

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.


Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.

Tel: +44 (0) 20 7413 5566
After hours: +44 7778 472 126
Email: press@amnesty.org
Russian forces must face justice for a series of war crimes committed in the region northwest of Kyiv, Amnesty International said today in a new briefing following an extensive on-the-ground investigation.
The briefing, 'He's Not Coming Back': War Crimes in Northwest Areas of Kyiv Oblast, is based on dozens of interviews and extensive review of material evidence. Amnesty International documented unlawful air strikes on Borodyanka, and extrajudicial executions in other towns and villages including Bucha, Andriivka, Zdvyzhivka and Vorzel.
An Amnesty International delegation, led by the organization's Secretary General, has been visiting the region in recent days, speaking with survivors and families of victims, and meeting with senior Ukrainian officials.
"The pattern of crimes committed by Russian forces that we have documented includes both unlawful attacks and willful killings of civilians," said Agnes Callamard, Amnesty International's Secretary General.
"We have met families whose loved ones were killed in horrific attacks, and whose lives have changed forever because of the Russian invasion. We support their demands for justice, and call on the Ukrainian authorities, the International Criminal Court and others to ensure evidence is preserved that could support future war crime prosecutions. It is vital that all those responsible, including up the chain of command, are brought to justice."
In Borodyanka, Amnesty International found that at least 40 civilians were killed in disproportionate and indiscriminate attacks, which devastated an entire neighborhood and left thousands of people homeless.
In Bucha and several other towns and villages located northwest of Kyiv, Amnesty International documented 22 cases of unlawful killings by Russian forces, most of which were apparent extrajudicial executions.
During 12 days of investigations, Amnesty International researchers interviewed residents of Bucha, Borodyanka, Novyi Korohod, Andriivka, Zdvyzhivka, Vorzel, Makariv and Dmytrivka, and visited sites of numerous killings.
In total, they interviewed 45 people who witnessed or had first-hand knowledge of unlawful killings of their relatives and neighbors by Russian soldiers, and 39 others who witnessed or had first-hand knowledge of the air strikes that targeted eight residential buildings.
Unlawful air strikes in Borodyanka
On March 1 and 2, a series of Russian air strikes hit eight residential buildings in the town of Borodyanka, approximately 60 kilometres northwest of Kyiv, which were home to more than 600 families.
The strikes killed at least 40 residents and destroyed the buildings, as well as dozens of surrounding buildings and houses. Most of the victims were killed in the buildings' basements, where they had sought shelter. Others died in their apartments.
On the morning of March 2, a single strike killed at least 23 people in Building 359 on Tsentralna Street. The victims included five of Vadim Zahrebelny's relatives: his mother Lydia, his brother Volodymyr and wife Yulia, and her parents Lubov and Leonid Hurbanov.
Vadim told Amnesty International: "We [Vadim and his son] left Building 359 just after 7am. However, my mother and my brother and his wife and her parents insisted on staying in the basement because they were afraid of getting shot by Russian soldiers if they went out on the streets. About 20 minutes after we left, Building 359 was bombed and they were all killed, together with other neighbors."
Vasyl Yaroshenko was close to one of the buildings when it was hit. He said: "I left my apartment to go do some work in the garage, as my wife was about to take a couple of older neighbors down to the basement. When I reached the garage, about 150 meters from the building, there was a huge explosion. I ducked behind the garage. When I looked, I saw a large gap in the building. The whole middle section of the building had collapsed - exactly where residents were sheltering in the basement. My wife Halina was among those killed. I still see her by the door of our apartment, the home where we lived for 40 years."
On March 1, a series of air strikes targeted six other buildings nearby. At least seven people were killed in Building 371 on Tsentralna Street, including Vitali Smishchuk, a 39-year-old surgeon, his wife Tetiana, and their four-year-old daughter Yeva.
Vitali's mother Ludmila told Amnesty International: "As the situation deteriorated, it became too dangerous to move from one part of the town to another. There were tanks on the streets... People were frightened to be outside.
"I was speaking to my son and telling him to leave, but he was worried about going outside. They sheltered in the basement for safety - but the bomb destroyed the middle section of the building, where the basement was."
No fixed Ukrainian military targets are known to have been located at or around any of the buildings which were struck, though at times armed individuals supporting Ukrainian forces reportedly fired on passing Russian military vehicles from or near some of those buildings. Knowingly launching direct attacks on civilian objects or disproportionate attacks constitute war crimes.
