{"id":22136,"date":"2024-01-18T13:22:24","date_gmt":"2024-01-18T13:22:24","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/laweuro.com\/?p=22136"},"modified":"2024-01-18T13:22:24","modified_gmt":"2024-01-18T13:22:24","slug":"case-of-molchanov-and-others-v-russia-43487-21-and-27-others","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/laweuro.com\/?p=22136","title":{"rendered":"CASE OF MOLCHANOV AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA – 43487\/21 and 27 others"},"content":{"rendered":"

The applicants complained of the disproportionate measures taken against them as organisers or participants of public assemblies.<\/p>\n

\n

European Court of Human Rights
\nFIRST SECTION
\nCASE OF MOLCHANOV AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA<\/strong>
\n(Applications nos. 43487\/21 and 27 others \u2013 see appended list)
\nJUDGMENT
\nSTRASBOURG
\n18 January 2024<\/p>\n

This judgment is final but it may be subject to editorial revision.<\/p>\n

In the case of Molchanov and Others v. Russia,<\/strong><\/p>\n

The European Court of Human Rights (First Section), sitting as a Committee composed of:
\nP\u00e9ter Paczolay, President,
\nGilberto Felici,
\nRaffaele Sabato, judges,
\nand Viktoriya Maradudina, Acting Deputy Section Registrar,<\/p>\n

Having deliberated in private on 14 December 2023,<\/p>\n

Delivers the following judgment, which was adopted on that date:<\/p>\n

PROCEDURE<\/strong><\/p>\n

1. The case originated in applications against Russia lodged with the Court under Article\u00a034 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (\u201cthe Convention\u201d) on the various dates indicated in the appended table.<\/p>\n

2. The Russian Government (\u201cthe\u00a0Government\u201d) were given notice of the applications.<\/p>\n

THE FACTS<\/strong><\/p>\n

3. The list of applicants and the relevant details of the applications are set out in the appended table.<\/p>\n

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.<\/p>\n

THE LAW<\/strong><\/p>\n

I. JOINDER OF THE APPLICATIONS<\/strong><\/p>\n

5. Having regard to the similar subject matter of the applications, the Court finds it appropriate to examine them jointly in a single judgment.<\/p>\n

II. Jurisdiction<\/strong><\/p>\n

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.\u00a0Russia [GC], nos. 40792\/10 and 2 others, \u00a7\u00a7\u00a068\u201173, 17\u00a0January 2023).<\/p>\n

III. ALLEGED VIOLATION OF ARTICLE\u00a011 OF THE CONVENTION<\/strong><\/p>\n

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

8. The Court refers to the principles established in its case-law regarding freedom of assembly (see Kudrevi\u010dius and Others v.\u00a0Lithuania [GC], no.\u00a037553\/05, ECHR 2015, with further references) and proportionality of interference with it (see Oya Ataman v. Turkey, no. 74552\/01, ECHR 2006\u2011XIV, and Hyde Park and Others v. Moldova, no. 33482\/06, 31\u00a0March 2009).<\/p>\n

9. In the leading cases of Frumkin v. Russia, no. 74568\/12, ECHR\u00a02016 (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.<\/p>\n

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\u2019 freedom of assembly were not \u201cnecessary in a democratic society\u201d.<\/p>\n

11. These complaints are therefore admissible and disclose a breach of Article 11 of the Convention.<\/p>\n

IV. OTHER ALLEGED VIOLATIONS UNDER WELL-ESTABLISHED CASE-LAW<\/strong><\/p>\n

12. 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\u00a035\u00a0\u00a7\u00a03\u00a0(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 findings in Butkevich v. Russia, no.\u00a05865\/07, \u00a7\u00a7\u00a063-65, 13\u00a0February 2018, Tsvetkova and Others v. Russia, nos.\u00a054381\/08 and 5\u00a0others, \u00a7\u00a7 115-31, 10\u00a0April 2018, and Korneyeva v.\u00a0Russia, no.\u00a072051\/17, \u00a7\u00a7 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, \u00a7\u00a7 58-85, 20\u00a0September 2016, concerning the absence of a prosecuting party in the proceedings under the Code of Administrative Offences (the CAO); Martynyuk v.\u00a0Russia, no.\u00a013764\/15, \u00a7\u00a7 38-42, 8\u00a0October 2019, relating to the lack of suspensive effect of an appeal against the sentence of administrative detention.<\/p>\n

