A/HRC/45/CRP.9 78. In cases against Ukrainian soldiers prosecuted for grave human rights violations, members of these groups and other activists used intimidation to demand an end to the prosecution of “patriots” and the defendants’ release from custody. In cases against individuals accused of links to the armed groups, they demanded that the defendants remain in pre-trial detention.98 Although police launched investigations in several cases,99 these were ineffective and no perpetrator has been brought to account, leading to a sense of impunity. 100 79. For example, when the judges of Selydivskyi town court of Donetsk region acquitted the former ‘head’ of the ‘supreme court’ of ‘Donetsk people’s republic’, 101 they were targeted by a hate campaign.102 On 27 June 2017, members of National Corps and National Brigades extreme right-wing groups carried out a mock execution of a judge’s puppet and threatened more “radical actions” should the judges adopt decisions in favour of members of the armed groups.103 The judges complained to police but the investigation was only launched two months later and did not progress despite the availability of evidence and witnesses. The judges told OHCHR that the police did not interview them in the context of the investigation.104 80. OHCHR is concerned that in certain cases the prosecution or SBU may have assisted or encouraged such campaigns against judges. On at least ten occasions, OHCHR observed the appearance of undue collaboration or coordination between prosecutors or SBU officers and members of extreme right-wing groups in intimidating judges. In one such case, the SBU was seen ordering lunch for members of extreme right-wing groups who had demanded that judges deny release of a woman accused of support of armed groups on bail.105 In the case before the Selydivskyi city court described above, the judges complained that the hate campaign against them was incited by the prosecution. 81. OHCHR recalls that any attack or intimidation directed at judges undermines the independence of the judiciary and that police must prevent and investigate these attacks, as both a matter of security and to protect judges and the judiciary from attempts to interfere with their independence. E. Right to an effective remedy for violations by State forces 82. OHCHR observed that despite mechanisms in place for investigating and prosecuting human rights violations, perpetrators of violations committed during the prosecution of conflict-related crimes were rarely held to account. In particular, throughout the reporting period the majority of torture allegations against members of the military and law 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 18 OHCHR interviews, 29 September and 16 November 2017, 22 May 2018. Criminal Code, article 376 prohibits any interference with the activity of judicial authorities. OHCHR interviews, 29 August 2017, 8 August 2018. Verdict of the Selydivskyi town court of Donetsk region of 12 June 2017, available at reyestr.court.gov.ua/Review/67209654. The judges argued that the hate campaign against them started with publications accusing them of supporting separatism in different media. The authors of these publications referred to information which could have only been obtained from the prosecution (notification of the judges of Selydivskyi town court of Donetsk region about interference into their professional activity submitted to the High Council of Justice on 27 June 2017, available at www.vru.gov.ua/content/file/1288-0-6-17_.pdf). Online report concerning the National Corps’ action on their website, available at bit.ly/37SBuIV. OHCHR observed that the extreme right-wing groups employ the same tactic of interfering with the independence of judges in criminal proceedings that are not related to the armed conflict. Most notable in this regard is the case of 19 men prosecuted for mass disorder on 2 May 2014 in Odesa that resulted in the killing of six men. See OHCHR, Report on the human rights situation in Ukraine, 16 November 2015 – 15 February 2016, para. 100, available at www.ohchr.org/Documents/Countries/UA/Ukraine_13th_HRMMU_Report_3March2016.pdf. For more information about the 2 May trials, see HRMMU Briefing note on Accountability for killings and violent deaths on 2 May 2014, available at www.un.org.ua/images/documents/4671/Accountability%20for%20Killings%20and%20Violent%20 Deaths%20on%202%20May%202014%20in%20Odesa_1.pdf. OHCHR interview, 20 September 2017.