Amnesty International has created a new interactive 360-degree representation of the extensive damage caused by the air strikes in Borodyanka, which can be viewed here.
Unlawful killings northwest of Kyiv
The town of Bucha, approximately 30 kilometers northwest of Kyiv, was occupied by Russian forces in late February. Five men were killed in apparent extrajudicial executions by Russian forces in a compound of five buildings set around a courtyard close to the intersection of Yablunska and Vodoprovidna streets, all between March 4 and 19.
Yevhen Petrashenko, a 43-year-old sales manager and father-of-two, was shot dead in his apartment on Yablunska Street on March 4.
Yevhen's wife Tatiana told Amnesty International that she was in their building's basement, while Yevhen had remained in their apartment. He had gone to help a neighbor when Russian soldiers were conducting door-to-door searches. Tatiana lost contact with Yevhen, whose body was then found in his apartment by a neighbor the next day.
At her request, Russian soldiers allowed Tatiana to visit the apartment. She said: "Yevhen was lying dead in the kitchen. He had been shot in the back, [near his] lungs and liver. His body remained in the apartment until March 10, when we were able to bury him in a shallow grave in the courtyard."
Amnesty International researchers found two bullets and three cartridge cases at the scene of the killing. The organization's weapons investigator identified the bullets as black-tipped 7N12 armor-piercing 9x39mm rounds that can only be fired by specialized rifles used by some elite Russian units, including units reported to have been operating in Bucha during this time.
A collection of Russian military papers recovered in Bucha, which Amnesty International researchers analyzed, gives further indications as to the units involved. They included conscription and training records belonging to a driver-mechanic of the 104th Regiment of the VDV, the Russian Airborne Forces. Notably, some VDV units are equipped with specialized rifles that fire the armor-piercing 9x39mm round.
On March 22 or 23, Leonid Bodnarchuk, a 44-year-old construction worker who lived in the same building as Yevhen Petrashenko, was also killed. Residents who were sheltering in the basement told Amnesty International that Russian soldiers shot Leonid as he was walking up the stairs, then threw a grenade into the stairwell. They later found his maimed body slumped in a pool of blood on the stairs.
Amnesty International researchers found large blood stains over several steps on the stairs leading to the basement, as well as burn marks and a pattern of damage on the wall consistent with a grenade explosion.
In neighboring towns and villages, Amnesty International collected further evidence and testimony of unlawful killings, including apparent extrajudicial executions: some victims had their hands tied behind their back, while others showed signs of being tortured.
In the village of Novyi Korohod, Viktor Klokun, a 46-year-old construction worker, was killed. Olena Sakhno, his partner, told Amnesty International that some villagers brought her Viktor's body on March 6. She said: "His hands were tied behind his back with a piece of white plastic, and he had been shot in the head."
Oleksii Sychevky's wife Olha, 32, and father Olexandr, 62, were killed when the car convoy they were traveling in was fired upon by what they believed were Russian forces.
Oleksii told Amnesty International: "The convoy was all fleeing civilians. Almost all of the cars had kids inside. When our car had just reached a line of trees, I heard shots - first single shots, then a burst of gunfire.
"The shots hit the first vehicle in the convoy, and it stopped. We were the second vehicle and we had to stop, too. Then we were hit. At least six or seven shots hit our car. My dad was killed instantly by a bullet to the head. My wife was hit by metal shrapnel, and my kid [son] was also hit."
Amnesty International researchers who visited Bucha, Borodyanka and other nearby towns and villages in April, after victims had been exhumed (either from the rubble of collapsed buildings, or from the shallow, temporary graves in which many had been buried), found that many family members were unhappy with treatment of victims' remains. Family members were concerned that the processing of remains was chaotic, that they were not kept properly informed, and that remains in some cases were not being correctly identified.
Pursuing justice for war crimes
Extrajudicial executions committed in international armed conflicts constitute willful killings, which are war crimes. Indiscriminate and disproportionate attacks carried out with criminal intent are also war crimes.
All those responsible for war crimes should be held criminally responsible for their actions. Under the doctrine of command responsibility, hierarchal superiors - including commanders and civilian leaders, such as ministers and heads of state - who knew or had reason to know about war crimes committed by their forces, but did not attempt to stop them or punish those responsible, should also be held criminally responsible.