V. REMAINING COMPLAINTS<\/strong><\/p>\n

13. Some applicants raised further additional complaints under Article 6 of the Convention concerning other aspects of fairness of the administrative\u2011offence proceedings. In view of the findings in paragraphs\u00a011 and 12 above, the Court considers that there is no need to deal separately with these remaining complaints.<\/p>\n

VI. APPLICATION OF ARTICLE 41 OF THE CONVENTION<\/strong><\/p>\n

14. Regard being had to the documents in its possession and to its case\u2011law (see, in particular, Navalnyy and Others v. Russia [Committee], nos.\u00a025809\/17 and 14 others, \u00a7\u00a022, 4\u00a0October 2022), the Court finds it reasonable to award the sums indicated in the appended table.<\/p>\n

FOR THESE REASONS, THE COURT, UNANIMOUSLY,<\/strong><\/p>\n

1. Decides to join the applications;<\/p>\n

2. Holds that it has jurisdiction to deal with these applications as they relate to facts that took place before 16\u00a0September 2022;<\/p>\n

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 the remaining complaints raised by the applicants;<\/p>\n

4. Holds that these applications disclose a breach of Article\u00a011 of the Convention;<\/p>\n

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);<\/p>\n

6. Holds<\/p>\n

(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;<\/p>\n

(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.<\/p>\n

Done in English, and notified in writing on 18 January 2024, pursuant to Rule\u00a077\u00a0\u00a7\u00a7\u00a02 and\u00a03 of the Rules of Court.<\/p>\n

Viktoriya Maradudina\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 P\u00e9ter Paczolay
\nActing Deputy Registrar\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 President<\/p>\n

___________<\/p>\n

APPENDIX<\/strong>
\nList of applications raising complaints under Article 11 of the Convention
\n(disproportionate measures against organisers and participants of public assemblies)<\/p>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n
No.<\/strong><\/td>\nApplication no.<\/strong><\/p>\n

Date of introduction<\/strong><\/td>\n

Applicant\u2019s name<\/strong><\/p>\n

Year of birth<\/strong><\/p>\n

\u00a0<\/strong><\/td>\n

Representative\u2019s name and location<\/strong><\/td>\nName of the public event<\/strong><\/p>\n

Location<\/strong><\/p>\n

Date<\/strong><\/td>\n

Administrative charges<\/strong><\/td>\nPenalty<\/strong><\/td>\nFinal domestic decision<\/strong><\/p>\n

Court Name<\/strong><\/p>\n

Date<\/strong><\/td>\n

Other complaints under well-established case-law<\/strong><\/td>\nAmount awarded for pecuniary and non\u2011pecuniary damage and costs and expenses per applicant<\/strong><\/p>\n

(in euros)[i]<\/a><\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/thead>\n

1.<\/td>\n43487\/21<\/p>\n

11\/08\/2021<\/td>\n

Pavel Valeryevich MOLCHANOV<\/strong><\/p>\n

1976<\/td>\n

Memorial Human Rights Centre<\/p>\n

Moscow<\/td>\n

Rally \u201cFree Navalnyy\u201d<\/p>\n

Moscow<\/p>\n

31\/01\/2021<\/td>\n

article 20.2 \u00a7 6.1 of CAO<\/td>\ndetention for 10 days<\/td>\nMoscow City Court<\/p>\n

12\/02\/2021<\/td>\n

Art. 5 (1) – unlawful detention – escorting to and detention at the police station for compiling an offence report from 3.30 p.m. on 31\/01\/2021 until 5.30 p.m. on 02\/02\/2021;<\/p>\n

