Last Updated on January 18, 2024 by LawEuro
The applicants complained of the disproportionate measures taken against them as organisers or participants of public assemblies.
European Court of Human Rights
FIRST SECTION
CASE OF YAKHNOVETS AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA
(Applications nos. 32174/21 and 27 others – see appended list)
JUDGMENT
STRASBOURG
18 January 2024
This judgment is final but it may be subject to editorial revision.
In the case of Yakhnovets and Others v. Russia,
The European Court of Human Rights (First Section), sitting as a Committee composed of:
Péter Paczolay, President,
Gilberto Felici,
Raffaele Sabato, judges,
and Viktoriya Maradudina, Acting Deputy Section Registrar,
Having deliberated in private on 14 December 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, except for the fourth applicant, 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 Lashmankin and Others v. Russia, nos. 57818/09 and 14 others, § 489, 7 February 2017, 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; 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 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 the 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 these complaints 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 18 January 2024, pursuant to Rule 77 §§ 2 and 3 of the Rules of Court.
Viktoriya Maradudina Péter Paczolay
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 (code of administrative offences, CAO) | 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. | 32174/21
11/06/2021 |
Viktoriya Viktorovna YAKHNOVETS
1966 |
Memorial Human Rights Centre
Moscow |
Rally in support of Mr Navalnyy
Rostov-on-Don
31/01/2021 |
article 20.2 § 6.1 of CAO | administrative detention for 10 days | Rostov Regional Court
10/02/2021 |
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 12.30 p.m. on 31/01/2021 to 5.00 p.m. on 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: Rostov Regional Court, 10/02/2021;
Prot. 7 Art. 2 – delayed review of conviction by a higher tribunal – The sentence of administrative detention imposed on the applicant on 01/02/2021 was executed immediately, on account of the lack of suspensive effect of an appeal under the CAO. |
5,000 |
| 2. | 33066/21
04/06/2021 |
1) Nikolay Yevgenyevich VOKUYEV
1986
2) Stanislav Mikhaylovich OKULOV 1984
|
Mezak Ernest Aleksandrovich
Saint-Barthélemy-d’Anjou |
Rally in support of Mr Navalnyy
Syktyvkar
23/01/2021 |
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO | fines of RUB 10,000 for each of the applicants | Supreme Court of the Komi Republic, 31/03/2021 (first applicant) and
07/04/2021 (second applicant) |
Art. 6 (1) – lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings – Supreme Court of the Komi Republic, 31/03/2021 and 07/04/2021. | 3,500
to each applicant |
| 3. | 33571/21
22/06/2021 |
Valeriya Mikhaylovna IVANOVA
1996 |
Markin Konstantin Aleksandrovich
Velikiy Novgorod |
Rally in support of Mr Navalnyy
Velikiy Novgorod
23/01/2021 |
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO | fine of RUB 10,000 | Novgorod Regional Court
25/02/2021 |
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 3.15 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 decisions: Novgorod Regional Court, 25/02/2021.
|
4,000 |
| 4. | 35257/21
24/06/2021 |
Liliya Vasilyevna LOBKO
1940 |
Tykhta Vitaliy Dmitriyevich
Khabarovsk |
Rally in support of Mr Furgal
Khabarovsk
09/11/2020 |
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO | fine of RUB 5,000 | Khabarovsk Regional Court
24/12/2020 |
3,000 | |
| 5. | 35379/21
16/06/2021 |
Aleksey Vladimirovich GRESKO
1974 |
Zakhvatov Dmitriy Igorevich
Moscow |
Meeting Mr Navalnyy at the Vnukovo Airport of Moscow
Moscow
17/01/2021 |
article 19.3 § 1 of CAO | administrative detention for 12 days | Moscow City Court
20/02/2021 |
Art. 5 (1) – unlawful deprivation of liberty: escorting to the police station for the purpose of drawing up a record of administrative offence; detention in excess of 3 hours and without “exceptional circumstances”, from 6.10 p.m. to 11.00 p.m. on 17/01/2021,
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, 20/02/2021
|
5,000 |
| 6. | 36383/21
30/06/2021 |
Nikita Igorevich CHESNOKOV
1996 |
Memorial Human Rights Centre
Moscow |
Rally in support of Mr Navalnyy
Rostov-on-Don
31/01/2021 |
article 19.3 § 1 of CAO | administrative detention for 3 days | Rostov Regional Court
28/04/2021 |
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 2.00 p.m. on 31/01/2021 to 1.00 p.m. on 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: Rostov Regional Court, 28/04/2021,
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 |
| 7. | 36389/21
05/07/2021 |
Valentin Sergeyevich KVASHNIKOV
1978 |
|
Rally in support of Mr Furgal
Khabarovsk
23/07/2020 |
article 20.2 § 6.1 of CAO | fine of RUB 10,000 | Khabarovsk Regional Court
21/01/2021 |
Art. 6 (1) – lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings – final decisions: Khabarovsk Regional Court, 21/01/2021 and 04/06/2021.
