CASE OF ROGACHEV AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA – 64754/14 and 19 others

Last Updated on March 23, 2023 by LawEuro

The applicants complained of the disproportionate measures taken against them as participants of public assemblies.


FIRST SECTION
CASE OF ROGACHEV AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA
(Applications nos. 64754/14 and 19 others – see appended list)
JUDGMENT
STRASBOURG
23 March 2023

This judgment is final but it may be subject to editorial revision.

In the case of Rogachev and Others v. Russia,

The European Court of Human Rights (First Section), sitting as a Committee composed of:
Lətif Hüseynov, President,
Ivana Jelić,
Erik Wennerström, judges,

and Viktoriya Maradudina, Acting Deputy Section Registrar,

Having deliberated in private on 2 March 2023,

Delivers the following judgment, which was adopted on that date:

PROCEDURE

1. The case originated in applications against Russia lodged with the Court under Article 34 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (“the Convention”) on the various dates indicated in the appended table.

2. The Russian Government (“the Government”) were given notice of the applications.

THE FACTS

3. The list of applicants and the relevant details of the applications are set out in the appended table.

4. The applicants complained of the disproportionate measures taken against them as participants of public assemblies. They also raised other complaints under the provisions of the Convention.

THE LAW

I. JOINDER OF THE APPLICATIONS

5. Having regard to the similar subject matter of the applications, the Court finds it appropriate to examine them jointly in a single judgment.

II. ALLEGED VIOLATION OF ARTICLE 11 OF THE CONVENTION

6. The applicants complained principally of disproportionate measures taken against them as participants of public assemblies, namely the dispersal of these assemblies, as well as their arrest followed by conviction for administrative offence. They relied, expressly or in substance, on Article 11 of the Convention.

7. The Court refers to the principles established in its case-law regarding freedom of assembly (see Kudrevičius and Others v. Lithuania [GC], no. 37553/05, ECHR 2015, with further references) and proportionality of interference with it (see Oya Ataman v. Turkey, no. 74552/01, ECHR 2006‑XIV, and Hyde Park and Others v. Moldova, no. 33482/06, 31 March 2009).

8. In the leading cases of Frumkin v. Russia, no. 74568/12, ECHR 2016 (extracts), Navalnyy and Yashin v. Russia, no. 76204/11, 4 December 2014 and Kasparov and Others v. Russia, no. 21613/07, 3 October 2013, the Court already found a violation in respect of issues similar to those in the present case.

9. Having examined all the material submitted to it, the Court has not found any fact or argument capable of persuading it to reach a different conclusion as to the admissibility and merits of these complaints. Having regard to its case-law on the subject, the Court considers that in the instant case the interference with the applicants’ freedom of assembly was not “necessary in a democratic society”.

10. These complaints are therefore admissible and disclose a breach of Article 11 of the Convention.

III. OTHER ALLEGED VIOLATIONS UNDER WELL-ESTABLISHED CASE-LAW

11. The applicants submitted other complaints which also raised issues under the Convention, given the relevant well-established case-law of the Court (see appended table). These complaints are not manifestly ill-founded within the meaning of Article 35 § 3 (a) of the Convention, nor are they inadmissible on any other ground. Accordingly, they must be declared admissible. Having examined all the material before it, the Court concludes that they also disclose violations of the Convention in the light of its well‑established case-law (see Tsvetkova and Others v. Russia, nos. 54381/08 and 5 others, §§ 84-138, 10 April 2018, as regards unlawful administrative arrest, and Karelin v. Russia, no. 926/08, 20 September 2016, concerning examination of criminal cases in the absence of a prosecuting party in the judicial proceedings governed by the Federal Code of Administrative Offences).

IV. REMAINING COMPLAINTS

12. In view of its findings above, the Court considers that there is no need to deal separately with the remaining complaints under Article 6 of the Convention raised by some of the applicants in relation to other aspects of the fairness of the proceedings.

V. APPLICATION OF ARTICLE 41 OF THE CONVENTION

13. Article 41 of the Convention provides:

“If the Court finds that there has been a violation of the Convention or the Protocols thereto, and if the internal law of the High Contracting Party concerned allows only partial reparation to be made, the Court shall, if necessary, afford just satisfaction to the injured party.”