Art. 6 (1) – lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings;<\/p>\n

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.<\/td>\n

5,000<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
2.<\/td>\n43490\/21<\/p>\n

11\/08\/2021<\/td>\n

Vladimir Vladimirovich ORLOV<\/strong><\/p>\n

1995<\/td>\n

Memorial Human Rights Centre<\/p>\n

Moscow<\/td>\n

Rally \u201cFree Navalnyy\u201d<\/p>\n

St Petersburg<\/p>\n

31\/01\/2021<\/td>\n

article 20.2.2 \u00a7 1 of CAO<\/td>\ndetention for 12 days<\/td>\nSt Petersburg City Court<\/p>\n

11\/02\/2021<\/td>\n

Art. 5 (1) – unlawful detention – escorting to and detention at the police station for compiling an offence report from 4.27 p.m. on 31\/01\/2021 until 12.20 p.m. on 02\/02\/2021,<\/p>\n

Art. 6 (1) – lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings,<\/p>\n

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.<\/td>\n

5,000<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
3.<\/td>\n49077\/21<\/p>\n

28\/09\/2021<\/td>\n

Olga Aleksandrovna VAREGINA<\/strong><\/p>\n

1986<\/td>\n

Memorial Human Rights Centre<\/p>\n

Moscow<\/td>\n

Rally “Free Navalnyy”<\/p>\n

Pyatigorsk<\/p>\n

31\/01\/2021<\/td>\n

article 20.2.2 \u00a7 1 of CAO<\/td>\ndetention for 1 day<\/td>\nStavropol Regional Court<\/p>\n

31\/03\/2021<\/td>\n

Art. 5 (1) – unlawful detention – escorting to and detention at the police station for compiling an offence report from 12.20 p.m. on 31\/01\/2021 to 4.30 p.m. on 01\/02\/2021.<\/td>\n5,000<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
4.<\/td>\n49082\/21<\/p>\n

28\/09\/2021<\/td>\n

Yuriy Nikolayevich TSEPIN<\/strong><\/p>\n

1969<\/td>\n

Memorial Human Rights Centre<\/p>\n

Moscow<\/td>\n

Rally \u201cFree Navalnyy\u201d<\/p>\n

Pskov<\/p>\n

23\/01\/2021<\/td>\n

article 20.2 \u00a7 5 of CAO<\/td>\nfine of<\/p>\n

RUB 20,000<\/td>\n

Pskov Regional Court<\/p>\n

05\/04\/2021<\/td>\n

Art. 5 (1) – unlawful detention – escorting to the police station on 23\/01\/2021 for compiling an offence report,<\/p>\n

Art. 6 (1) – lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings.<\/td>\n

4,000<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
5.<\/td>\n49108\/21<\/p>\n

28\/09\/2021<\/td>\n

Yelena Vladimirovna LUSHINA<\/strong><\/p>\n

1993<\/td>\n

Memorial Human Rights Centre<\/p>\n

Moscow<\/td>\n

Rally \u201cFree Navalnyy\u201d<\/p>\n

Moscow<\/p>\n

23\/01\/2021<\/td>\n

article 20.2 \u00a7 6.1 of CAO<\/td>\nfine of<\/p>\n

RUB 10,000<\/td>\n

Moscow City Court<\/p>\n

30\/03\/2021<\/td>\n

Art. 5 (1) – unlawful detention – escorting to the police station on 23\/01\/2021 for compiling an offence report,<\/p>\n

Art. 6 (1) – lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings.<\/td>\n

4,000<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
6.<\/td>\n49184\/21<\/p>\n

30\/09\/2021<\/td>\n

Mikhail Gennadyevich YEGOROCHKIN<\/strong><\/p>\n

2000<\/td>\n

Memorial Human Rights Centre<\/p>\n

Moscow<\/td>\n

Rally \u201cFree Navalnyy\u201d<\/p>\n

Moscow<\/p>\n

31\/01\/2021<\/td>\n

article 20.2 \u00a7 5 of CAO<\/td>\nfine of<\/p>\n

RUB 10,000<\/td>\n

Moscow City Court<\/p>\n

02\/04\/2021<\/td>\n

Art. 5 (1) – unlawful detention – escorting to and detention at the police station for compiling an offence report from 5.10 p.m. on 31\/01\/2021 until 3.40 a.m. on 01\/02\/2021;<\/p>\n