|
3,500 |
| 8. | 36506/21
27/06/2021 |
Vadim Vyacheslavovich ZUBKOV
1996 |
Bochilo Anna Yevgenyevna
Barnaul |
Rally in support of Mr Navalnyy
Moscow
23/01/2021 |
article 20.2 § 6.1 of CAO | administrative detention for 10 days | 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 10.00 a.m. on 08/02/2021 until the hearing in the applicant’s administrative-offence case on the same day,
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,
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 |
| 9. | 37916/21
16/07/2021 |
Olga Alekseyevna KOMOLOVA
1999 |
Memorial Human Rights Centre
Moscow |
Rally in support of Mr Navalnyy
Moscow
02/02/2021 |
article 20.2 § 6.1 of CAO | fine of
RUB 15,000 |
Moscow City Court
14/04/2021 |
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 11.30 p.m. on 02/02/2021 to 7.50 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, 14/04/2021,
|
4,000 |
| 10. | 38412/21
02/07/2021 |
Dmitriy Vladimirovich VILSHANSKIY
1991 |
Memorial Human Rights Centre
Moscow |
Rally in support of Mr Navalnyy
Moscow
02/02/2021 |
article 20.2 § 6.1 of CAO | administrative detention for 10 days | Moscow City Court
12/02/2021 |
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 11.30 p.m. on 02/02/2021 to 8.30 p.m. on 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, 12/02/2021,
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 |
| 11. | 38516/21
14/07/2021 |
Boris Vladimirovich SARAPULOV
1957 |
Ivanets Vyacheslav Sergeyevich
Tbilisi, Georgia |
Rally in support of Mr Navalnyy
Irkutsk
23/01/2021 |
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO | fine of
RUB 10,000 |
Irkutsk Regional Court
01/06/2021 |
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, 01/06/2021 | 3,500 |
| 12. | 38906/21
14/07/2021 |
Artur Igorevich SAYAPIN
1994 |
Bubon Konstantin Vladimirovich
Khabarovsk |
Rally in support of Mr Furgal
Khabarovsk
25/08/2020 |
article 20.2 § 6.1 of CAO | administrative detention for
2 days (enforced), changed later to a fine of RUB 10,000 (not paid) |
Khabarovsk Regional Court
04/02/2021 |
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 midnight on 04/09/2020 to 10.30 a.m. on 05/09/2020,
Prot. 7 Art. 2 – delayed review of conviction by a higher tribunal – the administrative detention was enforced immediately after the decision of the first-instance court on account of the lack of suspensive effect of an appeal under the CAO.
|
5,000 |
| 13. | 38914/21
22/07/2021 |
Yegor Nikolayevich BELOV
1995 |
Memorial Human Rights Centre
Moscow |
Rally in support of Mr Navalnyy
Moscow
23/01/2021 |
article 20.2 § 6.1 of CAO | fine of
RUB 20,000 |
Moscow City Court
19/05/2021 |
Art. 5 (1) – unlawful deprivation of liberty: escorting to a police station for the purpose of drawing up a record of administrative offence; detention in excess of 3 hours and without “exceptional circumstances”, from 1.00 p.m. to 5.00 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, 19/05/2021.