14. Regard being had to the documents in its possession and to its case‑law (see, in particular, Saidov v. Russia [Committee], no. 31872/19, § 23, 26 July 2022), the Court finds it reasonable to award the sums indicated in the appended table.

FOR THESE REASONS, THE COURT, UNANIMOUSLY,

1. Decides to join the applications;

2. Declares the complaints concerning the right to peaceful assembly and the other complaints under well-established case-law of the Court, as set out in the appended table, admissible, and decides that it is not necessary to examine separately the remaining complaints under Article 6 of the Convention concerning other aspects of the fairness of the proceedings,

3. Holds that these applications disclose a breach of Article 11 of the Convention concerning the right to peaceful assembly;

4. Holds that there has been a violation of the Convention as regards the other complaints raised under well-established case-law of the Court (see appended table);

5. Holds

(a) that the respondent State is to pay the applicants, within three months, the amounts indicated in the appended table, to be converted into the currency of the respondent State at the rate applicable at the date of settlement;

(b) that from the expiry of the above-mentioned three months until settlement simple interest shall be payable on the above amounts at a rate equal to the marginal lending rate of the European Central Bank during the default period plus three percentage points.

Done in English, and notified in writing on 23 March 2023, pursuant to Rule 77 §§ 2 and 3 of the Rules of Court.

Viktoriya Maradudina                      Lətif Hüseynov
Acting Deputy Registrar                    President

___________

APPENDIX
List of applications raising complaints under Article 11 of the Convention
(disproportionate measures against organisers and participants of public assemblies)

No. Application no.

Date of introduction

Applicant’s name

Year of birth

 

Representative’s name and location Name of the public event

Location

Date

Administrative charges Penalty Final domestic decision

Court Name

Date

Other complaints under well‑established case-law Amount awarded for pecuniary and non-pecuniary damage and costs and expenses per applicant

(in euros)[i]

1. 64754/14

16/09/2014

Mikhail Borisovich ROGACHEV

1952

Mezak Ernest Aleksandrovich

Saint-Barthélemy d’Anjou

Manifestation against the war in Ukraine

 

Syktyvkar

 

16/03/2014

Article 20.2 § 5 of CAO fine of RUB 10,000 Supreme Court of the Komi Republic

10/09/2014

Art. 5 (1) – unlawful deprivation of liberty, including unrecorded detention and detention without a judicial order and any other legal basis – arrest on 16/03/2014; detention in excess of 3 hours,

 

Art. 6 (1) – lack of impartiality of tribunal – lack of the prosecuting party in the administrative proceedings: Final decision: Supreme Court of the Komi Republic on 10/09/2014

4,000
2. 54040/17

17/07/2017

Ivan Sergeyevich DOLIN

1986

Terekhov Konstantin Ilyich

Moscow

Anti-corruption manifestation

 

Tula

 

26/03/2017

Article 20.2 § 5 of CAO fine of RUB 10,000 Tula Regional Court

26/04/2017

Art. 5 (1) – unlawful deprivation of liberty, including unrecorded detention and detention without a judicial order and any other legal basis – unlawful and disproportionate administrative escorting and arrest on 26/03/2017 (it was possible to draw up a record on the spot; detention over 3 hours in breach of Article § 27.5 CAO),

 

Art. 6 (1) – lack of impartiality of tribunal in view of the absence of the prosecuting party in the administrative proceedings: Final decision: Tula Regional Court on 26/04/2017

4,000
3. 79261/17

02/11/2017

Anatoliy Vladimirovich MAKAROV

1989

Glukhov Aleksey Vladimirovich

Novocheboksarsk

Anti-corruption manifestation

 

Nizhny Novgorod

 

26/03/2017

Article 19.3 § 1 of CAO, Article 20.2 § 5 of CAO fines of RUB 500 and RUB 10,000 Nizhniy Novgorod Regional Court

03/05/2017

Art. 5 (1) – unlawful deprivation of liberty, including unrecorded detention and detention without a judicial order and any other legal basis – arrested at 2.40 p.m. on 26/03/2017, brought to a police station to draw up a record of administrative offence; released on the following day at 1.05 p.m. 4,000
4. 79264/17