Art. 6 (1) – lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings<\/td>\n

4,000<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
7.<\/td>\n49193\/21<\/p>\n

30\/09\/2021<\/td>\n

Yekaterina Aleksandrovna VELIKAYA<\/strong><\/p>\n

1987<\/td>\n

Memorial Human Rights Centre<\/p>\n

Moscow<\/td>\n

Rally \u201cFree Navalnyy\u201d<\/p>\n

Penza<\/p>\n

23\/01\/2021<\/td>\n

article 20.2 \u00a7 6.1 of CAO<\/td>\nfine of<\/p>\n

RUB 12,000<\/td>\n

Penza Regional Court<\/p>\n

01\/04\/2021<\/td>\n

Art. 5 (1) – unlawful detention – escorting to and detention at the police station for compiling an offence report from 8.10 a.m. until 1.30 p.m. on 23\/01\/2021;<\/p>\n

Art. 6 (1) – lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings.<\/td>\n

4,000<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
8.<\/td>\n49203\/21<\/p>\n

30\/09\/2021<\/td>\n

Aleksandr Ivanovich SVITLIK<\/strong><\/p>\n

1991<\/td>\n

Memorial Human Rights Centre<\/p>\n

Moscow<\/td>\n

Rally \u201cFree Navalnyy\u201d<\/p>\n

Moscow<\/p>\n

23\/01\/2021<\/td>\n

article 20.2 \u00a7 5 of CAO<\/td>\nfine of<\/p>\n

RUB 15,000<\/td>\n

Moscow City Court<\/p>\n

16\/04\/2021<\/td>\n

Art. 5 (1) – unlawful detention – escorting to the police station on 23\/01\/2021 for compiling an offence report;<\/p>\n

Art. 6 (1) – lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings.<\/td>\n

4,000<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
9.<\/td>\n49205\/21<\/p>\n

28\/09\/2021<\/td>\n

Nikita Ruslanovich MIKHONIN<\/strong><\/p>\n

1997<\/td>\n

Memorial Human Rights Centre<\/p>\n

Moscow<\/td>\n

Rally \u201cFree Navalnyy\u201d<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

Moscow<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

31\/01\/2021<\/td>\n

article 20.2 \u00a7 6.1 of CAO<\/td>\nfine of RUB 10,000<\/td>\nMoscow City Court<\/p>\n

20\/04\/2021<\/td>\n

Art. 5 (1) – unlawful detention – escorting to and detention at the police station for compiling an offence report from 12.30 p.m. on 31\/01\/2021 until 2.30 p.m. on 01\/02\/2021;<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

Art. 6 (1) – lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings.<\/td>\n

4,000<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
10.<\/td>\n49219\/21<\/p>\n

22\/09\/2021<\/td>\n

Aleksandr Dmitriyevich RAZDOBURDIN<\/strong><\/p>\n

1991<\/td>\n

Memorial Human Rights Centre<\/p>\n

Moscow<\/td>\n

Rally \u201cFree Navalnyy\u201d<\/p>\n

St Petersburg<\/p>\n

31\/01\/2021<\/td>\n

article 20.2 \u00a7 2 of CAO<\/td>\ndetention for 4 days<\/td>\nSt Petersburg City Court<\/p>\n

25\/03\/2021<\/td>\n

Art. 5 (1) – unlawful detention – escorting to the police station for compiling an offence report on 31\/01\/2021;<\/p>\n

Art. 6 (1) – lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings<\/td>\n

5,000<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
11.<\/td>\n49220\/21<\/p>\n

