A/HRC/42/40/Add.2 3. Justice 45. The Working Group notes that there is almost total impunity for acts of enforced disappearance; in fact, according to the information it received, only a few State officials have been convicted for the crime of illegal deprivation of liberty under article 146 of the Criminal Code. In all these cases, however, the whereabouts of the victims were known. According to the most recent information from the Office of the Prosecutor, between 2 August 2018 and 14 January 2019, 20 criminal proceedings were initiated under article 146 of the Criminal Code; two of them were closed, however, owing to absence of corpus delicti, leaving therefore 18 cases under investigation. In this regard, the Working Group emphasizes that the State duty to investigate, prosecute and try enforced disappearances exhaustively and impartially extends until the faith of the victim is established,10 even if and when the enforced disappearance is investigated and prosecuted under other offences. 46. As at the time of writing, in none of the investigations had the suspects been found and/or formally charged. It was also unclear whether these cases involved Ukrainian State officials or rather representatives of the armed groups and/or self-proclaimed bodies. Trials in absentia have been initiated by a special unit in the Office of the General Prosecutor for acts conducted by armed groups relating to the conflict, though they are very difficult to investigate and prosecute owing to the lack of access to the parts of the territory that are not under the Government’s control. 47. This lack of accountability for disappearances occurring in the context of the conflict essentially depends on a combination of factors, notably the lack of political will – particularly on the part of relevant State authorities to seriously investigate these crimes, unless they concern disappearances occurring at the hands of armed groups of the “Donetsk People’s Republic” or the “Luhansk People’s Republic” – and the loopholes in the legal framework, particularly due to the absence of an autonomous crime of enforced disappearance in the Criminal Code. The lack of legal knowledge about the crime of enforced disappearance and of special investigative practices is also a factor. The Working Group also received information in relation to the excessive length of proceedings. 48. The Working Group emphasizes that, while the de facto authorities in Donetsk and Luhansk may incur in responsibility under international law for their conduct, this does not diminish the State’s obligation to take all possible measures, including judicial ones, to protect the human rights of the population in the part of territory outside its control. At the same time, there should be no double standards when it comes to accountability for enforced disappearances; all acts that may constitute enforced disappearances should be investigated and prosecuted, irrespective of the perpetrator. 49. The Working Group was informed that there has been an issue with regard to which authority was competent to investigate and prosecute disappearances committed by the volunteer battalions – which operated at least with State acquiescence and with little or no control at the beginning of the conflict – before they were completely integrated into the armed forces or the police in 2015. During its visit, the Working Group heard numerous allegations of disappearances carried out by volunteer battalions, such as the Azov Battalion and the Right Sector. The lack of specific investigative bodies with clear competence and responsibility to investigate acts of enforced disappearance has also affected the effectiveness in the investigation of this crime. 50. The Working Group notes that criminal acts perpetrated by State agents have been investigated and prosecuted by the Military Prosecutor under the supervision of the General Prosecutor. The new State Bureau of Investigation (see para. 35 above), which should better guarantee the independence of proceedings, would take over all cases under investigation as of the end of 2019. In accordance with the new law criminalizing enforced disappearance, it is important that investigations of all allegations thereof come within the competence of the State Bureau of Investigation – rather than having investigations scattered among different investigative bodies – and that the effective continuation of the cases currently managed by the Military Prosecutor be ensured. 10 See Declaration, art. 13.6 and Convention, art. 24.6. 11