![\"Chernobyl](\"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/wp-content\/uploads\/Ukraine_Chernobyl-command-room-1_@Oksana-Rekun.jpg\")
Nuclear plants' protection under Geneva Conventions<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
According to international law, nuclear power plants are under the protection of Article 56 of the additional protocol I to the Geneva Conventions<\/a>, which relates to the special protection of three kinds of facilities: dams<\/a>, dykes, and nuclear power plants.<\/p>\n\n\n\n \"Why these specifically? Because these are facilities that contain dangerous forces. And the release of these dangerous forces can have catastrophic consequences [and cause] significant civilian casualties,\u201d says Volodymyr<\/em> Hryshko, senior legal advisor at Truth Hounds, a non-governmental organization specialized in documenting and investigating international crimes. \u201cArticle 56 states that such structures and facilities must not be targeted, even if they are military facilities.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n In general, when it comes to the protection of facilities during wartime, it is governed by the principle of distinction: civilian, military, and dual-use facilities, adds Hryshko. Regarding nuclear power plants, there is general protection against an attack, but there are cases where this protection stops, explains Andrey Yakovlev, a lawyer, managing partner at Umbrella Law Firm<\/em>, and an expert in international humanitarian and criminal law. \"It ceases only if the nuclear power plant generates energy for the regular, direct support of military operations, and if such an attack is the only possible means to stop such support,\u201d he says. \u201cIn all other cases, it is not permitted. This means that nuclear power plants cannot be military targets. And if they are not a military target, then it constitutes an attack on a civilian infrastructure. And that is a war crime.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n In the case of the Chernobyl nuclear power plant, it\u2019s a completely different story since there is no electricity generated there, says Hryshko. In his view, this is a direct violation of international humanitarian law, as well as a violation of the rule prohibiting attacks on civilian sites or on structures and installations containing dangerous forces. \"The Chernobyl nuclear power plant, and specifically this sarcophagus [the new confinement safe or the arch], contained hazardous materials, which they were supposed to protect. Russians usually have two approaches. The first is to justify their attack as a military necessity or a rational decision. The second is simply to deny that they did it.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n The Russian Federation has not officially acknowledged that it was their drone. They claimed that Ukraine fired on the Chernobyl nuclear power plant sarcophagus itself in order to blame Russia for it and \u201dderail a peaceful settlement,\u201d as stated Kremlin spokesperson Dmitry Peskov.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Ukraine says it has evidence to the contrary. According to the press service of the Kyiv Regional Prosecutor\u2019s Office, on February 14, 2025, at approximately 1:50 a.m., a Russian \u201cGeran-2\u201d unmanned aerial vehicule (UAV) struck the dome-shaped \u201cnew safe confinement\u201d structure. Debris from the drone fell inside the building and outside, near the point of impact. According to preliminary data from law enforcement, the drone was flying from the north.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The case is currently subject to criminal proceedings as a war crime.<\/p>\n\n\n\n According to the Chernobyl nuclear plant authorities and later by the prosecutor\u2019s office, no deviations in radiation levels were detected following the UAV strike. Based on the results of the pre-trial investigation, a series of expert examinations has been ordered, which are still ongoing. \u201cThe main thing is simply to prove the direct involvement of the Russian Federation and their intent to attack the Chernobyl sarcophagus,\u201d says Hryshko.<\/p>\n\n\n\t When the strike happened, most employees were in the staff break rooms. \u201cThose who were on duty at the moment of the strike didn\u2019t even realize what had happened. They felt as if someone had slammed a door loudly,\u201d we were told at the plant.<\/p>\n\n\n\n While visiting the arch, we can see the remains of metal debris sheared from the structure's roof. Inside the arch, the air is damp. The structure's size is once again impressive. There\u2019s water on the floor, which gets into the arch through openings after it rains. You can\u2019t step in it. As we were told, none of this should be there. This is one of the clear signs that the arch is not fully fulfilling its functions.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The plant authorities say there were plans to dismantle unstable structures of the old \u201cshelter\u201d facility, but the attack made this impossible for now. \u201cFirst there was the COVID-19 pandemic, then a full-scale war, and then a drone strike: we don\u2019t know when we\u2019ll begin dismantling these structures,\u201d they say. \u201cThe main function of the new confinement safe is to protect people from radiation exposure and to begin dismantling the \u2018Shelter\u2019 facility. It used to be an airtight structure, and now it isn\u2019t. We lost our main membrane, the part that was on fire. And to put it out, the State Emergency Service made many holes, about 340. And now the big question is how to patch this membrane from the inside, because it\u2019s located between several layers of thermal insulation. This drone has ruined all our plans.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n Since late 2022, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) experts have been stationed at the Chernobyl nuclear plant on a rotational basis. Their representatives are also present at all nuclear power plants in Ukraine.<\/p>\n\n\n\n In the morning after the attack, once the State Emergency Service personnel had extinguished the fire on the site, a group of IAEA representatives inspected the impact area. They observed smoke coming from the roof of the containment building, smelled burnt plastic, and noted that the fire was being fueled by flammable material in the roof cladding. However, according to their data, the radiation level at the site had not changed.<\/p>\n\n\n\n During their inspection, the IAEA team also noted that both the outer and inner shells of the arch had been damaged by the UAV attack. A hole approximately six meters in diameter had formed there, and some equipment and electrical cables were damaged. However, the support beams did not sustain significant damage.