30\/09\/2021<\/td>\n

Nadezhda Sergeyevna NEZNAYEVA<\/strong><\/p>\n

1999<\/td>\n

Memorial Human Rights Centre<\/p>\n

Moscow<\/td>\n

Rally \u201cFree Navalnyy\u201d<\/p>\n

Moscow<\/p>\n

02\/02\/2021<\/td>\n

article 20.2 \u00a7 6.1 of CAO<\/td>\ndetention for 10 days<\/td>\nMoscow City Court<\/p>\n

06\/04\/2021<\/td>\n

Art. 5 (1) – unlawful detention – escorting to and detention at the police station for compiling an offence report from 11.55 p.m. on 02\/02\/2021 until 4.00 p.m. on 03\/02\/2021;<\/p>\n

Art. 6 (1) – lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings;<\/p>\n

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.<\/td>\n

5,000<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
12.<\/td>\n49233\/21<\/p>\n

22\/09\/2021<\/td>\n

Maksim Eduardovich BORODULIN<\/strong><\/p>\n

1992<\/td>\n

Memorial Human Rights Centre<\/p>\n

Moscow<\/td>\n

Rally \u201cFree Navalnyy\u201d<\/p>\n

St Petersburg<\/p>\n

31\/01\/2021<\/td>\n

article 20.2 \u00a7 2 of CAO<\/td>\nfine of<\/p>\n

RUB 10,000<\/td>\n

St Petersburg City Court<\/p>\n

25\/03\/2021<\/td>\n

Art. 5 (1) – unlawful detention – escorting to and detention at the police station for compiling an offence report from 2.00 p.m. on 31\/01\/2021 to 1.00 a.m. on 01\/02\/2021;<\/p>\n

Art. 6 (1) – lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings.<\/td>\n

4,000<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
13.<\/td>\n49237\/21<\/p>\n

30\/09\/2021<\/td>\n

Albina Vladislavovna PUKHOVA<\/strong><\/p>\n

1965<\/td>\n

Memorial Human Rights Centre<\/p>\n

Moscow<\/td>\n

Rally \u201cFree Navalnyy\u201d<\/p>\n

Nizhniy Novgorod<\/p>\n

31\/01\/2021<\/td>\n

article 20.2 \u00a7 5 of CAO<\/td>\nfine of<\/p>\n

RUB 10,000<\/td>\n

Nizhniy Novgorod Regional Court<\/p>\n

12\/05\/2021<\/td>\n

Art. 5 (1) – unlawful detention – escorting to and detention at the police station for compiling an offence report from noon until 7.20 p.m. on 31\/01\/2021;<\/p>\n

Art. 6 (1) – lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings.<\/td>\n

4,000<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
14.<\/td>\n49243\/21<\/p>\n

30\/09\/2021<\/td>\n

Olga Yuruevna KARAVASHKOVA<\/strong><\/p>\n

2002<\/td>\n

Memorial Human Rights Centre<\/p>\n

Moscow<\/td>\n

Rally \u201cFree Navalnyy\u201d<\/p>\n

Moscow<\/p>\n

23\/01\/2021<\/td>\n

article 20.2 \u00a7 5 of CAO<\/td>\nfine of<\/p>\n

RUB 10,000<\/td>\n

Moscow City Court<\/p>\n

02\/04\/2021<\/td>\n

Art. 5 (1) – unlawful detention – escorting to and detention at the police station for compiling an offence report from 6.10 p.m. on 23\/01\/2021 until 12.30 a.m. on 24\/01\/2021;<\/p>\n

Art. 6 (1) – lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings.<\/td>\n

4,000<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
15.<\/td>\n49301\/21<\/p>\n

22\/09\/2021<\/td>\n

Sergey Aleksandrovich BOBRIK<\/strong><\/p>\n

1991<\/td>\n

Memorial Human Rights Centre<\/p>\n

Moscow<\/td>\n

Rally \u201cFree Navalnyy\u201d<\/p>\n

Moscow<\/p>\n

31\/01\/2021<\/td>\n

article 20.2 \u00a7 6.1 of CAO<\/td>\ndetention for 10 days<\/td>\nMoscow City Court<\/p>\n

