A/HRC/43/CRP.7 premises of the ‘ministry of state security’ (in Donetsk or Luhansk) or ‘Izoliatsiia’ detention facility (in Donetsk). 66. The majority of interviewed individuals were initially detained under ‘administrative arrest’ (in ‘Donetsk people’s republic’) or ‘preventive arrest’ (in ‘Luhansk people’s republic’), and held incommunicado without access to a lawyer. Some detainees were not informed about the reasons of their detention or ‘charges’ against them for a prolonged period. Relatives of those detained who enquired about their whereabouts were not provided with any information beyond confirmation, in a few instances, that the person was indeed detained. 67. In most cases, ‘investigative actions’ commenced immediately after the apprehension, with a few exceptions when detainees spent days or weeks in custody before any action was taken. ‘Investigative actions’ comprised mostly of interrogations either at the ‘ministry of state security’ or in the ‘Izoliatsiia’ detention facility (in Donetsk) or at the ‘ministry of state security’ (in Luhansk) by individuals who presented themselves as ‘officers’ of the ‘ministry of state security’ or did not identify themselves at all. Several detainees believed Russian “FSB officers” 46 took part in interrogations, and some perceived them to be in a position of authority. 68. In most documented cases, the interrogators began by threatening detainees with violence or rape and made threats against their families if they refused to confess or otherwise cooperate with the ‘investigation’. Such threats were often accompanied by blows to the body or slaps to the face. 69. Fifty-two out of the 56 individuals interviewed by OHCHR reported having been subjected to torture or ill-treatment, sometimes including sexual violence, mostly during the interrogations, in order to extract confessions or information, in most cases, about working for the SBU. The frequency, intensity and length of the torture and ill-treatment varied considerably, however they usually continued until a detainee agreed to confess (orally, in writing or on video) or to provide information. Methods of torture and ill-treatment included beatings, electric shocks, asphyxiation (wet and dry), sexual violence, positional torture, removal of body parts (nails and teeth), deprivation of water, food, sleep or access to a toilet, mock executions, threats of violence or death and threats of harm to family. Testimony of the released detainees indicate that torture and ill-treatment was also carried out for punitive purposes and to humiliate and intimidate, including by personnel of some detention facilities. OHCHR identified a continuum of torture and ill-treatment that was often exacerbated by inhumane detention conditions, in particular in the ‘Izoliatsiia’ detention facility. VI. Administration of justice and accountability “It’s wartime, you are lucky to still be alive.” – A ‘judge’ responds to a man’s complaint about being tortured in ‘Izoliatsiia’, during a ‘court hearing’ in Donetsk. 70. On 26 November 2019, the Government issued a communication 47 to the United Nations Secretary-General notifying him of changes in the material and territorial scope of its derogation from the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) and the 46 47 The FSB is the Federal Security Service of the Russian Federation. The term “FSB officers” is used as a shorthand by detainees to indicate anyone they suspected of originating from and acting on behalf of the Russian Federation. They based their statement on the Russian accent of the person. Communication in accordance with the obligations of the Government of Ukraine under Article 4, para. 3, of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, available at https://treaties.un.org/doc/Publication/CN/2019/CN.618.2019-Eng.pdf. 17