Last Updated on November 9, 2023 by LawEuro
The applicants complained principally of disproportionate measures taken against them as organisers or participants of public assemblies, namely their arrest in relation to the dispersal of these assemblies and their conviction for administrative offences. They relied, expressly or in substance, on Article 11 of the Convention.
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 interferences with the applicants’ freedom of assembly were not “necessary in a democratic society”. These complaints are therefore admissible and disclose a breach of Article 11 of the Convention.
Read the entire document.
THIRD SECTION
CASE OF SARANCHUK AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA
(Applications nos. 15326/19 and 24 others – see appended list)
JUDGMENT
STRASBOURG
9 November 2023
This judgment is final but it may be subject to editorial revision.
In the case of Saranchuk and Others v. Russia,
The European Court of Human Rights (Third Section), sitting as a Committee composed of:
Peeter Roosma, President,
Ioannis Ktistakis,
Andreas Zünd, judges,
and Viktoriya Maradudina, Acting Deputy Section Registrar,
Having deliberated in private on 19 October 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 organisers or 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. JURISDICTION
6. The Court observes that the facts giving rise to the alleged violations of the Convention occurred prior to 16 September 2022, the date on which the Russian Federation ceased to be a party to the Convention. The Court therefore decides that it has jurisdiction to examine the present applications (see Fedotova and Others v. Russia [GC], nos. 40792/10 and 2 others, §§ 68‑73, 17 January 2023).
III. ALLEGED VIOLATION OF ARTICLE 11 OF THE CONVENTION
7. The applicants complained principally of disproportionate measures taken against them as organisers or participants of public assemblies, namely their arrest in relation to the dispersal of these assemblies and their conviction for administrative offences. They relied, expressly or in substance, on Article 11 of the Convention.
8. 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).
9. 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.
10. 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 interferences with the applicants’ freedom of assembly were not “necessary in a democratic society”.
11. These complaints are therefore admissible and disclose a breach of Article 11 of the Convention.
IV. OTHER ALLEGED VIOLATIONS UNDER WELL-ESTABLISHED CASE-LAW
12. Some applicants submitted other complaints which also raised issues under the Convention and its Protocols, 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.
13. Having examined all the material before it, the Court concludes that these complaints also disclose violations of the Convention and its Protocols in the light of its findings in Butkevich v. Russia, no. 5865/07, §§ 63-65, 13 February 2018, Tsvetkova and Others v. Russia, nos. 54381/08 and 5 others, §§ 115-31, 10 April 2018, and Korneyeva v. Russia, no. 72051/17, §§ 34-36, 8 October 2019, as to various aspects of unlawful deprivation of liberty of organisers or participants of public assemblies; Karelin v. Russia, no. 926/08, §§ 58-85, 20 September 2016, concerning the absence of a prosecuting party in the proceedings under the Code of Administrative Offences (the CAO); Elvira Dmitriyeva v. Russia, nos. 60921/17 and 7202/18, §§ 77-90, 30 April 2019, concerning administrative convictions for making calls to participate in public events; Karuyev v. Russia, no. 4161/13, §§ 15-26, 18 January 2022, concerning interference in the applicant’s freedom of expression in a form of administrative conviction for petty hooliganism without specific offence elements; Martynyuk v. Russia, no. 13764/15, §§ 38-42, 8 October 2019, and Tsvetkova and Others, cited above, §§ 178-88, related to the lack of suspensive effect of an appeal against the sentence of administrative detention.
V. REMAINING COMPLAINTS
14. Some applicants raised further additional complaints under Article 6 of the Convention concerning the fairness of the administrative-offence proceedings. In view of the findings in paragraphs above, the Court considers that there is no need to deal separately with these remaining complaints.
VI. APPLICATION OF ARTICLE 41 OF THE CONVENTION
15. Regard being had to the documents in its possession and to its case‑law (see in particular Navalnyy and Others v. Russia [Committee], nos. 25809/17 and 14 others, § 22, 4 October 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. Holds that it has jurisdiction to deal with these applications as they relate to facts that took place before 16 September 2022;
3. Declares the complaints under Article 11 of the Convention and the other complaints under well-established case-law of the Court, as set out in the appended table, admissible, and finds that there is no need to examine separately the remaining complaints under Article 6 of the Convention;
4. Holds that there has been a breach of Article 11 of the Convention;
5. Holds that there has been a violation of the Convention and the Protocols thereto as regards the other complaints raised under the well-established case-law of the Court (see appended table);
6. 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 9 November 2023, pursuant to Rule 77 §§ 2 and 3 of the Rules of Court.