26\/03\/2021<\/td>\n

Art. 5 (1) – unlawful detention – escorting to and detention at the police station for compiling an offence report from 12.30 p.m. on 31\/01\/2021 until 11.00 p.m. on 01\/02\/2021;<\/p>\n

Art. 6 (1) – lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings;<\/p>\n

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.<\/td>\n

5,000<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
16.<\/td>\n49434\/21<\/p>\n

22\/09\/2021<\/td>\n

Aleksey Nikolayevich DUNTSOV<\/strong><\/p>\n

1987<\/td>\n

Memorial Human Rights Centre<\/p>\n

Moscow<\/td>\n

Rally \u201cFree Navalnyy\u201d<\/p>\n

Moscow<\/p>\n

31\/01\/2021<\/td>\n

article 20.2 \u00a7 5 of CAO<\/td>\nfine of<\/p>\n

RUB 10,000<\/td>\n

Moscow City Court<\/p>\n

26\/03\/2021<\/td>\n

Art. 5 (1) – unlawful detention – escorting to and detention at the police station for compiling an offence report from 5.10 p.m. on 31\/01\/2021 until 4.45 a.m. on 01\/02\/2021;<\/p>\n

Art. 6 (1) – lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings<\/td>\n

4,000<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
17.<\/td>\n49443\/21<\/p>\n

22\/09\/2021<\/td>\n

Ivan Fedorovich FEDTSOV<\/strong><\/p>\n

2002<\/td>\n

Memorial Human Rights Centre<\/p>\n

Moscow<\/td>\n

Rally \u201cFree Navalnyy\u201d<\/p>\n

Moscow<\/p>\n

31\/01\/2021<\/td>\n

article 20.2 \u00a7 5 of CAO<\/td>\nfine of<\/p>\n

RUB 10,000<\/td>\n

Moscow City Court<\/p>\n

06\/04\/2021<\/td>\n

Art. 5 (1) – unlawful detention – escorting to and detention at the police station for compiling an offence report from 12.10 p.m. until 7.00 p.m. on 31\/01\/2021;<\/p>\n

Art. 6 (1) – lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings.<\/td>\n

4,000<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
18.<\/td>\n49466\/21<\/p>\n

22\/09\/2021<\/td>\n

Yevgeniy Vladimirovich PEREVERZOV<\/strong><\/p>\n

1977<\/td>\n

Memorial Human Rights Centre<\/p>\n

Moscow<\/td>\n

Rally \u201cFree Navalnyy\u201d<\/p>\n

Taganrog<\/p>\n

31\/01\/2021<\/td>\n

article 20.2 \u00a7 5 of CAO<\/td>\nfine of<\/p>\n

RUB 10,000<\/td>\n

Rostov Regional Court<\/p>\n

23\/03\/2021<\/td>\n

Art. 5 (1) – unlawful detention – escorting to the police station for compiling an offence report on 31\/01\/2021;<\/p>\n

Art. 6 (1) – lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings.<\/td>\n

4,000<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
19.<\/td>\n49473\/21<\/p>\n

22\/09\/2021<\/td>\n

Mariya Vladimirovna DANILINA<\/strong><\/p>\n

1996<\/td>\n

Memorial Human Rights Centre<\/p>\n

Moscow<\/td>\n

Rally \u201cFree Navalnyy\u201d<\/p>\n

Moscow<\/p>\n

02\/02\/2021<\/td>\n

article 20.2 \u00a7 6.1 of CAO<\/td>\nfine of<\/p>\n

RUB 15,000<\/td>\n

Moscow City Court<\/p>\n

26\/03\/2021<\/td>\n

Art. 5 (1) – unlawful detention – escorting to and detention at the police station for compiling an offence report from 11.15 p.m. on 02\/02\/2021 until 9.20 p.m. on 03\/02\/2021;<\/p>\n

Art. 6 (1) – lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings.<\/td>\n

4,000<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
20.<\/td>\n49474\/21<\/p>\n

