Last Updated on December 14, 2023 by LawEuro
The applicants complained of the disproportionate measures taken against them as organisers or participants of public assemblies.
European Court of Human Rights
THIRD SECTION
CASE OF DORONIN AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA
(Applications nos. 44105/21 and 29 others – see appended list)
JUDGMENT
STRASBOURG
14 December 2023
This judgment is final but it may be subject to editorial revision.
In the case of Doronin 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 23 November 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); and Martynyuk v. Russia, no. 13764/15, §§ 38-42, 8 October 2019, relating 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 other aspects of fairness of the administrative‑offence proceedings. In view of the findings in paragraphs 12 and 13 above, the Court considers that there is no need to deal separately with these remaining complaints.
15. The Court has further examined the rest of the complaints raised by the applicants and considers that, in the light of all the material in its possession and in so far as the matters complained of are within its competence, these complaints either do not meet the admissibility criteria set out in Articles 34 and 35 of the Convention or do not disclose any appearance of a violation of the rights and freedoms enshrined in the Convention or the Protocols thereto. It follows that this part of the applications must be rejected in accordance with Article 35 § 4 of the Convention.
VI. APPLICATION OF ARTICLE 41 OF THE CONVENTION
16. 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 the applicants’ complaints 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 the well-established case-law of the Court, as set out in the appended table, admissible, finds that there is no need to examine separately the remaining complaints under Article 6 of the Convention, and declares the remainder of the applications inadmissible;
4. Holds that these applications disclose 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 14 December 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 per applicant
(in euros)[i] |
| 1. | 44105/21
30/08/2021 |
Vladimir Dmitriyevich DORONIN
1991 |
Memorial Human Rights Centre
Moscow |
Rally “Free Navalnyy”
Volgograd 31/01/2021 |
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO | fine of RUB 10,000 | Volgograd Regional Court
04/03/2021 |
Art. 5 (1) – unlawful detention – escorting to and detention at the police station on 31/01/2021 for compiling an offence record between 1.30 p.m. and 9.00 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. |
4,000 |
| 2. | 44369/21
12/08/2021 |
Yevgeniy Olegovich TIKHONOV
2000 |
Glukhov Aleksey Vladimirovich
Novocheboksarsk |
Rally “Free Navalnyy”
Cheboksary 23/01/2021 |
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO | fine of RUB 15,000 | Supreme Court of the Chuvashia Republic
26/03/2021 |
Art. 6 (1) – lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings. | 3,500 |
| 3. | 44373/21
12/08/2021 |
Artem Aleksandrovich MAKAROV
1989 |
Glukhov Aleksey Vladimirovich
Novocheboksarsk |
Rally “Free Navalnyy”
Cheboksary 23/01/2021 |
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO | fine of RUB 10,000 | Supreme Court of the Chuvashia Republic
30/03/2021 |
Art. 6 (1) – lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings. | 3,500 |
| 4. | 44380/21
12/08/2021 |
Ivan Igorevich KUZNETSOV
1995 |
Glukhov Aleksey Vladimirovich
Novocheboksarsk |
Rally “Free Navalnyy”
Cheboksary 23/01/2021 |
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO | fine of RUB 12,000 | Supreme Court of the Chuvashia Republic
15/04/2021 |
Art. 6 (1) – lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings. | 3,500 |
| 5. | 44383/21
12/08/2021 |
Aleksey Dmitriyevich MAKSIMOV
2001 |
Glukhov Aleksey Vladimirovich
Novocheboksarsk |
Rally “Free Navalnyy”
Cheboksary 23/01/2021 |
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO | fine of RUB 10,000 | Supreme Court of the Chuvashia Republic
23/03/2021 |