Viktoriya Maradudina Peeter Roosma
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
(in euros)[i] |
| 1. | 15326/19
11/03/2019 |
Irina Vladimirovna SARANCHUK
1990 |
Ivanets Vyacheslav Sergeyevich
Tbilisi, Georgia |
Rally in support of Mr A. Navalnyy
Irkutsk 10/10/2020 Political rally Irkutsk 04/05/2018 |
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
Article 20.2 § 6 of CAO |
fine of RUB 11,000
fine of RUB 10,000 |
Irkutsk Regional Court
03/03/2021 Irkutsk Regional Court 28/11/2018 |
Art. 6 (1) – lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in all sets of the administrative-offence proceedings – final decisions: Irkutsk Regional Court, 03/03/2021 and 28/11/2018 | 4,000 |
| 2. | 20684/19
02/04/2019 |
Aleksey Aleksandrovich LAVRINENKOV
1982 |
Glukhov Aleksey Vladimirovich
Novocheboksarsk |
Rally against the pension reform
Smolensk 01/07/2018 |
article 20.2 § 2 of CAO | fine of RUB 10,000 | Smolensk Regional Court
03/10/2018 |
Art. 6 (1) – lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in all sets of the administrative-offence proceedings – final decisions: Smolensk Regional Court, 03/10/2018 and 10/10/2018;
Art. 10 (1) – conviction for making calls to participate in public events – conviction for an administrative offence for calling on the public to participate in an unauthorised public event (rally against the pension reform on 09/09/2018), art. 20.2 § 8 of the CAO, administrative detention of one day. Final decision: Smolensk Regional Court, 10/10/2018 |
4,000 |
| 3. | 28028/19
14/05/2019 |
Nataliya Mikhaylovna SAVOSKINA
1980 |
Kiselyov Roman Denisovich
Moscow |
Rally in support of Mr O. Sentsov
Moscow 18/06/2018 Rally in support of Mr A. Navalnyy Moscow 31/01/2021 |
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO |
fine of RUB 15,000
fine of RUB 10,000 |
Moscow City Court
14/11/2018 Moscow City Court 11/05/2021 |
Art. 5 (1) – unlawful deprivation of liberty:
– escorting to a police station for the purpose of drawing up a record of administrative offence; from 5.00 p.m. to 7.20 p.m. on 18/06/2018, – escorting to a police station for the purpose of drawing up a record of administrative offence and detention in excess of 3 hours and without “exceptional circumstances”, from 2.20 p.m. to 7.50 p.m. on 31/01/2021; Art. 6 (1) – lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in all sets of the administrative-offence proceedings – final decisions: Moscow City Court, 14/11/2018 and 11/05/2021 |
5,000 |
| 4. | 28491/19
16/05/2019 |
Olga Igorevna KUZNETSOVA
1962 |
Pomazuyev Aleksandr Yevgenyevich
Vilnius |
“Hybrid” rally against the pension reform
Arkhangelsk 09/09/2018 Rally in support of Mr A. Navalnyy Arkhangelsk 23/01/2021 |
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
article 20.2 § 2 of CAO, article 20.2 § 5 of CAO |
two fines of RUB 14,000 and 15,000 respectively
two fines of RUB 25,000 and 15,000 respectively |
Arkhangelsk Regional Court, 20/11/2018 and
29/01/2019 Arkhangelsk regional Court, 12/03/2021 and 03/06/2021 |
Art. 5 (1) – unlawful deprivation of liberty: escorting to a police station for the purpose of drawing up a record of administrative offence; detention in excess of 3 hours and without “exceptional circumstances”:
– from 2.30 p.m. on 23/01/2021 to 24/01/2021, the hearing in the applicant’s administrative offence case, – unrecorded escorting on 21/04/2021; Art. 6 (1) – lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in all sets of the administrative-offence proceedings – final decisions: Arkhangelsk Regional Court, 20/11/2018, 29/01/2019 12/03/2021 and 03/06/2021 |
5,000 |
| 5. | 30007/19
18/05/2019 |
Dmitriy Germanovich GUSEV
1976 |
Grachev Anton Sergeyevich
Gatchina |
Rally in support of the accused in “Novoye Velichiye” and “Set” criminal cases
St Petersburg 28/10/2018 |
Article 20.2.2 § 1 of CAO | fine of RUB 10,000 | St Petersburg City Court
13/12/2018 |
Art. 5 (1) – unlawful deprivation of liberty:
