Russian forces forcibly remove 25 residents from occupied part of Kharkiv region – Lubinets

Twenty-five residents were forcibly removed from the temporarily occupied part of Ukraine’s Kharkiv region. The group included young people, elderly residents, and children. Their current locations and living conditions were not known, according to Dmytro Lubinets, Ukraine’s Parliament Commissioner for Human Rights.

Russian forces described the action on Telegram as a “rescue operation.” Lubinets said video footage showed pressure and intimidation instead. He argued that people were not allowed to choose their destination or agree freely. He also warned that the children’s information was being collected, while relatives might not know where they were.

Lubinets called on Russia’s human rights commissioner to reveal where all 25 people were being held and under what conditions. He also asked for complete information and measures to return them to Ukraine. He contacted the International Committee of the Red Cross, the United Nations, and other organizations.

The reported number was 25 residents. They were taken from a temporarily occupied part of the Kharkiv region while active hostilities were continuing. The group was not limited to one age category. It included young people, elderly people, and children.

The presence of children made the situation especially serious for Lubinets. He said the children were being taken away and their personal data was collected. Parents and other relatives might not even know where the children were. The article does not identify the residents by name or give a detailed breakdown by age.

The uncertainty continued after the removal. No one reportedly knew where the 25 people were or the conditions in which they were being held. Lubinets demanded that Russia disclose their whereabouts, provide information about their treatment, and support their return to Ukraine. He also alerted international organizations.

Dmytro Lubinets is the Ukrainian Parliament Commissioner for Human Rights. In the article, he acts as an ombudsman who reports alleged abuses, raises concerns about civilians, and seeks information about people removed from occupied territory.

His actions show the practical role described here. He demanded that Russia’s human rights commissioner disclose the 25 residents’ locations, explain their conditions, provide complete details, and support their return. He also warned people not to send passport details, addresses, phone numbers, or documents through an evacuation-related Telegram bot.

Lubinets further contacted the International Committee of the Red Cross, the United Nations, and other international organizations. The article does not list every legal power of his office. It does show him documenting alleged violations, communicating with foreign officials, protecting personal data, and pressing for accountability and the civilians’ return.

A genuine evacuation protects civilians from danger while respecting their choice. People should know where they are going, understand what will happen, and agree to leave. The purpose is to move them to safety, not to control their destination or separate them from their homes and relatives.

Lubinets contrasted that standard with the reported removal of 25 residents. Russian channels called it a “rescue operation,” but Lubinets said available video showed pressure and intimidation. He said people were deprived of the ability to decide where to go and what would happen next. A Telegram bot also sought personal data under an evacuation pretext.

Under the article’s explanation, removing people from occupied territory to the aggressor state without consent is forcible transfer and deportation. That distinction matters because international humanitarian law prohibits such conduct. Calling it “evacuation” does not change the reality when consent and meaningful choice are absent.

When civilians are taken without consent, they can lose control over their destination, safety, and contact with family. Unknown whereabouts create immediate fear and prevent relatives from checking whether people are safe. The article highlights this risk for children, whose parents may not know where they are.

The reported case shows several dangers. The 25 residents’ locations and conditions were unknown. Lubinets also said occupiers were collecting children’s information and using a Telegram bot to gather passport details, addresses, phone numbers, and documents. He warned that the information could be used against civilians and their relatives.

The uncertainty also makes accountability harder. Lubinets demanded records, locations, and treatment details from Russia’s human rights commissioner. He contacted the Red Cross, the United Nations, and other organizations. Until information is disclosed, families remain unable to verify safety, and the removed civilians remain at risk of coercion, separation, or misuse of their data.

Article 49 of the Fourth Geneva Convention protects civilians in territories occupied during war. As described in the article, it explicitly prohibits forcibly transferring or deporting people from occupied territory. The rule addresses both organized removal within the occupied area and deportation beyond it.

Lubinets applied that principle to the 25 residents taken from the occupied part of Kharkiv region. He said that moving people to the aggressor state without their consent is not a genuine evacuation. He also linked the reported pressure, intimidation, and uncertainty about the residents’ locations to wider protections for civilians.

The article names other relevant Geneva Convention protections too. Article 34 prohibits taking hostages, while Article 33 prohibits intimidation, terrorism, and collective punishment. Lubinets said Russia’s actions violate international humanitarian law and asked Russia’s commissioner and international organizations to help establish what happened and secure the civilians’ return.

An occupied territory is an area placed under the effective control of a foreign military during an armed conflict. Occupation does not automatically transfer lawful sovereignty to the occupying power. Civilians living there remain protected people, even when fighting is nearby or local authorities have lost control.

Those protections matter because an occupying power controls movement, services, information, and security. Civilians may be unable to leave freely or resist orders safely. In this case, the article describes 25 residents removed from a temporarily occupied part of Kharkiv region. Lubinets said pressure and intimidation prevented genuine choice about where they would go.

International humanitarian law therefore limits how civilians may be treated. The article specifically cites protections against forcible transfer and deportation, hostage-taking, intimidation, terrorism, and collective punishment. These rules are meant to preserve civilian safety and dignity during occupation. The reported removal and unknown conditions prompted demands for disclosure, international attention, and return to Ukraine.