Art. 6 (1) – lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings. | 3,500 |
| 6. | 44425/21
17/08/2021 |
Aleksandr Ivanovich DYAKOV
1988 |
Solovyev Stanislav Vyacheslavovich
Moscow |
Rally “Free Navalnyy”
Moscow 31/01/2021 |
article 20.2 § 6.1 of CAO | fine of RUB 20,000 | Moscow City Court
18/02/2021 |
Art. 5 (1) – unlawful detention – escorting to and detention at the police station after compiling an offence record between 4.10 p.m. on 31/01/2021 and 02/02/2021;
Art. 6 (1) – lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings. |
4,000 |
| 7. | 44668/21
12/08/2021 |
Aleksandr Andreyevich KUDRYASHOV
1993 |
Glukhov Aleksey Vladimirovich
Novocheboksarsk |
Rally “Free Navalnyy”
Cheboksary 23/01/2021 |
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO | fine of RUB 10,000 | Supreme Court of Chuvashia
04/05/2021 |
Art. 6 (1) – lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings. | 3,500 |
| 8. | 44693/21
12/08/2021 |
Arkadiy Nikolayevich MITROSHKIN
2021 |
Glukhov Aleksey Vladimirovich
Novocheboksarsk |
Rally “Free Navalnyy”
Cheboksary 23/01/2021 |
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO | fine of RUB 12,000 | Supreme Court of the Chuvashia Republic
06/04/2021 |
Art. 6 (1) – lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings. | 3,500 |
| 9. | 44699/21
12/08/2021 |
Pavel Vadimovich PETROV
2001 |
Glukhov Aleksey Vladimirovich
Novocheboksarsk |
Rally “Free Navalnyy”
Cheboksary 23/01/2021 |
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO | fine of RUB 10,000 | Supreme Court of Chuvashia
06/04/2021 |
Art. 6 (1) – lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings. | 3,500 |
| 10. | 44706/21
12/08/2021 |
Anzhelika Nikolayevna ROMANOVA
1995 |
Glukhov Aleksey Vladimirovich
Novocheboksarsk |
Rally “Free Navalnyy”
Cheboksary 23/01/2021 |
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO | fine of RUB 10,000 | Supreme Court of the Chuvashia Republic
31/03/2021 |
Art. 6 (1) – lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings. | 3,500 |
| 11. | 44967/21
18/08/2021 |
Svetlana Mikhaylovna KRIVITSKAYA
1972 |
Vasilyev Nikolay Vladimirovich
Moscow |
Eco-protest
Moscow 27/09/2020 |
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO | fine of RUB 10,000 | Moscow City Court
18/02/2021 |
Art. 6 (1) – lack of impartiality of tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings. | 3,500 |
| 12. | 45001/21
20/08/2021 |
Darya Dmitriyevna VIKULOVA
1997 |
Krasikov Vladimir Vladimirovich
Samara |
Rally “Free Navalnyy”
Samara 31/01/2021 |
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO | fine of RUB 10,000 | Samara Regional Court
18/05/2021 |
Art. 5 (1) – unlawful detention – escorting to the police station on 31/01/2021 for compiling an offence record;
Art. 6 (1) – lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings. |
4,000 |
| 13. | 45022/21
03/09/2021 |
Pavel Sergeyevich LEVITSKIY
1986 |
Zhdanov Ivan Yuryevich
Vilnius |
Rally “Free Navalnyy”
Kurgan 23/01/2021 |
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO | 20 hours of community work | Kurgan Regional Court
17/03/2021 |
Art. 5 (1) – unlawful detention – escorting to the police station on 23/01/2021 for compiling an offence record;
Art. 6 (1) – lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings. |
4,000 |
| 14. | 45056/21
25/08/2021 |
Aleksandra Aleksandrovna SHNAYDER
2000 |
Rally “Free Navalnyy”
Novosibirsk 23/01/2021 |
article 20.2 § 2 of CAO | detention for 8 days | Novosibirsk Regional Court
25/02/2021 |
Art. 6 (1) – lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings;
Prot. 7 Art. 2 – Right of appeal against criminal conviction/sentence – The sentence of administrative detention imposed on the applicant was executed immediately, on account of the lack of suspensive effect of an appeal under the CAO. |
5,000 | |
| 15. | 45255/21
30/08/2021 |
Inna Vyacheslavovna TITOVA
1985 |
Vasin Vladimir Valeryevich
Krasnoyarsk |
Rally “Free Navalnyy”
Krasnoyarsk 31/01/2021 |
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO | fine of RUB 10,000 | Krasnoyarsk Regional Court
13/05/2021 |