1) escorting to a police station for the purpose of drawing up a record of administrative offence; detention in excess of 3 hours and without “exceptional circumstances”: – from 2.40 p.m. on 28/10/2018 to 29/10/2018, – from 9.13 p.m. on 06/08/2019 to 7.00 p.m. on 08/08/2019. Both times, the applicant was detained until the hearings in his administrative-offence case; 2) unlawful escorting to a police station for the purpose of drawing up a record of administrative offence on 23/01/2021; Art. 10 (1) – various restrictions on the right to freedom of expression – on 03/08/2019 the applicant pronounced a speech during an authorised public rally for fair elections in St Petersburg. On 06/08/2019 he was arrested and escorted to a police station where he was charged with an administrative offence under art. 20.1 § 1 of the CAO (petty hooliganism) for having used a swearword in his speech in respect of Mr Putin. He was further convicted for administrative offence and sentenced to a 10-day administrative detention. Final decision: St Petersburg City Court, 14/08/2019; Art. 10 (1) – conviction for making calls to participate in public events – conviction under art. 20.2 § 2 of the CAO, administrative detention of 8 days for calling on the public to participate in an unauthorised public event scheduled for 23/01/2021 in support to Mr A Navalnyy. Final decision: St Petersburg City Court, 04/03/2021 |
5,000 |
| 6. | 37292/19
24/06/2019 |
Yegor Mikhaylovich KARASEV
1998 |
Zakhvatov Dmitriy Igorevich
Moscow |
Rally against isolation of Russian internet
Moscow 10/03/2019 Rally in support of Mr A. Navalnyy Moscow 02/02/2021 |
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO |
fine of RUB 10,000
fine of RUB 15,000 |
Moscow City Court
18/04/2019 Moscow City Court 03/06/2021 |
Art. 5 (1) – unlawful deprivation of liberty: escorting to a police station for the purpose of drawing up a record of administrative offence; detention in excess of 3 hours and without “exceptional circumstances”:
– from 12.30 p.m. to 6.00 p.m. on 10/03/2019, – from 11.50 p.m. on 02/02/2021 to 8.30 a.m. on 03/02/2021; Art. 6 (1) – lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings – final decision: Moscow City Court, 18/04/2019 |
5,000 |
| 7. | 39338/19
12/07/2019 |
Ilya Vladimirovich KOROBKOV
1986 |
Rally against pension reform
Yekaterinburg 09/09/2018 |
Article 20.2 § 5 of CAO | fine of RUB 15,000 | Sverdlovsk Regional Court
16/01/2019 |
Art. 5 (1) – unlawful deprivation of liberty: escorting to a police station for the purpose of drawing up a record of administrative offence; detention in excess of 3 hours and without “exceptional circumstances”, from 5.20 p.m. on 09/09/2018 to 10/09/2018;
Art. 6 (1) – lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings – final decision: Sverdlovsk Regional Court, 16/01/2019 |
5,000 | |
| 8. | 42030/19
19/07/2019 |
Boris Vadimovich FEDYUKIN
1989 |
Pomazuyev Aleksandr Yevgenyevich
Vilnius |
Rally against the pension reform
Samara 09/09/2018 March in support of Mr A. Navalnyy Samara 21/04/2021 |
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO |
fine of RUB 10,000
fine of RUB 10,000 |
Samara Regional Court
31/01/2019 Samara Regional Court 20/07/2021 |
Art. 5 (1) – unlawful deprivation of liberty, including unrecorded detention and detention without a judicial order and any other legal basis – escorting to a police station for the purpose of drawing up a record of administrative offence, on 08/11/2018 and on 26/04/2021;
Art. 6 (1) – lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in all sets of the administrative-offence proceedings – final decisions: Samara Regional Court, 31/01/2019 and 20/07/2021 |
5,000 |
| 9. | 42221/19
16/07/2019 |
Viktor Romanovich KAZANTSEV
2000 |
Vasin Vladimir Valeryevich
Krasnoyarsk |
Rally against Mr Putin’s re‑election as President
Krasnoyarsk 05/05/2018 Rally in support of Mr A. Navalnyy Krasnoyarsk 31/01/2021 |
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO |
fine of RUB 10,000
fine of RUB 20,000 |
Krasnoyarsk Regional Court
17/01/2019 Krasnoyarsk Regional Court 20/04/2021 |
Art. 5 (1) – unlawful deprivation of liberty:
1) escorting to a police station for the purpose of drawing up a record of administrative offence; detention in excess of 3 hours and without “exceptional circumstances”: – from 4.00 p.m. to 09.00 p.m. on 05/05/2018, while the said record was drawn up only on 15/05/2018, – from 1.20 p.m. to 10.55 p.m. on 31/01/2021, while the said record was drawn up only on 12/02/2021, 2) unlawful escorting to a police station for the purpose of drawing up a record of administrative offence on 23/01/2021; Art. 6 (1) – lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in all sets of the administrative-offence proceedings – final decisions: Sverdlovsk Regional Court, 11/03/2021, and Krasnoyarsk Regional Court, 20/04/2021; Art. 10 (1) – conviction for making calls to participate in public events – conviction under art. 20.2 § 2 of the CAO, fine of RUB 20,000 for calling on the public to participate in an unauthorised public event scheduled for 23/01/2021 in support to Mr A. Navalnyy. Final decision: Sverdlovsk Regional Court, 11/03/2021 |
5,000 |
| 10. | 42683/19
08/08/2019 |
Dmitriy Gennadyevich GUDKOV
1980 |
Bochilo Anna Yevgenyevna
Barnaul |
Rally in support to fair elections to Mosgorduma
Moscow 14/07/2019 Rally in support of Mr A. Navalnyy Moscow 23/01/2021 |
article 20.2 § 8 of CAO
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO |
administrative detention of 30 days
fine of RUB 10,000 |
Moscow City Court
01/08/2019 Moscow City Court 29/09/2021 |
Art. 5 (1) – unlawful deprivation of liberty, including unrecorded detention and detention without a judicial order and any other legal basis – escorting to a police station for the purpose of drawing up a record of administrative offence; detention in excess of 3 hours and without “exceptional circumstances”,
– from 2.55 p.m. to 5.55 p.m. on 27/07/2019, – from 3.30 p.m. on 28/07/2019 to 5.13 p.m. on 30/07/2019, hearing in the applicant’s administrative-offence case; Art. 6 (1) – lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in all sets of the administrative-offence proceedings – final decisions: Moscow City Court, 01/08/2019, 04/10/2019 and 29/09/2021; Art. 10 (1) – conviction for making calls to participate in public events – conviction under art. 20.2 § 2 of the CAO, administrative detention of 10 days, for an administrative offence of calling on the public to participate in an unauthorised public event scheduled for 27/07/2019 for fair elections to Mosgorduma. Final decision: Moscow City Court, 04/10/2019 |
6,000 |
| 11. | 10059/21
16/02/2021 |
Maksim Ruslanovich KONYUKHOV
1990 |
Zboroshenko Nikolay Sergeyevich
Mytishchi |
Rally in support of Mr A. Navalnyy
Moscow 31/01/2021 |
article 20.2 § 6.1 of CAO | administrative detention of 15 days (partly exempted for health reasons by the Moscow City Court) | Moscow City Court
05/02/2021 |
Art. 5 (1) – unlawful deprivation of liberty: escorting to a police station for the purpose of drawing up a record of administrative offence; detention in excess of 3 hours and without “exceptional circumstances”, from 31/01/2021 to 01/02/2021, hearing in the applicant’s administrative-offence case;
Art. 6 (1) – lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings – final decision: Moscow City Court, 05/02/2021 |
5,000 |
| 12. | 16344/21
08/03/2021 |
Nikita Alekseyevich DOBRYNIN
1993 |
Sirosh Fedor Yevgenyevich
Moscow |
Political rally
Moscow 24/03/2020 |
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO | fine of RUB 10,000 | Moscow City Court
10/09/2020 |
Art. 5 (1) – unlawful deprivation of liberty, including unrecorded detention and detention without a judicial order and any other legal basis – unlawful deprivation of liberty: escorting to a police station for the purpose of drawing up a record of administrative offence; from 5.30 p.m. to 7.20 p.m. on 24/03/2020;
Art. 6 (1) – lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings – final decision: Moscow City Court, 10/09/2020 |
5,000 |
| 13. | 24360/21
17/04/2021 |
Yevgeniya Vladimirovna VAZHENINA
1987 |
Cherkasov Vitaliy Viktorovich
St Petersburg |
Rally in support of the governor of the Khabarovsk Region, Mr S. Furgal
Khabarovsk 07/11/2020 Rally in support of the governor of the Khabarovsk Region, Mr S. Furgal Khabarovsk 26/12/2020 |
article 20.2 § 8 of CAO
article 20.2 § 8 of CAO |
administrative detention of 9 days
fine of RUB 150,000 |