|
4,000 |
| 14. | 39896/21
27/07/2021 |
Pavel Nikolayevich LUSHAKOV
1998 |
Memorial Human Rights Centre
Moscow |
Rally in support of Mr Navalnyy
Moscow
02/02/2021 |
article 20.2 § 6.1 of CAO | administrative detention for 10 days | Moscow City Court
10/02/2021 |
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 on 11.00 a.m. 02/02/2021 to 8.00 p.m. 03/02/2021, the applicant was not released after the administrative offence record had been compiled; complaint raised on appeal,
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, 10/02/2021,
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 |
| 15. | 40196/21
27/07/2021 |
Petr Aleksandrovich MAKAROV
2000 |
Shindyapin Arkadiy Vitalyevich
Moscow |
Rally in support of Mr Navalnyy
Moscow
31/01/2021 |
article 20.2 § 6.1 of CAO | administrative detention for 10 days | 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 4.25 p.m. on 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,
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 |
| 16. | 40444/21
27/07/2021 |
Sergey Yuryevich AFANASYEV
1965 |
Shindyapin Arkadiy Vitalyevich
Moscow |
Rally in support of Mr Navalnyy
Moscow
31/01/2021 |
article 20.2 § 6.1 of CAO | administrative detention for 10 days | 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 3.50 p.m. on 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,
Prot. 7 Art. 2 – delayed review of conviction by a higher – 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 |
| 17. | 40532/21
30/07/2021 |
Aleksandr Vladimirovich SMIRNOV
1990 |
Pomazuyev Aleksandr Yevgenyevich
Vilnius |
Rally in support of Mr Navalnyy
Yaroslavl
31/01/2021 |
article 20.2 § 2 of CAO | administrative detention for 10 days | Yaroslavl Regional 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 12.25 p.m. on 31/01/2021 to 01/02/2021, hearing in the applicant’s administrative-offence case. | 5,000 |
| 18. | 40877/21
02/08/2021 |
Klim Dmitriyevich BONDAR
2002 |
Eysmont Mariya Olegovna
Moscow |
Rally in support of Mr Navalnyy
Moscow
31/01/2021 |
article 20.2 § 6.1 of CAO | administrative detention for 8 days | 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 5.50 p.m. on 31/01/2021 to 5.00 p.m. on 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 |
| 19. | 41620/21
06/08/2021 |
Sergey Nikolayevich OZEROV
1976 |
Pershakova Yelena Yuryevna
Moscow |
Rally in support of Mr Navalnyy
Moscow
31/01/2021 |
article 20.2 § 6.1 of CAO | administrative detention for 15 days | Moscow City Court
12/02/2021 |
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 12.40 p.m. 31/01/2021 to midnight on 01/02/2021,
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, 12/02/2021,
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 |
| 20. | 42996/21
10/08/2021 |
Valentina Yevgenyevna VOLKOVA
1978 |
Lepekhin Andrey Gennadyevich
Chelyabinsk |
Collective recording a video petition to the US President and the world community regarding the poor ecological conditions
Chelyabinsk
12/12/2020 |
article 20.2 § 2 of CAO | fine of
RUB 20,000 |
Chelyabinsk Regional Court
10/02/2021 |
Art. 6 (1) – lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings – final decision: Chelyabinsk Regional Court, 10/02/2021. | 3,500 |
| 21. | 43200/21
11/08/2021 |
Roman Alekseyevich ZHURAVLEV
1995 |
Nurgaleyev Danil Ilnurovich
Kazan |
Rally in support of Mr Navalnyy
Kazan
23/01/2021 |
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO | fine of
RUB 10,000 |
Supreme Court of the Tatarstan Republic
10/03/2021 |
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 4.00 p.m. on 23/01/2021 to 2.30 p.m. on 24/01/2021 | 4,000 |
| 22. | 43242/21
09/08/2021 |
Viktor Yuryevich YEZHOV
1966 |
Eysmont Mariya Olegovna
Moscow |
Rally in support of Mr Navalnyy
Moscow
31/01/2021 |
article 20.2 § 6.1 of CAO | administrative detention for 10 days | Moscow City Court
12/02/2021 |
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. on 31/01/2021 to 4.30 p.m. on 01/02/2021,
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, 12/02/2021.