Art. 5 (1) – unlawful detention – escorting to and detention at the police station for compiling an offence record 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. |
4,000 |
| 16. | 45264/21
30/08/2021 |
Marina Yuryevna KADETOVA
1996 |
Vasin Vladimir Valeryevich
Krasnoyarsk |
Rally “Free Navalnyy”
Krasnoyarsk 31/01/2021 |
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO | fine of RUB 10,000 | Krasnoyarsk Regional Court
19/04/2021 |
Art. 5 (1) – unlawful detention – escorting to the police station for compiling an offence 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. |
4,000 |
| 17. | 45271/21
30/08/2021 |
Pavel Olegovich GERASIMENKO
2001 |
Vasin Vladimir Valeryevich
Krasnoyarsk |
Rally “Free Navalnyy”
Krasnoyarsk 31/01/2021 |
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO | fine of RUB 10,000 | Krasnoyarsk Regional Court
13/05/2021 |
Art. 5 (1) – unlawful detention – escorting to the police station for compiling an offence record 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. |
4,000 |
| 18. | 45276/21
30/08/2021 |
Valentina Mikhaylovna VESNYANKO
1999 |
Vasin Vladimir Valeryevich
Krasnoyarsk |
Rally “Free Navalnyy”
Krasnoyarsk 23/01/2021 |
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO | fine of RUB 20,000 | Krasnoyarsk Regional Court
03/06/2021 |
Art. 5 (1) – unlawful detention – escorting to the police station for compiling an offence record 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, |
4,000 |
| 19. | 46593/21
31/08/2021 |
Yana Aleksandrovna ZENKINA
1993 |
Memorial Human Rights Centre
Moscow |
Rally “Free Navalnyy”
Tambov 23/01/2021 |
article 20.2 § 2 of CAO | fine of RUB 20,000 | Tambov Regional Court
01/03/2021 |
Art. 6 (1) – lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings. | 3,500 |
| 20. | 47098/21
16/09/2021 |
Vladislav Andreyevich LYGIN
1998 |
Memorial Human Rights Centre
Moscow |
Rally “Free Navalnyy”
Volgograd 23/01/2021 |
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO | fine of RUB 10,000 | Volgograd Regional Court
17/03/2021 |
Art. 5 (1) – unlawful detention – escorting to and detention at the police station for compiling an offence record 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. |
4,000 |
| 21. | 47146/21
07/09/2021 |
Stanislav Vladimirovich MERENKOV
1991 |
Memorial Human Rights Centre
Moscow |
Rally “Free Navalnyy”
Moscow 31/01/2021 |
article 20.2 § 6.1 of CAO | detention for 10 days | Moscow City Court
18/03/2021 |
Art. 5 (1) – unlawful detention – escorting to and detention at the police station for compiling an offence record between 1.20 p.m. on 31/01/2021 and 7.30 p.m. on 01/02/2021;
Art. 6 (1) – lack of impartiality of tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in both sets of administrative-offence proceedings; Prot. 7 Art. 2 – delayed review of conviction by a higher tribunal – the sentence of administrative detention imposed on the applicant was executed immediately, on account of the lack of suspensive effect of an appeal under the CAO. |
5,000 |
| 22. | 47239/21
16/09/2021 |
Khasana Aleksandrovna ROKOSSOVSKAYA
2000 |
Memorial Human Rights Centre
Moscow |
Rally “Free Navalnyy”
Murmansk 23/01/2021 |
article 20.2 § 2 of CAO | fine of RUB 10,000 | Murmansk Regional Court
09/04/2021 |
Art. 5 (1) – unlawful detention – escorting to and detention at the police station for compiling an offence record between 8.00 a.m. on 30/01/2021 and 7.00 p.m. on 01/02/2021;
Art. 6 (1) – lack of impartiality of tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in both sets of administrative-offence proceedings |
4,000 |
| 23. | 28736/22
24/05/2022 |
Aleksey Igorevich NEFEDOV
1976 |
Rally “Free Navalnyy”
Novosibirsk 31/01/2021 |
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO | fine of RUB 10,000 | Novosibirsk Regional Court
24/11/2021 |
Art. 5 (1) – unlawful detention – escorting to and detention at the police station for compiling an offence record between 1.20 p.m. and 6.00 p.m. on 31/01/2021,
Art. 6 (1) – lack of impartiality of tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in both sets of administrative-offence proceedings. |
4,000 | |
