A/HRC/40/CRP.3 banned Muslim groups, as well as the fact that they had possessed, read and discussed books deemed to be ‘extremist’ under the Russian law despite the absence of any evidence indicating that they had called for or planned to engage in any form of violence or violation of public order. 107. OHCHR notes with concern that in September 2016, four other Crimean Tatar men received long prison sentences for their alleged membership in the same organization, 129 while at least 11 other Crimean residents are currently on trial on similar charges. 130 OHCHR reiterates that freedom to manifest one’s religion or belief may only be limited on the grounds prescribed by law, which are necessary to protect public safety, order, health, morals or the fundamental rights and freedoms of others. 131 108. During the reporting period, at least five criminal cases against Crimean residents charged for their alleged anti-Russian statements in social media were closed following the de-criminalization of a single act of “incitement of hatred or violence” under Russian law,132 which is de facto applied in Crimea. Previously, OHCHR reported extensively about the systematic use by the Russian Federation authorities of the anti-extremism legislation in Crimea against critics of the peninsula’s occupation and vocal pro-Ukrainian activists.133 OHCHR welcomes this positive step by the Russian Federation, although the extent to which such de-criminalization will be implemented remains to be seen. D. Illegal population transfers and freedom of movement 109. According to the Russian Federation judicial registry, in 2018, courts in Crimea ordered deportation from the peninsula of at least 435 individuals considered foreigners under Russian Federation laws, including 231 Ukrainian nationals. Of the total number in 2018, at least 50 individuals were “forcibly removed”, a procedure that prescribes placement in temporary detention before deportation. Many of the deported were Ukrainian citizens, whose residence rights in Crimea were not recognized by authorities. In one case, a man, who had relocated to Crimea from Kyiv to undergo medical rehabilitation, was deported after having been compelled to cooperate with law enforcement, or risk detention.134 110. Deportations of protected persons from Crimea occur against the backdrop of restrictions imposed on free movement between mainland Ukraine and the peninsula. During the reporting period, the Federal Security Service of the Russian Federation denied entry to a Ukrainian journalist and banned her from Crimea for 10 years. 135 Russian border officials informed the journalist of the ban at one of the crossing points of the Administrative Boundary Line without any explanation of the specific grounds for such decision. Russian authorities issue similar bans to other journalists, civic activists, or other public figures, who are perceived as critics of Crimea’s occupation.136 111. Individual or mass forcible transfers, as well as deportations of protected persons from occupied territory to the territory of the occupying Power, or to that of any other country, occupied or not, are prohibited under international humanitarian law, regardless of 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 See OHCHR report on the human rights situation in Ukraine, 16 August - 15 November 2016, para. 164. See OHCHR report on the human rights situation in Ukraine, 16 May - 15 August 2018, para. 111112. ICCPR, art. 18 (3). Law of the Russian Federation No 519-FZ, 27 December 2018. See inter alia OHCHR second thematic report “On the situation of human rights in the temporary occupied Autonomous Republic of Crimea and the city of Sevastopol, Ukraine”, 13 September 2017 30 June 2018, para. 46. OHCHR interview, 21 November 2018. OHCHR interview, 29 November 2018. See OHCHR first thematic report “On the situation of human rights in the temporary occupied Autonomous Republic of Crimea and the city of Sevastopol, Ukraine”, 22 February 2014 - 12 September 2017, para. 128. 27