Khabarovsk Regional Court
18/11/2020 Khabarovsk Regional Court 30/03/2021 |
Art. 5 (1) – unlawful deprivation of liberty, including unrecorded detention and detention without a judicial order and any other legal basis – escorting to a police station for the purpose of drawing up a record of administrative offence; detention in excess of 3 hours and without “exceptional circumstances”:
– from 2.00 p.m. on 07/11/2020 to 10.00 a.m. on 09/11/2020, – from 1.00 p.m. on 15/02/2021 to 16/02/2021, the hearing in the applicant’s administrative offence case, Prot. 7 Art. 2 – delayed review of conviction by a higher tribunal – the sentence of administrative detention imposed on the applicant by the court of first instance was executed immediately, on account of the lack of suspensive effect of an appeal under the CAO |
6,000 |
| 14. | 25053/21
20/04/2021 |
Aleksandr Vasilyevich VASILYEV
1979 |
Bubon Konstantin Vladimirovich
Khabarovsk |
Rally in support of the governor of the Khabarovsk Region, Mr S. Furgal
Khabarovsk 10/10/2020 |
article 20.2 § 8 of CAO | administrative detention of 20 days | Khabarovsk Regional Court
20/10/2020 |
Prot. 7 Art. 2 – delayed review of conviction by a higher tribunal – the sentence of administrative detention imposed on the applicant by the court of first instance was executed immediately, on account of the lack of suspensive effect of an appeal under the CAO | 5,000 |
| 15. | 26915/21
08/05/2021 |
Mikhail Yevgenyevich PARFENYUK
1996 |
Ivanets Vyacheslav Sergeyevich
Tbilisi |
Political rally
Irkutsk 23/01/2021 |
article 20.2 § 2 of CAO | administrative detention of 10 days | Irkutsk Regional Court
28/01/2021 |
Art. 6 (1) – lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings – final decision: Irkutsk regional Court, 28/01/2021 | 5,000 |
| 16. | 28225/21
30/04/2021 |
Yelizaveta Aleksandrovna KLEPIKOVA
2000 |
Memorial Human Rights Centre
Moscow |
Rally in support of Mr A. Navalnyy
Moscow 23/01/2021 |
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO | fine of RUB 13,000 | Moscow City Court
11/02/2021 |
Art. 5 (1) – unlawful deprivation of liberty: escorting to a police station for the purpose of drawing up a record of administrative offence; detention in excess of 3 hours and without “exceptional circumstances”, from 4.00 p.m. to 11.30 p.m. on 23/01/2021;
Art. 6 (1) – lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings – final decision: Moscow City Court, 11/02/2021 |
5,000 |
| 17. | 28370/21
04/05/2021 |
Lada Sergeyevna SOKOLOVA
2021 |
Political rally
Moscow 29/05/2020 |
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO | fine of RUB 15,000 | Moscow City Court
06/11/2020 |
Art. 5 (1) – unlawful deprivation of liberty: escorting to a police station for the purpose of drawing up a record of administrative offence; detention there from 4.35 p.m. to 7.20 p.m. on 29/05/2020;
Art. 6 (1) – lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings – final decision: Moscow City Court, 06/11/2020 |
5,000 | |
| 18. | 28581/21
02/06/2021 |
Syldys Aleksandrovich KHOMUSHKU
1984 |
Memorial Human Rights Centre
Moscow |
Rally in support of Mr A. Navalnyy
Moscow 31/01/2021 |
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO | fine of RUB 10,000 | Moscow City Court
22/03/2021 |
Art. 5 (1) – unlawful deprivation of liberty: escorting to a police station for the purpose of drawing up a record of administrative offence; detention in excess of 3 hours and without “exceptional circumstances”, from 5.30 p.m. to 11.50 p.m. on 31/01/2021;
Art. 6 (1) – lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings – final decision: Moscow City Court, 22/03/2021 |
5,000 |
| 19. | 31621/21
07/06/2021 |
Yaroslav Ruslanovich MAYKOV
1990 |
Memorial Human Rights Centre
Moscow |
Rally in support of Mr A. Navalnyy
Moscow 31/01/2021 |
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO | fine of RUB 10,000 | Moscow City Court
18/03/2021 |
Art. 5 (1) – unlawful deprivation of liberty: escorting to a police station for the purpose of drawing up a record of administrative offence; detention in excess of 3 hours and without “exceptional circumstances”, from 11.45 a.m. to 9.30 p.m. on 31/01/2021;