|
5,000 |
| 23. | 43501/21
18/08/2021 |
Vyacheslav Nikolayevich TITOV
1988 |
Pershakova Yelena Yuryevna
Moscow |
Rally in support of Mr Navalnyy
Moscow
02/02/2021 |
article 20.2 § 6.1 of CAO | administrative detention for 10 days | Moscow City Court
24/03/2021 |
Art. 5 (1) – unlawful deprivation of liberty: escorting to the police station for the purpose of drawing up a record of administrative offence; detention in excess of 3 hours and without “exceptional circumstances”, from 11.30 p.m. on 02/02/2021 to 12.00 a.m. on 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, 24/03/2021,
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 |
| 24. | 43680/21
10/08/2021 |
Vladimir Aleksandrovich LAZAR
1999 |
Zhdanov Ivan Yuryevich
Vilnius |
Rally in support of Mr Navalnyy
Moscow
23/01/2021 |
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO | fine of
RUB 10,000 |
Moscow City Court
04/03/2021 |
Art. 5 (1) – unlawful deprivation of liberty: escorting to the police station for the purpose of drawing up a record of administrative offence, from 4.30 p.m. to an unspecified time 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, 04/03/2021.
|
4,000 |
| 25. | 44318/21
09/08/2021 |
Rinat Safayevich SALIKHOV
1998 |
Memorial Human Rights Centre
Moscow |
Rally in support of Mr Navalnyy
Moscow
02/02/2021 |
article 20.2 § 6.1 of CAO | administrative detention for
8 days |
Moscow City Court
10/02/2021 |
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 11.45 p.m. on 02/02/2021 to 9.15 a.m. on 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, 10/02/2021,
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 |
| 26. | 44678/21
26/08/2021 |
Darya Dmitriyevna LEVKINA
1998 |
Pomazuyev Aleksandr Yevgenyevich
Vilnius |
Rally in support of Mr Navalnyy
Kurgan
23/01/2021 |
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO | fine of RUB 15,000 | Kurgan Regional Court
17/03/2021 |
Art. 6 (1) – lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings – final decision: Kurgan Regional Court, 17/03/2021.
|
3,500 |
| 27. | 47849/21
08/09/2021 |
Yevgeniy Vadimovich ROYZMAN
1962 |
Fedotova Yuliya
Yekaterinburg |
Rally in support of Mr Navalnyy
Yekaterinburg
23/01/2021
Rally in support of Mr Navalnyy
Yekaterinburg
31/01/2021
Rally (march) in support of Mr Navalnyy
Yekaterinburg
21/04/2021 |
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO |
fine of
RUB 20,000
fine of RUB 20,000
fine of RUB 20,000 |
Sverdlovsk Regional Court
20/05/2021
Sverdlovsk Regional Court, 13/05/2021 and 20/05/2021
Sverdlovsk Regional Court 26/05/2021 |
Art. 6 (1) – lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings – final decisions: Sverdlovsk Regional Court, 13/05/2021, 20/05/2021 and 26/05/2021;
Art. 10 (1) – conviction for making calls to participate in public events – calls to participate at two unauthorised public rallies in support to Mr A. Navalnyy, scheduled on 31/01/2021 and on 21/04/2021, under art. 20.2 § 2 of the CAO, administrative detention for one day, final decisions: Sverdlovsk Regional Court, 13/05/2021 (both proceedings). |
5,000 |
| 28. | 50470/21
01/10/2021 |
Vladislav Vladimirovich BASHKINOV
2000 |
Solovyev Stanislav Vyacheslavovich
Moscow |
Rally in support of Mr Navalnyy
Moscow
23/01/2021 |
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO | fine of
RUB 20,000 |
Moscow City Court
02/04/2021 |
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 6.00 p.m. to 10.30 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, 02/04/2021.
|
4,000 |
[i] Plus any tax that may be chargeable to the applicants.
Leave a Reply