If Ukraine had the only official database of Russia's military presence in Ukraine, then various government agencies would not separately document the evidence of the Russian military presence in Ukraine. It would be a unified system, according to Serhiy Movchan, an analyst at the Human Rights Abuse Documentation Center.

“When today different governmental bodies appeal to non-governmental public organizations on one and the same issue and ask to provide similar information, this once again suggests the absence of a unified system. Unfortunately, we once again speak about the need to establish coordination and information,” Serhiy Movchan believes.

Yet there are two decisions of the ECHR in the issue of the Russian-Ukrainian conflict, namely the decision of Klepik against Ukraine and Caesar against Ukraine. But they did not consider Russia's involvement in the military conflict in the Donbas.

Individual cases of compensation for material damage for lost property, submitted by the lawyers of UHHRU, are still under consideration. If we draw a parallel with Russia's aggression against Georgia, then there are no solutions for them, though 10 years have passed. The ECHR takes a long time to make decisions.

“Applications for the loss of property in the conflict zone are now pending before the ECHR. There is not a single executed national court decision on payment of compensation for destroyed property in the conflict zone by Ukraine. We have a big gap in the legislation: there is no proper judicial practice on these issues," said Vitaly Lebed, a lawyer at the Center for Strategic Affairs.

Earlier QHA reported that another evidence of Russian military presence in the East of Ukraine was discovered near Mariupol. In the area of the Joint Forces Operation on the Mariupol-Sartana highway, Ukrainian border guards discovered a mine of Russian origin, according to the report of the State Border Service of May 21.