22\/09\/2021<\/td>\n

Andrey Ivanovich PINDAK<\/strong><\/p>\n

1990<\/td>\n

Memorial Human Rights Centre<\/p>\n

Moscow<\/td>\n

Rally \u201cFree Navalnyy\u201d<\/p>\n

Moscow<\/p>\n

02\/02\/2021<\/td>\n

article 20.2 \u00a7 6.1 of CAO<\/td>\ndetention for 7 days<\/td>\nMoscow City Court<\/p>\n

24\/03\/2021<\/td>\n

Art. 5 (1) – unlawful detention – escorting to and detention at the police station for compiling an offence report from 12.10 a.m. on 03\/02\/2021 until 12.15 p.m. on 03\/02\/2021;<\/p>\n

Art. 6 (1) – lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings.<\/td>\n

5,000<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
21.<\/td>\n49504\/21<\/p>\n

22\/09\/2021<\/td>\n

Polina Valentinovna DUDINA<\/strong><\/p>\n

1999<\/td>\n

Memorial Human Rights Centre<\/p>\n

Moscow<\/td>\n

Rally \u201cFree Navalnyy\u201d<\/p>\n

Moscow<\/p>\n

31\/01\/2021<\/td>\n

article 20.2 \u00a7 5 of CAO<\/td>\nfine of<\/p>\n

RUB 10,000<\/td>\n

Moscow City Court<\/p>\n

24\/03\/2021<\/td>\n

Art. 5 (1) – unlawful detention – escorting to and detention at the police station for compiling an offence report from 12.05 a.m. until 6.45 p.m. on 31\/01\/2021;<\/p>\n

Art. 6 (1) – lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings.<\/td>\n

4,000<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
22.<\/td>\n49533\/21<\/p>\n

22\/09\/2021<\/td>\n

Pavel Alekseyevich LINKOV<\/strong><\/p>\n

1986<\/td>\n

Memorial Human Rights Centre<\/p>\n

Moscow<\/td>\n

Rally \u201cFree Navalnyy\u201d<\/p>\n

Moscow<\/p>\n

02\/02\/2021<\/td>\n

article 20.2 \u00a7 5 du CIA<\/td>\nfine of<\/p>\n

RUB 15,000<\/td>\n

Moscow City Court<\/p>\n

11\/05\/2021<\/td>\n

Art. 5 (1) – unlawful detention – escorting to and detention at the police station for compiling an offence report from 10.40 a.m. on 02\/02\/2021 until 6.00 p.m. on 02\/02\/2021;<\/p>\n

Art. 6 (1) – lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings.<\/td>\n

4,000<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
23.<\/td>\n49542\/21<\/p>\n

22\/09\/2021<\/td>\n

Yuliya Vladimirovna FILIMONOVA<\/strong><\/p>\n

 <\/td>\n

Memorial Human Rights Centre<\/p>\n

Moscow<\/td>\n

Rally \u201cFree Navalnyy\u201d<\/p>\n

Moscow<\/p>\n

02\/02\/2021<\/td>\n

article 20.2 \u00a7 5 of CAO<\/td>\nfine of<\/p>\n

RUB 10,000<\/td>\n

Moscow City Court<\/p>\n

14\/04\/2021<\/td>\n

Art. 5 (1) – unlawful detention – escorting to and detention at the police station for compiling an offence report from 11.45 p.m. on 02\/02\/2021 until 5.30 a.m. on 03\/02\/2021;<\/p>\n

Art. 6 (1) – lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings.<\/td>\n

4,000<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
24.<\/td>\n49552\/21<\/p>\n

22\/09\/2021<\/td>\n

Maksim Viktorovich PETREYEV<\/strong><\/p>\n

1983<\/td>\n

Memorial Human Rights Centre<\/p>\n

Moscow<\/td>\n

Rally \u201cFree Navalnyy\u201d<\/p>\n

Moscow<\/p>\n

31\/01\/2021<\/td>\n

article 20.2 \u00a7 6.1 of CAO<\/td>\nfine of<\/p>\n

RUB 15,000<\/td>\n

Moscow City Court<\/p>\n

26\/03\/2021<\/td>\n

Art. 5 (1) – unlawful detention – escorting to and detention at the police station for compiling an offence report from 4.20 p.m. on 31\/01\/2021 until 2.00 p.m. on 01\/02\/2021;<\/p>\n

