Forensic evidence base · compiled June 2026  ·  About this project →

The paper trail of a city taken apart.

In occupied Mariupol, the homes of residents who fled or were killed are being declared “ownerless,” signed over to the state, and resold — through an administrative machine that documents itself.

This is a verifiable record of that machine: specific properties, tied to specific seizure acts, signed by named occupation officials — every source captured from the original and cryptographically hashed, built to support both restitution claims and criminal accountability.

MARIUPOL RUSSIA UKRAINE Donetsk — occupied since 2014 Crimea — annexed 2014 SEA OF AZOV BLACK SEA

Mariupol sits on the Sea of Azov coast. In spring 2022, Russian and Russian-backed forces encircled and besieged the city, advancing from the Russian-occupied east (Donetsk) and from Crimea, annexed by Russia in 2014.

6,084properties on the evidence spine
12,948“ownerless” registry entries
2,666occupation court cases
1,155legal-grade · 2+ independent sources
days to the 1 July 2026 re-registration deadline

What this shows

After the 2022 siege, Russia's occupation administration built a legal assembly line for taking property. A home is cut off from utilities, listed as “ownerless”, inspected, and — until a December 2025 law abolished even that step — handed to the municipality by an occupation court. The displaced owner is required to appear in person, with a Russian passport, within a fixed window to stop it: a condition designed to be impossible to meet.

What makes this documentable is that each stage leaves a dated, signed record. The same registries, decrees, and court dockets meant to legitimize the seizures are the evidence of them. This project assembles those records into one queryable spine, cross-checks each property against independent sources — including a UN satellite damage assessment — and maps the chain of signatures from the city administration up to the Russian ministries and the developers who receive the cleared land.

Start with the master dossier for the whole picture, or open a single documented case below.

The exhibits

Ten ways into the record.

Overview

The Master Dossier

The full picture in one document: the timeline from invasion to the re-registration deadline, the seizure machine stage by stage, who operates it, and how the evidence holds together.

Open the dossier →
System map

The Dispossession Pipeline

The machine itself, rung by rung — from “ownerless” designation through court transfer, demolition, land reallocation, rebuild and resale — each step tied to the decree that authorizes it.

Trace the pipeline →
Case · restoration without restitution

Lenina (Myru) 104–110

Four buildings decreed for demolition, then restored rather than razed — while ownership was stripped through the registry anyway, the apartments re-listed as compensation housing for others, and residents shut out.

Open the case →
Case · address laundering

Nakhimova 82

A demolished building reborn under a new address on the same footprint, its apartments sold into a subsidized-mortgage market — the demolish→rebuild→resell pattern, documented end to end.

Open the case →
Case · registry to resale

From “Ownerless” to For-Sale

Three buildings, scores of individual flats registered as “ownerless,” specific units then reposted again and again on occupation resale channels within weeks.

Open the case →
Case · graves beneath new construction

A Burial Ground, Rebranded

Five consecutive buildings, each with a documented courtyard grave from the 2022 siege, demolished and reallocated under five sequential decrees to one developer for one branded condominium complex — no exhumation recorded.

Open the case →
Case · the court route

The Court Docket

2,666 rulings that converted “ownerless” homes into municipal title, 28 named judges with their full ruling record, two cases decoded end to end — and the finding that none of the 2,666 records name a street address.

Open the case →
Interactive · geospatial

The Interactive Map

Every documented case study, grave site, and recorded mass-casualty courtyard, plotted against the full geocoded property-seizure spine — click any marker for sourcing and a link to the full exhibit.

Open the map →
Interactive · who operates it

The Stakeholder Network

The command chain and beneficiaries as a navigable graph — officials, judges, contractors and developer companies — with overlays for the relevant Rome Statute provisions.

Explore the network →
Methodology · provenance

Sources

Every category of source behind this archive — occupation court portals, registries, developer and corporate-ownership records, Telegram, resale marketplaces, satellite imagery, and the legal/journalistic context — with counts drawn straight from the chain-of-custody log.

See the full catalogue →

How it was built

Documented to an evidentiary standard.

Capture before parse
Every source page and document is saved verbatim the moment it is retrieved, before anything is read from it. The raw store is append-only.
Hashed for the record
Every artifact carries a SHA-256 fingerprint and a UTC retrieval timestamp — any later alteration is detectable. ~211,900 artifacts held under chain of custody.
Two independent sources
A property-to-seizure link is treated as legal-grade only when at least two independent record families agree — fuzzy matches are confidence-scored, not assumed.
Berkeley Protocol
Methods follow the Berkeley Protocol on Digital Open Source Investigations, so the chain from raw source to finished claim is reproducible.

Occupation records are evidence of the act of seizure — never valid title. Ukraine does not recognize the occupation's registrations, courts, or decrees, and neither does this project. They are presented here as self-incriminating documentation of an unlawful process, not as lawful ownership.

Lawful owners who are living private individuals are not named in these materials; identifying detail is minimized and held separately as sensitive personal data. Named occupation officials, judges, and beneficiaries acting in an official capacity are in scope for accountability. The deceased shown in the casualty records are drawn from public memorial sources.