Allen Weiner, a Stanford University senior law lecturer and the head of its program in international conflict and negotiation, told the Washington Examiner that “there are a number of countries that would presumably have the legal capacity to conduct investigations, possible prosecutions in their domestic courts as well,” in addition to the investigation by the International Criminal Court and the one being conducted by the Ukrainian government.

There are risks involved in the documentation of war crimes, Weiner noted, saying, “It’s always best to get to a crime scene when the crime scene is fresh,” but investigators “have to be very careful about subjecting their own personnel to risks, so there’s going to be a trade-off there.”

Some evidence might still be helpful even if investigators can’t get to an area immediately, he said, mentioning “if people were killed with their hands tied behind their backs” or “if you see whether people were shot at closer range or not,” or in “some kind of point-blank fashion.”

Weiner said that “it seems quite imaginable” that the ICC would “be able to issue indictments with respect to the kinds of indiscriminate attacks against urban settings,” though he’s not certain whom the court would charge for the crimes, and it depends on whom they can prove gave the order to commit such acts.

Since neither Russia nor Ukraine is a part of the ICC, the institution only has jurisdiction over the conduct of war on Ukrainian soil. It doesn’t have the ability to charge Russia with the crime of aggression, even though “that’s the one that it would be easiest to imagine that Vladimir Putin is responsible for because we know that he’s the one who made the decision to order the invasion of Ukraine,” Weiner said.