Art. 6 (1) – lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings.<\/td>\n

4,000<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
25.<\/td>\n49591\/21<\/p>\n

22\/09\/2021<\/td>\n

Tatyana Yevgenyevna IZOTOVA<\/strong><\/p>\n

1986<\/td>\n

Memorial Human Rights Centre<\/p>\n

Moscow<\/td>\n

Rally \u201cFree Navalnyy\u201d<\/p>\n

St Petersburg<\/p>\n

31\/01\/2021<\/td>\n

article 20.2.2 \u00a7 1 of CAO<\/td>\nfine of<\/p>\n

RUB 15,000<\/td>\n

St Petersburg City Court<\/p>\n

23\/03\/2021<\/td>\n

Art. 5 (1) – unlawful detention – escorting to and detention at the police station for compiling an offence report from 2.45 p.m. until 9.00 p.m. on 31\/01\/2021;<\/p>\n

Art. 6 (1) – lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings.<\/td>\n

4,000<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
26.<\/td>\n49599\/21<\/p>\n

22\/09\/2021<\/td>\n

Vladislav Olegovich NARUSHEV<\/strong><\/p>\n

1996<\/td>\n

Memorial Human Rights Centre<\/p>\n

Moscow<\/td>\n

Rally \u201cFree Navalnyy\u201d<\/p>\n

Samara<\/p>\n

31\/01\/2021<\/td>\n

article 20.2 \u00a7 5 of CAO<\/td>\nfine of<\/p>\n

RUB 10,000<\/td>\n

Samara Regional Court<\/p>\n

25\/03\/2021<\/td>\n

Art. 5 (1) – unlawful detention – escorting to the police station for compiling an offence report from 1.30 p.m. until 6.30 p.m. on 31\/01\/2021;<\/p>\n

Art. 6 (1) – lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings.<\/td>\n

4,000<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
27.<\/td>\n49754\/21<\/p>\n

16\/09\/2021<\/td>\n

Maksim Anatolyevich KHLAMOV<\/strong><\/p>\n

1991<\/td>\n

Memorial Human Rights Centre<\/p>\n

Moscow<\/td>\n

Rally \u201cFree Navalnyy\u201d<\/p>\n

Moscow<\/p>\n

31\/01\/2021<\/td>\n

article 20.2 \u00a7 5 of CAO<\/td>\nfine of<\/p>\n

RUB 20,000<\/td>\n

Moscow City Court<\/p>\n

18\/03\/2021<\/td>\n

Art. 5 (1) – unlawful detention – escorting to and detention at the police station for compiling an offence report from 1.25 p.m. until 9.56 p.m. on 31\/01\/2021;<\/p>\n

Art. 6 (1) – lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings.<\/td>\n

4,000<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
28.<\/td>\n59537\/21<\/p>\n

17\/11\/2021<\/td>\n

Roman Vladimirovich PYTEL<\/strong><\/p>\n

1991<\/td>\n

Memorial Human Rights Centre<\/p>\n

Moscow<\/td>\n

Rally \u201cFree Navalnyy\u201d<\/p>\n

Moscow<\/p>\n

02\/02\/2021<\/td>\n

article 20.2 \u00a7 6.1 of CAO<\/td>\nfine of<\/p>\n

RUB 15,000<\/td>\n

Moscow City Court<\/p>\n

17\/05\/2021<\/td>\n

Art. 5 (1) – unlawful detention – escorting to and detention at the police station for compiling an offence report from 11.45 p.m. on 02\/02\/2021 until 5.00 p.m. on 03\/02\/2021;<\/p>\n

Art. 6 (1) – lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings.<\/td>\n

4,000<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

[i]<\/a> Plus any tax that may be chargeable to the applicants.<\/p>\n