02/11/2017

Vladislav Gennadyevich POPOV

1992

Glukhov Aleksey Vladimirovich

Novocheboksarsk

Anti-corruption manifestation

 

Nizhny Novgorod

 

26/03/2017

Article 20.2 § 5 of CAO,

Article 19.3 § 1 of CAO

fine of RUB 10,000 and RUB 500, respectively Nizhniy Novgorod Regional Court

23/05/2017

 

Nizhniy Novgorod Regional Court

04/05/2017

Art. 5 (1) – unlawful deprivation of liberty, including unrecorded detention and detention without a judicial order and any other legal basis – arrested at 2.40 p.m. on 26/03/2017, brought to a police station to draw up a record of administrative offence; released on the following day at 1.05 p.m. 4,000
5. 80804/17

16/11/2017

Dmitriy Andreyevich KRYUKOV

1993

Glukhov Aleksey Vladimirovich

Novocheboksarsk

Anti-corruption manifestation

 

Nizhniy Novgorod

 

26/03/2017

Article 20.2 § 5 of CAO fine of RUB 10,000 Nizhniy Novgorod Regional Court

17/05/2017

Art. 5 (1) – unlawful deprivation of liberty, including unrecorded detention and detention without a judicial order and any other legal basis – arrested on 26/03/2017 at 4.10 p.m. during the assembly; brought to the police station to draw up a record of administrative arrest; released on the same day at 9 p.m.; the issue of the detention was examined by the appeal court,

 

Art. 6 (1) – lack of impartiality of tribunal – prosecuting party absent in administrative proceedings: Final decision: Nizhniy Novgorod Regional Court on 17/05/2017

4,000
6. 80808/17

16/11/2017

Vladimir Aleksandrovich MICHUROV

1965

Glukhov Aleksey Vladimirovich

Novocheboksarsk

Anti-corruption demonstration

 

Nizhniy Novgorod

 

26/03/2017

Article 20.2 § 5 of CAO fine of RUB 10,000 Nizhniy Novgorod Regional Court

17/05/2017

Art. 5 (1) – unlawful deprivation of liberty, including unrecorded detention and detention without a judicial order and any other legal basis – arrested on 26/03/2017 at 4.10 p.m. during the assembly; brought to the police station to draw up a record of administrative arrest; released on the same day at 9 p.m.; the issue of the detention was examined by the appeal court,

 

Art. 6 (1) – lack of impartiality of tribunal – lack of the prosecuting party in the administrative proceedings: Final decision: Nizhniy Novgorod Regional Court on 17/05/2017

4,000
7. 285/18

07/12/2017

Pavel Sergeyevich DEGTEV

1993

Glukhov Aleksey Vladimirovich

Novocheboksarsk

Anti-corruption manifestation

 

Nizhniy Novgorod

 

26/03/2017

Article 20.2 § 5 of CAO fine of RUB 10,000 Nizhniy Novgorod Regional Court

15/06/2017

Art. 5 (1) – unlawful deprivation of liberty, including unrecorded detention and detention without a judicial order and any other legal basis – arrested on 26/03/2017 at 2.10 p.m. during the assembly; brought to the police station to draw up a record of administrative arrest; released on the same day at 7.30 p.m.; the issue of the detention was examined by the appeal court,

 

Art. 6 (1) – lack of impartiality of tribunal – lack of the prosecuting party in the administrative proceedings: Final decision: Nizhniy Novgorod Regional Court on 15/06/2017

4,000
8. 2443/18

08/12/2017

Eduard Yuryevich BESHLIYEV

1991

Glukhov Aleksey Vladimirovich

Novocheboksarsk

Anti-corruption manifestation

 

Nizhniy Novgorod

 

26/03/2017

Article 20.2 § 5 of CAO fine of RUB 10,000 Nizhniy Novgorod Regional Court

15/06/2017

Art. 6 (1) – lack of impartiality of tribunal – lack of the prosecuting party in the administrative proceedings: Final decision: Nizhniy Novgorod Regional Court on 15/06/2017 3,500
9. 2455/18

