Unveiling Thousands of Concealed Russian Documents
Earlier this year, an individual who had submitted a complaint to the Russian government’s human rights ombudsman checked on its progress online. By mistake, they entered the incorrect complaint number and, instead of an error message, were presented with a different person’s complaint, as reported by Maxim Kurnikov, a Russian journalist based in Berlin. This erroneous entry led to a remarkable discovery: a trove of complaints, which included submissions from Russian soldiers engaged in the conflict in Ukraine, had been inadvertently made publicly accessible on the ombudsman’s website. The data revealed was alarmingly sensitive, encompassing medical files, passport information, and personal contact details. It also held significant public relevance, especially the reports of abuse and coercion within the Russian military. The individual who stumbled upon this oversight notified Mr. Kurnikov, as per the journalist’s account. Mr. Kurnikov, who left Russia after its invasion of Ukraine in 2022 and currently operates the news outlet Echo from Berlin, collaborated with his team to compile the publicly accessible complaints. The earliest available complaints were dated to April 2025, shortly after the ombudsman, Tatyana N. Moskalkova, proclaimed an update to her office’s I.T. systems. The complaints were no longer accessible after September, when it seems the office realized it had been inadvertently sharing complaints online. Mr. Kurnikov and his team managed to gather over 9,000 complaints from this five-month interval. It remains unclear how many others may have accessed the database while it was publicly available. Mr. Kurnikov authored several articles discussing the allegations found in the complaints. He also provided the full set of documents to The New York Times. A group of Times journalists invested roughly two months into independently examining and categorizing the complaints, validating their authenticity, and reaching out to numerous complainants. The files contained personal contact information, medical and legal records, as well as pictures of passports and other identification documents. In hundreds of the cases scrutinized by The Times, email addresses, phone numbers, and other personal details corresponded with data available on social media and other online platforms. The Times implemented measures to protect the confidentiality of personal details and to secure that information. The Times employed software to filter down the complaints to over 6,000 that seemed to be related to the conflict in Ukraine. Approximately half of these complaints appeared to be inquiries regarding missing persons — relatives seeking information about soldiers who were unaccounted for. The Times concentrated on the remaining 3,000 complaints, reviewing and categorizing each one. More than 1,500 contained allegations of war-related misconduct. While the majority of complaints were filed by families of soldiers, The Times identified over 300 that were submitted by the soldiers themselves. The team then reached out to over 240 of the complainants, sometimes contacting multiple individuals mentioned in the same complaint. The Times prioritized communicating with those who had made the most detailed allegations in key categories identified by the team, such as extrajudicial punishments and cases of individuals unfit for service being coerced into combat. The team aimed, first, to verify that the complaints had actually been submitted. Second, The Times sought to gather as much information as possible regarding the specific claims of abuse. Although many contacted did not respond or declined to comment, 75 acknowledged that they had indeed filed a petition. Several provided more detailed information. Some had already shared parts of their narratives publicly, including videos uploaded to social media. Many complaints contained supporting evidence of abuses: videos, images, voice messages and texts from the frontlines, along with medical records, court documents, and internal military papers. In certain instances, those contacted by The Times provided additional evidence. However, in other cases, The Times was unable to validate the assertions made in the filings. The ombudsman who received the complaints, Ms. Moskalkova, is accountable to President Vladimir V. Putin and possesses the authority to investigate abuses or injustices committed by segments of the Russian government, including the military. Citizens frequently approach her office as a last resort. The office has also facilitated prisoner exchanges throughout the ongoing conflict. Ms. Moskalkova’s office did not reply to a request for comments, nor did the Kremlin or the Russian Ministry of Defense. Mr. Kurnikov indicated that these complaints challenge the narrative promoted by the Kremlin that Russian society is coping well with the war and, in a sense, is not feeling its repercussions. “The appeals we examined swiftly reshaped my understanding, including my perspective on what war entails for Russians,” he stated. “The despair within our society, the number of individuals who have lost brothers, fathers, and husbands, their suffering, and the indifference exhibited by the state and government officials in their efforts to locate or recover their loved ones.”
Published: 2025-12-31 10:02:00
source: www.nytimes.com
