A/HRC/44/21 the basis of judgments delivered in 2014 by the Yamalo-Nenets and Tatarstan district courts of the Russian Federation, which had found the video in question extremist and included it at that time on the Federal List of Extremist Materials. In all four cases, the determination of the defendants’ guilt was reached solely on the basis of judgments of courts in the Russian Federation without any attempt by the courts in Crimea to independently assess the lawfulness of the impugned social media posts, including their compatibility with the defendants’ rights to freedom of expression.41 33. OHCHR received reports that journalists and media workers continued to face interference with their professional activities by the local authorities in Crimea, including law enforcement agencies. These practices included surveillance methods such as phonetapping, being physically followed by law enforcement officers, threats of physical harm, criminal prosecution, arrests and prohibition of entry into the territory of Crimea. Numerous media outlets and individual journalists informed OHCHR that, owing to these risks, they would self-censor the content of their publications, conceal their authorship or limit their reporting to non-political topics and stories. Other journalists outside of the peninsula decided not to risk physical entry into Crimea or were banned from such entry by the Federal Security Service of the Russian Federation. For example, OHCHR interviewed a Crimean Tatar journalist who became internally displaced in a part of Ukraine that is not Crimea, after her media outlet, ATR, had been forced to relocate from Crimea to another part of Ukraine in 2015. 42 During the reporting period, the journalist learned that the authorities in Crimea had subsequently opened a criminal case and issued an arrest warrant against her. 34. During the reporting period, several civil society groups faced obstacles in organizing conferences, public discussions and other meetings. OHCHR received information regarding cases in which law enforcement authorities pressured and threatened landlords of facilities where Crimean Tatar civic groups planned to conduct meetings. Meetings could consequently not proceed as scheduled or did not take place. In at least three cases documented by OHCHR, the law enforcement authorities seemed to target actual or perceived critics of the occupation of Crimea and the policies of the Russian Federation on the peninsula, such as the Mejlis and Crimean Solidarity.43 35. OHCHR received reports of continuing arrests and criminal prosecution of Jehovah’s Witnesses in Crimea through the application by the Russian Federation of its legal framework to Crimea. 44 Since 2017, all 22 congregations of Jehovah’s Witnesses registered in Crimea have lost their right to operate following the decision of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation that the group breached the country’s law on combating extremist activity.45 As a result, Jehovah’s Witnesses who practise their faith risk retaliation by law enforcement. 36. The prosecution of perceived sympathizers of the Muslim group Hizb ut-Tahrir also continued. The group operates legally in Ukraine, but is officially listed as a terrorist 41 42 43 44 45 OHCHR, “Report on the human rights situation in Ukraine: 16 May to 15 August 2019”, para. 110. Available at www.ohchr.org/Documents/Countries/UA/ReportUkraine16May-15Aug2019_EN.pdf. ATR was among the Crimean Tatar media outlets that were denied reregistration according to Russian Federation legislation and had to cease operations on the peninsula in 2015. It had previously received warnings from the authorities of the Russian Federation not to “disseminate rumours” and “promote extremism”. OHCHR, “Situation of human rights in the temporarily occupied Autonomous Republic of Crimea and the city of Sevastopol (Ukraine)”, paras. 156–157. In response to cases of criminal prosecution of Crimean Tatars, relatives of detained Crimean Tatars created a civic group, Crimean Solidarity, operating as a platform to exchange information, mobilize support and reach out to lawyers and human rights defenders. OHCHR, “Report on the situation of human rights in the temporarily occupied Autonomous Republic of Crimea and the city of Sevastopol, Ukraine: 13 September 2017 to 30 June 2018”, para. 53. Available at www.ohchr.org/Documents/Countries/UA/CrimeaThematicReport10Sept2018_EN.pdf. During the reporting period, the organization of Jehovah’s Witnesses publicly listed the cases of three Jehovah’s Witnesses in Crimea who were under criminal prosecution. Information about individual victims can be found at the website of Jehovah’s Witnesses in the Russian Federation, available at https://jw-russia.org/prisoners.html#sort=region. OHCHR, “Situation of human rights in the temporarily occupied Autonomous Republic of Crimea and the city of Sevastopol (Ukraine)”, para. 144. 9