Any justice processes or mechanisms should be as comprehensive as possible, and ensure that all perpetrators of war crimes, crimes against humanity, genocide, and the crime of aggression in Ukraine, from all parties to the conflict, are brought to justice in fair trials, without recourse to the death penalty. In addition, the rights of victims must be at the forefront of investigating and prosecuting international crimes, and all justice mechanisms should adopt a survivor-centered approach.
Amnesty International's documentation of violations of human rights and international humanitarian law committed during the war in Ukraine is available here.
Amnesty International is a worldwide movement of people who campaign for internationally recognized human rights for all. Our supporters are outraged by human rights abuses but inspired by hope for a better world - so we work to improve human rights through campaigning and international solidarity. We have more than 2.2 million members and subscribers in more than 150 countries and regions and we coordinate this support to act for justice on a wide range of issues.
“Marco Rubio has claimed the power to designate people terrorist supporters based solely on what they think and say,” said one free speech advocate.
Free speech advocates are sounding the alarm about a bill in the US House of Representatives that they fear could allow Secretary of State Marco Rubio to strip US citizens of their passports based purely on political speech.
The bill, introduced by Rep. Brian Mast (R-Fla.), will come up for a hearing on Wednesday. According to The Intercept:
Mast’s new bill claims to target a narrow set of people. One section grants the secretary of state the power to revoke or refuse to issue passports for people who have been convicted—or merely charged—of material support for terrorism...
The other section sidesteps the legal process entirely. Rather, the secretary of state would be able to deny passports to people whom they determine “has knowingly aided, assisted, abetted, or otherwise provided material support to an organization the Secretary has designated as a foreign terrorist organization.”
Rubio has previously boasted of stripping the visas and green cards from several immigrants based purely on their peaceful expression of pro-Palestine views, describing them as "Hamas supporters."
These include Columbia protest leader Mahmoud Khalil, who was arrested by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) after Rubio voided his green card; and Rumeysa Ozturk, the Tufts student whose visa Rubio revoked after she co-wrote an op-ed calling for her school to divest from Israel.
Mast—a former soldier for the Israel Defense Forces who once stated that babies were "not innocent Palestinian civilians"—has previously called for "kicking terrorist sympathizers out of our country," speaking about the Trump administration's attempts to deport Khalil, who was never convicted or even charged with support for a terrorist group.
Critics have argued that the bill has little reason to exist other than to allow the Secretary of State to unilaterally strip passports from people without them actually having been convicted of a crime.
As Kia Hamadanchy, a senior policy counsel at the American Civil Liberties Union, noted in The Intercept, there is little reason to restrict people convicted of terrorism or material support for terrorism, since—if they were guilty—they'd likely be serving a long prison sentence and incapable of traveling anyway.
“I can’t imagine that if somebody actually provided material support for terrorism, there would be an instance where it wouldn’t be prosecuted—it just doesn’t make sense,” he said.
Journalist Zaid Jilani noted on X that "judges can already remove a passport over material support for terrorism, but the difference is you get due process. This bill would essentially make Marco Rubio judge, jury, and executioner."
The bill does contain a clause allowing those stripped of their passports to appeal to Rubio. But, as Hamadanchy notes, the decision is up to the secretary alone, "who has already made this determination." He said that for determining who is liable to have their visa stripped, "There's no standard set. There’s nothing."
As Seth Stern, the director of advocacy at the Freedom of the Press Foundation, noted in The Intercept, the language in Mast's bill is strikingly similar to that found in the so-called "nonprofit killer" provision that Republicans attempted to pass in July's "One Big Beautiful Bill" Act. That provision, which was ultimately struck from the bill, would have allowed the Treasury Secretary to unilaterally strip nonprofit status from anything he deemed to be a "terrorist-supporting organization."
Stern said Mast's bill would allow for "thought policing at the hands of one individual."
“Marco Rubio has claimed the power to designate people terrorist supporters based solely on what they think and say,” he said, "even if what they say doesn’t include a word about a terrorist organization or terrorism."
"Trump explicitly threatened to use the state to target anyone he and MAGA scapegoat for Kirk's murder," said New Republic writer Greg Sargeant.
White House Deputy Chief of Staff Stephen Miller vowed Friday that he and President Donald Trump would use this week's assassination of Charlie Kirk to "dismantle" the organized left using state power.
