Russian authorities in occupied areas of Ukraine label homes “ownerless.” That allows authorities to transfer them into municipal ownership by Russia-installed courts and redistribute them, including to new residents holding Russian passports. This sham process violates international law on occupation and international human rights law.
Kseniya Kvitka
Yevhen, Kristina, and their children welcomed 2022 in their newly-renovated apartment in eastern Mariupol in Ukraine.
Just weeks earlier, they had finally paid off the mortgage they had carried for 11 years. The family had little time to enjoy the home they had worked so hard to build.
Two months later, Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine forced them to flee the besieged city. During the attacks that followed, their apartment building was damaged. Then, at the end of 2025, they learned that the Russian occupation authorities had declared their apartment “ownerless.”
As Human Rights Watch recently found, Russian authorities in occupied areas of Ukraine label homes “ownerless.” That allows authorities to transfer them into municipal ownership by Russia-installed courts and redistribute them, including to new residents holding Russian passports. This sham process violates international law on occupation and international human rights law.
The only way for owners of homes in occupied territories to avoid seizure is to re-register their property under Russian law by July.
Russian passport required
But in practice, this is impossible without first obtaining a Russian passport. The message to Ukrainians is clear: accept a Russian passport and comply with the occupier’s rules, or forfeit your home.
Properties can also be confiscated for unpaid utilities and alleged safety risks linked to nonuse. But in practice, the lack of registration remains the decisive factor.
For thousands of Ukrainians who fled occupied areas, this is a no-win situation. Many are trying every possible way to protect their property, only to encounter discriminatory barriers imposed by Russian authorities at every step.
Some appoint a legal representative through powers of attorney issued at Russian embassies abroad. However, while in some documented cases authorities permitted these representatives to handle property maintenance, they did not allow them to register or sell the property. Instead, the authorities required owners to appear in person and hold Russian passports.
For those who have fled, returning to the occupied areas involves a difficult and costly journey, with no way of knowing whether they will be allowed to enter.
‘Filtration’ at Moscow airport
Under Russia’s travel restrictions, the only route for Ukrainian passport holders to reach the occupied territories is through Moscow’s Sheremetyevo Airport.
There, they undergo “filtration”: intrusive questioning and phone inspections. Only a fraction are allowed to proceed, with most denied entry and banned from Russia for periods ranging from 20 to 50 years.
Some owners we interviewed said they had relied on relatives or friends in occupied areas to look after their homes or had allowed people to live there in exchange for covering utility costs. However, this did not protect their property from being declared “ownerless.”
We reviewed hundreds of decisions by Russian courts showing that judges often disregarded evidence that owners were identifiable and reachable, had no utility debts, or had tenants living in the property.
Instead, courts ruled that the lack of Russian registration alone was sufficient grounds for seizure. In one case, a judge transferred an apartment to municipal ownership despite evidence that the owner, a Ukrainian citizen, was too ill to travel and was actively seeking ways to register her property under Russian law.
“It’s like they announce them ownerless while still admitting they have owners,” said a displaced resident of Mariupol.
Recent amendments to Russian legislation treating Ukrainians as citizens of an “unfriendly state” have tightened these restrictions even further. Powers of attorney for property-related transactions are now recognised only if issued by notaries operating in occupied areas, and only with special permission.
Ukrainians must also obtain such permission before they can even attempt to register their apartments.
Yevhen, Kristina and millions of Ukrainians now face the risk of permanently losing their homes. Without meaningful reparations and accountability, they also risk losing a path to rebuilding their lives.
For many affected homeowners, that path will depend heavily on the Register of Damage for Ukraine and the future Claims Commission, set up under the Council of Europe to register and ultimately adjudicate claims based on harm endured.
Sustained funding from the European Union, the Council of Europe and governments will be vital to ensuring that compensation mechanisms are fully operational.
Alongside these efforts, Ukraine and its allies should strengthen support to address the immediate housing and financial challenges facing displaced Ukrainians.