Art. 6 (1) – lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings – final decision: Moscow City Court, 18/03/2021 |
5,000 |
| 20. | 31684/21
07/06/2021 |
Nikolay Sergeyevich AGAPOV
1993 |
Memorial Human Rights Centre
Moscow |
Rally in support of Mr A. Navalnyy
Moscow 23/01/2021 |
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO | fine of RUB 15,000 | Moscow City Court
20/04/2021 |
Art. 5 (1) – unlawful deprivation of liberty: escorting to a police station for the purpose of drawing up a record of administrative offence; detention in excess of 3 hours and without “exceptional circumstances”, from 8.25 p.m. on 23/01/2021 to 2.40 a.m. on 24/01/2021;
Art. 6 (1) – lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings – final decision: Moscow City Court, 20/04/2021 |
5,000 |
| 21. | 32175/21
11/06/2021 |
Dmitriy Andreyevich PEREGON
1999 |
Memorial Human Rights Centre
Moscow |
Rally in support of Mr A Navalnyy
Vladivostok 31/01/2021 |
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO | fine of RUB 15,000 | Primorye Regional Court
13/04/2021 |
Art. 5 (1) – unlawful deprivation of liberty: escorting to a police station for the purpose of drawing up a record of administrative offence; detention in excess of 3 hours and without “exceptional circumstances”, from 3.50 p.m. on 31/01/2021 to 4.15 a.m. on 01/02/2021; the applicant spent more than 4 hours in the police van;
Art. 6 (1) – lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings – final decision: Primorye Regional Court, 13/04/2021 |
5,000 |
| 22. | 32607/21
29/05/2021 |
Yelena Sergeyvna BEREZHNAYA
1992 |
Sirosh Fedor Yevgenyevich
Moscow |
Environmental rally
Moscow 16/08/2020 |
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO | fine of RUB 15,000 | Moscow City Court
30/11/2020 |
Art. 5 (1) – unlawful deprivation of liberty: escorting to a police station for the purpose of drawing up a record of administrative offence; detention in excess of 3 hours and without “exceptional circumstances”, from 6.25 p.m. to 9.25 p.m. on 16/08/2020;
Art. 6 (1) – lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings – final decision: Moscow City Court, 30/11/2020 |
5,000 |
| 23. | 32652/21
29/05/2021 |
Diana Yevgenyevna BORISEVICH
1997 |
Sirosh Fedor Yevgenyevich
Moscow |
Environmental rally
Moscow 16/08/2020 |
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO | fine of RUB 10,000 | Moscow City Court
04/12/2020 |
Art. 5 (1) – unlawful deprivation of liberty: escorting to a police station for the purpose of drawing up a record of administrative offence; from 6.25 p.m. to 9.05 p.m. on 16/08/2020,
Art. 6 (1) – lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings – final decision: Moscow City Court, 04/12/2020 |
5,000 |
| 24. | 32654/21
29/05/2021 |
Aliya Makhmutovna GIZETDINOVA
1992 |
Sirosh Fedor Yevgenyevich
Moscow |
Environmental rally
Moscow 16/08/2020 |
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO | fine of RUB 10,000 | Moscow City Court
04/12/2020 |
Art. 5 (1) – unlawful deprivation of liberty: escorting to a police station for the purpose of drawing up a record of administrative offence; detention in excess of 3 hours and without “exceptional circumstances”, from 6.25 p.m. to 9.25 p.m. on 16/08/2020;
Art. 6 (1) – lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings – final decision: Moscow City Court, 04/12/2020 |
5,000 |
| 25. | 52100/21
12/10/2021 |
Boris Leonidovich KROTOV
1971 |
Pershakova Yelena Yuryevna
Moscow |
Rally in support of Mr A. Navalnyy
Moscow 02/02/2021 |
article 20.2 § 6.1 of CAO | fine of RUB 20,000 | Moscow City Court
12/04/2021 |
Art. 5 (1) – unlawful deprivation of liberty escorting to a police station for the purpose of drawing up a record of administrative offence; detention in excess of 3 hours and without “exceptional circumstances”, from 11.40 a.m. on 02/02/2021 to 03/02/2021, hearing in the applicant’s administrative-offence case;
Art. 6 (1) – lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings – final decision: Moscow City Court, 12/04/2021 |
5,000 |
[i] Plus any tax that may be chargeable to the applicants.
Leave a Reply