In a rant on Fox News, Miller—the architect of Trump's mass roundups and deportations of immigrants—shouted that the best way to honor Kirk's memory was to carry out a political purge against the left, which he called a "domestic terrorism movement in this country."
Miller provided few details on what specific left-wing figures or groups he believed were stoking this violence. He claimed the left was waging "doxxing campaigns" against right-wing figures, though he cited no specific examples.
He did, however, cite many examples of harsh, but nevertheless First Amendment-protected, speech that he considered an incitement to violence, including that "the left calls people enemies of the republic, calls them fascists, says they're Nazis, says they're evil," and claimed that many people online were "celebrating" Kirk's assassination.
"The last message that Charlie Kirk gave to me before he joined his creator in heaven," Miller said, was, "that we have to dismantle and take on the radical left organizations in this country that are fomenting violence, and we are going to do that."
"Under President Trump's leadership," Miller vowed to shut down these unspecified leftist groups.
"I don't care how," he said. "It could be a RICO charge, a conspiracy charge, conspiracy against the United States, insurrection. But we are going to do what it takes to dismantle the organizations and the entities that are fomenting riots, that are doxxing, that are trying to inspire terrorism, that are committing acts of wanton violence."
RICO refers to the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act, which the government has traditionally used to prosecute organized crime groups. Trump later said one of his targets for these charges may be the billionaire liberal donor George Soros, the owner of the Open Society Foundations nonprofit, whom Trump accused of funding "riots," a charge Soros denied.
Miller did not limit his call to destroying those who commit crimes. He also spoke of those "spreading this evil hate," telling them, "You will live in exile. Because the power of law enforcement under President Trump's leadership will be used to find you, will be used to take away your money, to take away your power, and if you've broken the law, to take away your freedom."
An official White House account on X reposted a clip of Miller's comments calling for the "dismantling" of left-wing organizations:
"Trump signaled he intended to use Kirk's shooting as a pretext for a broad crackdown on the left," said Jordan Weissman, a journalist at The Argument. "Here's Stephen Miller being much more explicit. He's talking about RICO and terrorism charges, echoing right-wing influencers."
Aaron Reichlin-Melnick, a senior fellow at the American Immigration Council, meanwhile, pointed out the irony of the threat coming from Miller, noting that he "routinely slanders his political opponents with vile language that treats disagreement as if it’s treason."
Little is still known about what, if any, political ideology precisely motivated Kirk's alleged shooter, 22-year-old Tyler Robinson, who was apprehended in Utah on Friday. Robinson was not affiliated with any political party, and the scrawlings he left behind at the scene of the crime contain a mishmash of hyper-online but only vaguely political symbols and phrases.
But even before the suspect had been identified or apprehended, efforts had begun on the right to use Kirk's murder as an excuse to crack down on their left-wing enemies. In an ominous speech Thursday night, Trump blamed the shooting on the "radical left," saying it was “directly responsible for the terrorism that we're seeing in our country today, and it must stop right now."
On Fox News Friday, Trump indicated that he was extending this dragnet to anyone who has expressed harsh words for figures on the right. The president said:
For years those on the radical left have compared wonderful Americans like Charlie to Nazis. This kind of rhetoric is directly responsible for the terrorism that we’re seeing in our country and must stop right now. My administration will find each and every one of those who contributed to this atrocity and to other political violence, including the organizations that fund it and support it, as well as those who go after our judges and law enforcement officials.

The portrayal of the left as a unique "national security threat" is not borne out by data. On Friday, The Economist published an analysis of data from the Prosecution Project, an open-source database that catalogues crimes that seek "a socio-political change or to communicate."
The findings reaffirm what has been found in previous studies: That "extremists on both left and right commit violence, although more incidents appear to come from right-leaning attackers."
During the same Fox interview, when a host noted the prevalence of right-wing extremism, Trump said: "I’ll tell you something that’s going to get me in trouble, but I couldn’t care less. The radicals on the right oftentimes are radical because they don’t want to see crime. They’re saying, ‘We don’t want these people coming in. We don’t want you burning our shopping centers. We don’t want you shooting our people in the middle of the street.’”
Trump concluded: “The radicals on the left are the problem.”
Meanwhile, virtually all prominent figures and groups on the left—from politicians like Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.), and New York City mayoral candidate Zohran Mamdani to writers for left-wing publications like Jacobin or The Nation to activist groups like Public Citizen, MoveOn, the ACLU, and Indivisible—have unequivocally condemned violence against Kirk, even while repudiating his views.