<\/p>\n\n\n\n \"It is clear that this was a very serious incident, in which a drone struck and damaged a large protective structure at a major nuclear site. As I have repeatedly stated during this devastating war, attacking a nuclear facility is absolutely prohibited; this should never happen,\" noted<\/a> at the time IAEA Director General Rafael Grossi.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Following this strike, an on-site meeting of IAEA representatives was held in November 2025. They assessed the arch. According to the plant authorities, their following report stated that the complex was not functioning properly and needed to be repaired. This IAEA report is necessary for the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development (EBRD) to begin seeking funds for the assessment and, subsequently, donors for the repair of the arch itself.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The arch was designed to last 100 years. Now, in order for it to continue functioning, it must be repaired by 2030.<\/p>\n\n\n\n In August 2025, the EBRD engaged French companies Bouygues and Vinci to assess the damage and develop a strategy for the shelter\u2019s restoration. They determined that a full restoration of the containment\u2019s functionality is required. This will cost approximately 500 million euros.<\/p>\n\n\n\n As of today, neither the donors of the International Chernobyl Support Fund (ICSF) nor the EBRD have made any official commitments regarding the confirmation of the specified scope and the cost of the work. Currently, under a grant agreement, 30 million euros have been allocated for design work by Bouygues and Vinci, which have formed a consortium called \u201cNovarka 2.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n At the plant, officials say that Ukraine cannot handle this on its own without additional funding for the restoration and repair of the arch and the accelerated dismantling of unstable structures at the \u201dShelter\" facility. They also believe that political support from other countries is needed to put pressure on Russia. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Although the Chernobyl nuclear plant no longer generates electricity \u2013 it only functions as a substation receiving and distributing electricity \u2013 and is in the process of being decommissioned, its primary task remains ensuring nuclear and radiation safety, as well as managing spent nuclear fuel and radioactive waste. It remains a nuclear facility and requires protection.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The Chernobyl plant's occupation by Russian forces from February 24, 2022 to April 2022, the drone strike, and the current occupation of the Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant in southeastern Ukraine, have exposed vulnerabilities in the international nuclear safety system.<\/p>\n\n\n\n \"Today, neither international legal instruments nor the global community are capable of preventing or ensuring their safety from armed aggression. Ukraine\u2019s experience should serve as an impetus to rethink and improve the international legal framework for ensuring nuclear safety, in particular by developing new effective mechanisms for protecting nuclear facilities, establishing liability for violations of relevant norms and rules, and ensuring effective consequences for violators,\u201d say the plant authorities.<\/p>\n\n\n\n According to Yakovlev, attacks on nuclear power plants could escalate into crimes against humanity. \"If we consider the context of the entire energy infrastructure, this effectively confirms that a crime against humanity is being committed,\u201d he says. \u201cRussians are attacking both nuclear plants and everything else, not for military purposes. It\u2019s a form of coercion to force surrender or to drive people out of Ukraine. But the main goal isn\u2019t covered by the goals of an armed conflict. Because when we talk about war crimes, they\u2019re always meant to achieve a military advantage. And here, it turns out, there\u2019s no such goal. That is why I would consider an attack on the nuclear sector to be 100% prohibited,\u201d says the expert. \u201cIt constitutes a crime against humanity, which has no military objective.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n According to him, the international community must respond to the attack on the plant as such attacks could become the norm, not only in Ukraine, but in the entire world. \"Since the development of UAV systems makes this possible, the lack of a response could have such serious consequences that no one even anticipates. By allowing a lackluster response to an attack on nuclear power plants, we are encouraging attacks on similar facilities in other countries by various states that may be in conflict, or even by terrorist groups,\u201d he warns.<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cThis is not just a matter for Ukraine, but also for global nuclear safety. If you don\u2019t stop this now, you\u2019ll be starting a storm tomorrow,\u201d plant officials say. Shortly before this article was published, on June 7, 2026, at 02:10am, the Russian Federation\u2019s military was reported to have attacked the Central Spent Nuclear Fuel Storage Facility in the Chernobyl Exclusion Zone. A drone strike partially destroyed the container reception building. No spent nuclear fuel was being stored there. The fire, which covered an area of 40 square meters, was quickly contained. No personnel were injured. The radiation levels remain within normal limits, the company stated.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The SBU reported<\/a> that it classifies the new Russian strike as a war crime.<\/p>\n\n\n\n This is an edited version of a longer report published<\/em> on Pechera.info<\/a><\/em>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n This report was made through a grant by Fondation Hirondelle \/ Justice Info.<\/em><\/em><\/p>\n\n\n![\"Chernobyl](\"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/wp-content\/uploads\/Ukraine_Chernobyl-Oksana-Rekun_@Oksana-Rekun.jpg\")
The drone attack on February 14, 2025<\/strong><\/h2>\n\n\n\n
![\"Chernobyl](\"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/wp-content\/uploads\/Ukraine_Chernobyl-command-room-2_@Oksana-Rekun.jpg\")
IAEA's response<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
A 500 million euros repair...<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
![\"Chernobyl](\"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/wp-content\/uploads\/Ukraine_Chernobyl-drone-attack-2_@Oksana-Rekun.jpg\")
A crime against humanity?<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
\u201cIf you don\u2019t stop this now, you\u2019ll be starting a storm tomorrow\u201d<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
\n\n\n\n
![\"Following](\"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/wp-content\/uploads\/Ukraine-Russia_floodwaters-Kherson_@Oleksii-Filippov-AFP-540x360.jpg\")
<\/div><\/a>\r\n\t\t\t