30/11/2017

Eduard Georgiyevich CHUPROV

1976

Glukhov Aleksey Vladimirovich

Novocheboksarsk

Anti-corruption manifestation

Nizhniy Novgorod

26/03/2017

Article 20.2 § 5 of CAO fine of RUB 10,000 Nizhniy Novgorod Regional Court

08/06/2017

Art. 5 (1) – unlawful deprivation of liberty, including unrecorded detention and detention without a judicial order and any other legal basis – Unrecorded detention for four hours on 26/03/2017, raised on appeal,

Art. 6 (1) – lack of impartiality of tribunal – lack of the prosecuting party in the administrative proceedings: Final decision: Nizhniy Novgorod Regional Court on 08/06/2017

4,000
10. 2471/18

30/11/2017

Yevgeniy Aleksandrovich LAZAREV

1990

Glukhov Aleksey Vladimirovich

Novocheboksarsk

Anti-corruption manifestation

Nizhniy Novgorod

26/03/2017

Article 20.2 § 5 of CAO fine of RUB 10,000 Nizhniy Novgorod Regional Court

15/06/2017

Art. 5 (1) – unlawful deprivation of liberty, including unrecorded detention and detention without a judicial order and any other legal basis – arrest on 26/03/2017 during the manifestation for the sole purpose of drawing up a record, issue examined by the appeal court,

Art. 6 (1) – lack of impartiality of tribunal – lack of the prosecuting party in the administrative proceedings: Final decision: Nizhniy Novgorod Regional Court on 15/06/2017

4,000
11. 2474/18

30/11/2017

Yelena Vasilyevna AYBAZOVA

1961

Glukhov Aleksey Vladimirovich

Novocheboksarsk

Anti-corruption manifestation

Nizhniy Novgorod

26/03/2017

Article 20.2 § 5 of CAO fine of RUB 10,000 Nizhniy Novgorod Regional Court

01/06/2017

Art. 5 (1) – unlawful deprivation of liberty, including unrecorded detention and detention without a judicial order and any other legal basis – arrest on 26/03/2017 during the manifestation for the sole purpose of drawing up a record of an administrative offence, issue examined by the appeal court,

Art. 6 (1) – lack of impartiality of tribunal – lack of the prosecuting party in the administrative proceedings: Final decision: Nizhniy Novgorod Regional Court on 01/06/2017

4,000
12. 2478/18

30/11/2017

Sergey Vladimirovich KOROTKOV

1983

Glukhov Aleksey Vladimirovich

Novocheboksarsk

Anti-corruption manifestation

Nizhniy Novgorod

26/03/2017

Article 20.2 § 5 of CAO fine of RUB 10,000 Nizhniy Novgorod Regional Court

15/06/2017

Art. 5 (1) – unlawful deprivation of liberty, including unrecorded detention and detention without a judicial order and any other legal basis – arrest on 26/03/2017 during the manifestation for the sole purpose of drawing up a record of an administrative offence, issue examined by the appeal court,

Art. 6 (1) – lack of impartiality of tribunal – lack of the prosecuting party in the administrative proceedings: Final decision: Nizhniy Novgorod Regional Court on 15/06/2017

4,000
13. 2483/18

30/11/2017

Dmitriy Alekseyevich OSTAPETS

1997

Glukhov Aleksey Vladimirovich

Novocheboksarsk

Anti-corruption manifestation

Nizhniy Novgorod

26/03/2017

Article 20.2 § 5 of CAO fine of RUB 10,000 Nizhniy Novgorod Regional Court

15/06/2017

Art. 5 (1) – unlawful deprivation of liberty, including unrecorded detention and detention without a judicial order and any other legal basis – arrest on 26/03/2017 during the manifestation for the sole purpose of drawing up a record of an administrative offence, issue examined by the appeal court,

Art. 6 (1) – lack of impartiality of tribunal – lack of the prosecuting party in the administrative proceedings: Final decision: Nizhniy Novgorod Regional Court on 15/06/2017