| 24. | 30801/22
09/06/2022 |
Gleb Yuryevich LEVOCHKIN
1992 |
Baranova Nataliya Andreyevna
Moscow |
Rally “Free Navalnyy”
Moscow 21/04/2021 |
article 20.2 § 6.1 of CAO | fine of RUB 10,000 | Moscow City Court
09/02/2022 |
Art. 5 (1) – unlawful detention – escorting to and detention at the police station for compiling an offence record between 7.30 p.m. on 24/02/2021 and 4.00 p.m. on 26/04/2021;
Art. 6 (1) – lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings |
4,000 |
| 25. | 32624/22
09/06/2022 |
Anastasiya Georgiyevna TAYNS-KOVALEVSKAYA
1995 |
Rally “Free Navalnyy”
Moscow 21/04/2021 |
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO | fine of RUB 10,000 | Moscow City Court
09/12/2021 |
Art. 6 (1) – lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings. | 3,500 | |
| 26. | 35521/22
29/06/2022 |
Konstantin Sergeyevich MAKLYAK
1990 |
Levchenko Aleksey Alekseyevich
Rostov-on-Don |
Anti-war rally
Rostov-on-Don 06/03/2022 |
article 19.3 § 1 of CAO | detention for 15 days | Rostov Regional Court
18/03/2022 |
Art. 5 (1) – unlawful detention – escorting to and detention at the police station for compiling an offence record between 3.20 p.m. on 06/03/2022 and 8.10 a.m. on 07/03/2022;
Art. 6 (1) – lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings; Prot. 7 Art. 2 – delayed review of conviction by a higher tribunal – the sentence of administrative detention imposed on the applicant was executed immediately, on account of the lack of suspensive effect of an appeal under the CAO. |
5,000 |
| 27. | 35532/22
29/06/2022 |
Olesya Igorevna BAKHTIYAROVA
2003 |
Levchenko Aleksey Alekseyevich
Rostov-on-Don |
Anti-war rally
Rostov-on-Don 06/03/2022 |
article 19.3 § 1 of CAO | detention for 15 days | Rostov Regional Court
10/03/2022 |
Art. 5 (1) -unlawful detention – escorting to and detention at the police station for compiling an offence record between 3.20 p.m. on 06/03/2022 and 10.00 a.m. on 07/03/2022;
Art. 6 (1) – lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings; Prot. 7 Art. 2 – delayed review of conviction by a higher tribunal – the sentence of administrative detention imposed on the applicant was executed immediately, on account of the lack of suspensive effect of an appeal under the CAO. |
5,000 |
| 28. | 36163/22
01/07/2022 |
Tatyana Vladimirovna CHECHETKINA
1991 |
Kabirov Rushan Rafisovich
Kazan |
Anti-war rally
Kazan 27/02/2022 |
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO | fine of RUB 10,000 | Supreme Court of the Tatarstan Republic
27/04/2022 |
Art. 5 (1) – unlawful detention – escorting to and detention at the police station for compiling an offence record between 4.00 p.m. on 27/02/2022 and the morning of 28/02/2022 when the applicant was transferred to the court;
Art. 6 (1) – lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings |
4,000 |
| 29. | 36231/22
01/07/2022 |
Maksim Vladimirovich MURUGIN
1994 |
Levchenko Aleksey Alekseyevich
Rostov-on-Don |
Anti-war rally
Rostov-on-Don 06/03/2022 |
article 19.3 § 1 of CAO | detention for 15 days | Sverdlovsk Regional Court
18/03/2022 |
Art. 5 (1) – unlawful detention – escorting to and detention at the police station for compiling an offence record between 6.10 p.m. on 06/03/2022 and the morning of 07/03/2022;
Art. 6 (1) – lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings; Prot. 7 Art. 2 – delayed review of conviction by a higher tribunal – the sentence of administrative detention imposed on the applicant was executed immediately, on account of the lack of suspensive effect of an appeal under the CAO. |
5,000 |
| 30. | 45186/22
06/09/2022 |
Vakhtang Anatolyevich PATALAKH
1977 |
Anti-war rally
Moscow 26/02/2022 |
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO | fine of RUB 11,000 | Moscow City Court
11/05/2022 |
Art. 5 (1) – unlawful detention – escorting to and detention at the police station for compiling an offence record between 5.40 p.m. and 10.56 p.m. on 26/02/2022;
Art. 6 (1) – lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings. |
4,000 |
[i] Plus any tax that may be chargeable to the applicants.
Leave a Reply