groups in the Luhansk region and on 2 August, the operator of the NTN channel was abducted in Donetsk. The whereabouts of all three remains unknown. On 31 July, the NGO Institute of Mass Information (IMI), which monitors violations of journalists' rights in Ukraine, published131 an overview of its study covering the cases of 51 journalists who have been abducted and held as hostages by armed groups in the Donetsk and Luhansk regions from April to the end of July. It provides examples of abducted journalists who against their will were forced to give false statements to Russian media, in particular, LifeNews. It appears that cooperation with Russian or pro-Russian media was sometimes a prerequisite for ending or lessening their inhumane treatment and, in some cases, release. Obstruction to lawful journalist activities On 21 July, the so-called “defence minister” of the self-proclaimed Donetsk People’s Republic (DPR), Igor Strelkov, announced that journalists, cameramen and photographers were not allowed to take photos, videos and audio recordings, or to be present in a combat zone or in the immediate proximity of military objects. Several journalists were subsequently harassed, regardless of whether or not they had accreditation from the so-called DPR. For example, a freelance field producer (fixer) for foreign media crews told the HRMMU that on 31 July, armed groups stopped her and the crew in Shakhtarsk (Donetsk region), threatened them with guns and confiscated their camera. It was reported on 15 August, that in Krasnodon, Luhansk region, the representatives of the so-called “Army of the south east” have prohibited photographing and filming in public places in the city, under the threat of prosecution by their so-called military tribunal. Arrests and detentions of journalists by Ukrainian forces On 18 July, the central district court of Mykolaiv sentenced the editor of the local website “Nabat”132 to four years of imprisonment with two years’ probation for publishing incorrect information about the security operation and spreading anti-Ukrainian information, which was classified as trespass against territorial integrity and inviolability of Ukraine under article 110/1 of the criminal code. On the night of 22 July, a freelance journalist from the TV channel Russia Today133 was detained by the SBU near the Donetsk airport where heavy fighting was going on. He reported having been held for three days and that his Ukrainian colleague was beaten up. He was then reportedly taken to the Polish border and “dumped out” after being told he was banned from Ukraine for three years; the Ukrainian journalist was released on 24 July. On 1 August, a female journalist (citizen of the USA and Russian Federation) working for Russia Today was detained by the SBU in Rakoshyno, Zakarpattia region for questioning. She was released after three hours and reportedly obliged to leave the territory of Ukraine by 4 August. Three journalists (from the Serbian weekly Pecat, 112 Ukrainian TV channel, and a freelance journalist from the Luhansk region) went missing on 1 August. Five days later, all three were found by local residents in Dniprodzerzhynsk. The journalists reported that they were detained 131 The study, published on 31 July, included, among other cases, those of Volyn Post’s journalist (held hostage from 26 April to 18 May), a freelance photographer (22-25 April), Hromadske TV’s journalists (30 June-2 July) and a freelance journalist and field producer (22-26 July). The HRMMU has mentioned these cases in its previous reports. 132 The “Nabat” website is known for its pro-federalism views. 133 The Russia Today journalist had been previously detained by the Ukraine Security Service on 30 May for unauthorized filming of classified military objects, but was later released. On 24 July, it was reported that based on the complaints in the UK about the coverage of the Malaysian Airlines crash by the TV channel Russia Today, it might be sanctioned by the UK organization that oversees broadcast standards. Several employees of Russia Today have recently resigned accusing the channel of covering the Malaysian Airlines crash story with “total disregard for the facts”. 208 | P a g e