4,000
14. 2489/18

30/11/2017

Natalya Valeryevna REZONTOVA

1968

Glukhov Aleksey Vladimirovich

Novocheboksarsk

Anti-corruption manifestation

Nizhniy Novgorod

26/03/2017

Article 20.2 § 5 of CAO fine of RUB 15,000 Nizhniy Novgorod Regional Court

07/09/2017

Art. 6 (1) – lack of impartiality of tribunal – lack of the prosecuting party in the administrative proceedings: Final decision: Nizhniy Novgorod Regional Court on 07/09/2017 3,500
15. 2568/18

08/12/2017

Aleksey Nikolayevich MAKEYEV

1977

Glukhov Aleksey Vladimirovich

Novocheboksarsk

Anti-corruption manifestation

Nizhniy Novgorod

26/03/2017

Article 20.2 § 5 of CAO fine of RUB 10,000 Nizhniy Novgorod Regional Court

15/06/2017

Art. 5 (1) – unlawful deprivation of liberty, including unrecorded detention and detention without a judicial order and any other legal basis – applicant arrested on 26/03/2017 at 4.10 p.m. during the manifestation, taken to the police station to draw up a record of administrative offence and was released at approximately 9 p.m. on the same day; raised that complaint in the administrative proceedings,

Art. 6 (1) – lack of impartiality of tribunal – lack of the prosecuting party in the administrative proceedings: Final decision: Nizhniy Novgorod Regional Court on 15/06/2017

4,000
16. 2569/18

08/12/2017

Vladislav Igorevich BELOGLAZOV

1997

Glukhov Aleksey Vladimirovich

Novocheboksarsk

Anti-corruption manifestation

Nizhniy Novgorod

26/03/2017

Article 20.2 § 5 of CAO fine of RUB 10,000 Nizhniy Novgorod Regional Court

15/06/2017

Art. 5 (1) – unlawful deprivation of liberty, including unrecorded detention and detention without a judicial order and any other legal basis – the applicant was arrested on 26/03/2017 during the manifestation, at approximately 4.10 p.m., and taken to a police station to draw up a record of administrative offence; he was released at approximately 9 p.m. on the same day, the complaint was raised on appeal,

Art. 6 (1) – lack of impartiality of tribunal – lack of the prosecuting party in the administrative proceedings: Final decision: Nizhniy Novgorod Regional Court on 15/06/2017

4,000
17. 2570/18

08/12/2017

Oleg Vasilyevich IGNATOV

1990

Glukhov Aleksey Vladimirovich

Novocheboksarsk

Anti-corruption manifestation

Nizhniy Novgorod

26/03/2017

Article 20.2 § 5 of CAO fine of RUB 10,000 Nizhniy Novgorod Regional Court

13/09/2017

Art. 6 (1) – lack of impartiality of tribunal – lack of the prosecuting party in the administrative proceedings: Final decision: Nizhniy Novgorod Regional Court on 13/09/2017 3,500
18. 11462/18

07/02/2018

Sergey Andreyevich LUNTS

1981

Ratnikova Svetlana Sergeyevna

St Petersburg

Collection of appeals to the President of Russia

St Petersburg

29/04/2017

Article 20.2 § 5 of CAO fine of RUB 10,000 St Petersburg City Court

08/08/2017

3,500
19. 12896/18

09/03/2018

Anastasiya Sergeyevna GROMYKO

1995

Dobralskiy Aleksandr Igorevich

Kaliningrad

Anti-corruption manifestation

Leninskiy Avenue, Kaliningrad

12/06/2017

Article 20.2 § 5 of CAO fine of RUB 10,000 Kaliningrad Regional Court

07/09/2017 (received on 26/09/2017)

Art. 6 (1) – lack of impartiality of tribunal – absence of a prosecuting party in administrative proceedings: Final decision: Kaliningrad Regional Court on 07/09/2017 (received on 26/09/2017) 3,500
20. 17280/18

20/03/2018

Denis Vladimirovich ZUTIKOV

1998

Preobrazhenskaya Oksana Vladimirovna

Strasbourg

Anti-corruption demonstration

Moscow, Pushkin square

26/03/2017

Article 20.2 § 5 of CAO fine of RUB 15,000 Moscow City Court

10/10/2017

Art. 6 (1) – lack of impartiality of tribunal – absence of a prosecuting party in administrative proceedings: Moscow City Court on 10/10/2017 3,500

[i] Plus any tax that may be chargeable to the applicants.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *