German prosecutor in Kyiv: “Give the victims a voice”

Since May, the Freiburg chief prosecutor Hoffmann has been advising Ukrainians on investigations into war crimes. In an interview, he talks about great expectations, problems in proving genocide – and his motivation.

ARD: What does your work here in Kyiv look like, what exactly is your support for the Ukrainian Prosecutor General’s Office?

Klaus Hoffmann: It’s very broad. We provide basic strategic advice. For example, with the following questions: How do you actually deal with the mass of procedures? Where do you set priorities? How to develop a strategy for the Attorney General’s own work? But it is also about direct legal questions, i.e. detailed questions about the crime of aggressive war or genocide. What are the requirements? What is the best way to determine this, what is the best way to document it?

Another focus is the prosecution of sex crimes during war: how do you go about it, how do you communicate with the public or with victims’ associations? How do you get victims of sexual violence to come forward and speak up? But how do you possibly train specialists as investigators and public prosecutors so that they learn how to deal with things differently? Especially with female victims, that a relationship of trust can be built up, that they are even willing to testify. Ukraine is very interested in that.

International expert help for the Ukrainians

ARD: Is your support also about specific cases? To check how the Ukrainian Prosecutor General’s Office works and investigates?

Hoffmann: Yes, we sometimes look at individual cases. We are also provided with case files to see how the investigations are going, where there may still be gaps or where things can be improved. Sometimes it’s simply a question of IT solutions, because the mass of information in the evidence requires proper software. Here, too, we bring in our experiences from various international tribunals – or from countries like Croatia, which are still conducting hundreds of war crimes trials to this day.

We show which solutions are most suitable for documenting, analyzing and prosecuting war crimes as effectively as possible. The issue of preserving evidence is always very important. The core message there is: The evidence should be secured in such a way that it can still be used in court in 20, 30, 40 years.

ARD: You spoke of the abundance of material that is accumulating. Are there already concrete processes underway and have there already been convictions?

Hoffmann: There are isolated processes that are strained. There are also individual verdicts against one or the other prisoner of war who could be specifically proven, for example, to have killed a civilian. There are some trials that are conducted in the absence of the accused. All in all, the Attorney General’s Office has more than 30,000 cases on its own website that relate to war crimes in the broadest sense. In addition, there is a relatively large number of proceedings directed against collaborators or in connection with the war of aggression.

“Very, very strong evidence that there were war crimes”

ARD: So war crimes definitely took place in Ukraine?

Hoffmann: Of course, the international experts are still trying to hold back a bit, saying that all the evidence must first be secured in order to analyze this calmly. But one can certainly say that there is very, very strong evidence in many places that there were war crimes: the shooting of civilians, the imprisonment of entire villages. Those who have been locked in the basement for months. There was rape, there was torture. There are quite a few reports about this. Of course, you still have to provide the proof in detail, but the overall picture is relatively clear even at first glance.

ARD: They typically investigate four crimes: war crimes, crimes against humanity, aggressive war and genocide. The latter will probably be the most difficult to prove?

Hoffmann: Yes, genocide is easily one of the greatest crimes and at the same time the most difficult to prove. It’s always about the intention to commit genocide – i.e. whether all actions are actually aimed at wiping out a people, an ethnic group, completely or at least partially. Yes, you just have to look very closely. Proof is particularly difficult.

From our point of view, you sometimes have to be a bit careful not to set the expectations of the population too high. Because war crimes are also the most serious crimes, and some of them are of course easier to prove with concrete acts. And of course there are heavy penalties for that. There is also no statute of limitations. There is a principle of universal law, which means that these acts can also be prosecuted worldwide.

But of course, in public perception, as we also know from the Yugoslav war, there is always a certain interest in seeing whether it wasn’t genocide after all.

“Detect in every direction”

ARD: There are usually different parties to war crimes. Presumably, not only Russian soldiers commit war crimes, but also Ukrainian, Belarusian or international fighters who are involved in the war here. Does Ukraine take action against all suspected perpetrators, including those from its own ranks?

Hoffmann: In any case, the Ukrainian colleagues should investigate in every direction. It’s difficult for any country to take action against its own people. There are individual investigative approaches. It wouldn’t be surprising if it didn’t exist at all.

It is also clear that Belarusian perpetrators are of course fundamentally a possibility. The same goes for foreign mercenaries. There are actually no restrictions. And we make sure that in all the consultations that we conduct, there is no focus solely on Russian perpetrators. We say war crimes should be investigated in the context of Russian aggression against Ukraine, but there is no single perpetrator restriction.

I think that’s very important for Ukraine too, for its own legitimacy. This is of course an important signal, but it is difficult to communicate this to one’s own population. This could also lead to an acquittal of a Russian perpetrator or suspect.

ARD: Has a Russian defendant already been acquitted or has a Ukrainian been charged?

Hoffmann: To my knowledge not.

“We have to approach it professionally”

ARD: Do you usually work from Kyiv or do you also go to the crime scenes?

Hoffmann: I was recently, long after the deeds, in the town of Butscha to see what the destruction looks like and to get an impression for myself. Two or three other colleagues were recently in the Kharkiv region and in the past we have sent individual colleagues with teams from the General Prosecutor’s Office to the area, especially after rocket attacks, in order to get an impression for ourselves and sometimes directly on site Giving tips on how best to proceed there now.

As heartbreaking as a Ukrainian or as a human being may be at one or the other crime scene: we say we have to approach it professionally, collect the evidence calmly, analyze it and then come to a conclusion.

ARD: How big is the pressure on the General Prosecutor’s Office in Kyiv? At the sight of mass graves or corpses with traces of torture, doesn’t the population and the government want to see verdicts quickly?

Hoffman: I do believe that there is a certain amount of public pressure. So not only politically, but also by the public. Of course, we also know this from the national context. That’s not alien to us. Then we also try to give advice to the extent that a communication strategy has to be developed in order to present one’s own work better to the outside world and perhaps also to communicate better what they are doing and perhaps also to explain the things that they are not currently doing .

For some things, it takes time to document it properly and not to hastily write accusations, which may then be somehow deficient afterwards, which may then also lead to bad results. Then it can’t be in your interest. But of course it’s a challenge. It’s a balancing act.

“Mass of cases will remain in Ukraine”

ARD: What sentences will be handed down in Ukraine, and what will go to the International Criminal Court, for example?

Hoffman: That remains to be seen. The Criminal Court always has complementary jurisdiction – that is, only when Ukraine is unable or unwilling to conduct cases. It is foreseeable that in the end maybe a dozen or two dozen cases could end up in the Criminal Court, and then more likely against the higher management level. The bulk of the cases will certainly remain in Ukraine.

ARD: What is your motivation for working here?

Hoffman: I’m trying to do something to counter the horror and the crimes, I want to give the victims a voice and I hope that at some point a part of the management level will be held responsible for what happened. And that is also the focus of my work: Not just looking at the individual soldiers, but also: Who commanded the individual units? What was the command structure like? What were the specifications? What was the propaganda behind it? How were people sent here and for what purpose?

It’s all about the big picture. These are such massive crimes, so widespread that they have to be countered with legal means.

The interview was conducted by Silke Diettrich, WDR, in Kyiv.