"Trump explicitly threatened to use the state to target anyone he and MAGA scapegoat for Kirk's murder," said New Republic writer Greg Sargeant. "We really could see Stephen Miller and Kash Patel use the FBI for 60s-style domestic persecution."
Citing US President Donald Trump's anti-climate executive actions, Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Lee Zeldin on Friday unveiled a proposal to end a program that requires power plants, refineries, landfills, and more to report their emissions.
While Zeldin claimed that "the Greenhouse Gas Reporting Program is nothing more than bureaucratic red tape that does nothing to improve air quality," experts and climate advocates emphasized the importance of the data collection, which began in 2010.
"President Trump promised Americans would have the cleanest air on Earth, but once again, Trump's EPA is taking actions that move us further from that goal," Joseph Goffman, who led the EPA Office of Air and Radiation during the Biden administration, said in a statement from the Environmental Protection Network, a group for former agency staff.
"Cutting the Greenhouse Gas Reporting Program blinds Americans to the facts about climate pollution. Without it, policymakers, businesses, and communities cannot make sound decisions about how to cut emissions and protect public health," he explained.
As The New York Times reported:
For the past 15 years, the Greenhouse Gas Reporting Program has collected data from about 8,000 of the country's largest industrial facilities. That information has helped guide numerous decisions on federal policy and has been shared with the United Nations, which has required developed countries to submit tallies of their emissions.
In addition, private companies often rely on the program's data to demonstrate to investors that their efforts to cut emissions are working. And communities often use it to determine whether local facilities are releasing air pollution that threatens public health.
"By hiding this information from the public, Administrator Zeldin is denying Americans the ability to see the damaging results of his actions on climate pollution, air quality, and public health," Goffman said. "It's a further addition to the deliberate blockade against future action on climate change—and yet another example of the administration putting polluters before people's health."
Sierra Club's director of climate policy and advocacy, Patrick Drupp, stressed Friday that "EPA cannot avoid the climate crisis by simply burying its head in the sand as it baselessly cuts off its main source of greenhouse gas emissions data."
"The agency has provided no defensible reason to cancel the program; this is nothing more than EPA's latest action to deny the reality of climate change and do everything it can to put the fossil fuel industry and corporate polluters before people," he added. "The Sierra Club will oppose this proposal every step of the way.”
Margie Alt, director of the Climate Action Campaign, similarly said that "the Trump administration's latest pro-polluter move to eliminate the Greenhouse Gas Reporting Program is just another brazen step in their Polluters First agenda."
Responding to the administration's claim that the proposal would save businesses up to $2.4 billion in regulatory costs, Alt said that "under the guise of saving Americans money, this is an attempt on the part of Trump, Lee Zeldin, and their polluter buddies to hide the ball and avoid responsibility for the deadly, dangerous, and expensive pollution they produce."
"If they succeed, the nation's biggest polluters will spew climate-wrecking pollution without accountability," she warned. "The idea that tracking pollution does 'nothing to improve air quality' is absurd," she added. "If you don't measure it, you can't manage it. Hiding information and allowing fossil fuel companies to avoid accountability are the true goals of this rule."
The Trump admin is now proposing to kill the Greenhouse Gas Reporting Program, which since 2010 has required 8,000+ coal plants, refineries, and factories to report their climate pollution.Without it, polluters get a free pass.No reporting = no accountability.
— Climate Action Now (@climateactapp.bsky.social) September 12, 2025 at 7:04 PM
BlueGreen Alliance executive director Jason Walsh declared that "the Trump administration continues to prove it does not care about the American people and their basic right to breathe clean air. This flies in the face of the EPA's core mission—to protect the environment and public health."
"The proposal is wildly unpopular with even industry groups speaking against it because they know the value of having this emissions data available," he noted. "Everybody in this country deserves to know the air quality in their community and how their lives can be affected when they live near high-emitting facilities."
“Knowledge is power and—in this case—health," he concluded. "The administration shouldn't be keeping people in the dark about the air they and their neighbors are breathing."
This proposal from Zeldin came a day after the EPA moved to reverse rules protecting people from unsafe levels of per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS), often called "forever chemicals," in US drinking water, provoking similar criticism. Earthjustice attorney Katherine O'Brien said that his PFAS decision "prioritizes chemical industry profits and utility companies' bottom line over the health of children and families across the country."