A/HRC/45/CRP.9 this decision, the prosecution requested the High Council of Justice to formally discipline the judges. The judges argued that such a request amounted to undue pressure by prosecutors and interfered with their independence in an on-going case.209 7. On 27 December 2017, Mr. B. was transferred to Donetsk as part of the simultaneous release of detainees. He told OHCHR that he agreed to the ‘exchange’ as it was the only way to be released. Mr. B. did not return to Government-controlled territory to attend trial, for fear of being re-arrested. His case was separated from that of Mr. P.’s and he was placed on a wanted list. 8. On 23 June 2018, Mr. P. was convicted of facilitating the activity of a terrorist organisation by hosting his friend Mr. B. (who, although not convicted, was referred to as a member of the armed groups of the self-proclaimed ‘Donetsk people’s republic’), and sentenced to four years and eight months in prison.210 He was released immediately due to the time he already served in pre-trial detention.211 Luhansk 9. On 12 March 2018, a woman attempting to cross the contact line at Stanytsia Luhanska was arrested by ‘officers’ of the self-proclaimed ‘Luhansk people’s republic’. The woman was handcuffed and taken to a nearby ambulance where she was searched, slapped, and her IDs, money and mobile phones were seized. The perpetrators explained she was suspected of collecting information for Ukrainian authorities. 10. Three armed men in balaclavas and camouflage uniforms put a bag over her head and brought her to the ‘ministry of state security’ in Luhansk, where she was tortured by four unidentified men for seven hours. The perpetrators applied electric shocks to her foot, punched her back, and struck her head with a book. They accused her of working for the Ukrainian authorities and forced her to “confess”. At night, she was locked in a cell in what she believed was an unofficial detention centre. She described the food as poor, and told OHCHR that the cell had no sanitation facilities. 11. Over ten days, the victim was interrogated in the ‘ministry of state security’ for about five hours almost every day, during which she was again punched and beaten. She was also threatened with sexual violence, and told that her relatives would be detained. She was forced to confess to cooperating with the Ukrainian government. Medical checks after her release confirmed that the blows she received had damaged her ribs and lungs. During her detention, she had no contact with the outside world. 12. After another ten days, on 2 April 2018, the woman was brought to an ‘investigator’, who wrote out her testimony without interrogating her. She signed it without reading it, in exchange for being allowed to see her daughter. At around the same time, her daughter was notified about her detention and hired a lawyer who the ‘investigator’ said was permitted to take such cases. When the victim met the lawyer and showed her the bruises caused by the beatings, the lawyer commented, “The sooner you’re sentenced, the better.” 13. After several days, the woman was brought to a room in the ‘ministry of state security’ where several ‘officers’ were present with video equipment. One ‘officer’ pointed a gun at her head and forced her to read a confession, which was video-recorded and published online. 14. In June 2018, the woman was transferred to the SIZO in Luhansk and her case was referred to the ‘military court’ of ‘Luhansk people’s republic’, which tried her in closed hearings. On 31 October 2018, the ‘court’ convicted her of ‘state treason’ and sentenced her to 12 years and 6 months in prison with confiscation of property. She appealed, but the ‘supreme court’ upheld the ‘verdict’. 209 210 211 40 Complaint of judges of Krasnoarmiiskyi town-district court of Donetsk region regarding interference with their independence by the prosecution of 18 December 2017, available at www.vru.gov.ua/content/file/3575-0-6-17_.pdf. Verdict of Krasnoarmiiskyi town-district court of Donetsk region, available at reyestr.court.gov.ua/Review/74877447. Ibid. The court reduced the sentence at the ratio of one day spent in pre-trial detention counts as two days spent in prison.