CEDH · CASELAW;JUDGMENTS;COMMITTEE;ENG — 23 mars 2023

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .sFE10DC93 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .s339D85E6 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:14pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s665E407E { margin-top:66pt; margin-bottom:14pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .s34DFC730 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .s82B4DA5F { page-break-before:right; clear:both; mso-break-type:section-break } .s10950C61 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .sB9D5CABB { width:28.35pt; display:inline-block } .s3AAE10DF { margin-top:14pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .s3CA22BA { font-family:Arial; text-transform:uppercase } .s6B505E72 { margin:0pt; padding-left:0pt } .sDECD9755 { margin-left:11.67pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; padding-left:6.78pt; font-family:Arial; text-transform:uppercase } .sDA7B489D { margin-top:14pt; margin-left:15pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; padding-left:3.45pt; font-family:Arial; text-transform:uppercase } .s5C5C410E { margin-top:14pt; margin-left:18.34pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; padding-left:0.11pt; font-family:Arial; text-transform:uppercase } .s67CAFE05 { margin-top:14pt; margin-left:18.45pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-family:Arial; text-transform:uppercase } .s7C22C014 { margin-top:14pt; margin-left:16.34pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; padding-left:2.11pt; font-family:Arial; text-transform:uppercase } .s434D37A9 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .sD0489F03 { margin-top:6pt; margin-left:21.25pt; margin-bottom:6pt; text-indent:7.1pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:10pt } .s74818F78 { margin-top:14pt; margin-bottom:3pt; text-align:justify; font-family:Arial; list-style-position:inside } .sE7B3A78A { width:1.99pt; font:7pt 'Times New Roman'; display:inline-block } .sFBC99493 { font-style:italic } .sD11CFAB7 { margin-top:14pt; margin-left:15.01pt; margin-bottom:3pt; text-align:justify; padding-left:1.99pt; font-family:Arial } .s51DFF5CF { margin-top:0pt; margin-left:34pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:-17pt; text-align:justify } .sE5BF05B1 { width:2.33pt; font:7pt 'Times New Roman'; display:inline-block } .s2D9C6089 { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s69DCC830 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .sC646A315 { width:14.54pt; display:inline-block } .sF5B27E79 { width:130.75pt; display:inline-block } .s9852CA4C { width:7.54pt; display:inline-block } .s9E436411 { width:138.09pt; display:inline-block } .s4ACA9207 { page-break-before:always; clear:both; mso-break-type:section-break } .s5E1364CA { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .sCC22C24E { font-family:Arial; color:#3e3e3e } .s6DB91820 { text-align:center } .s8BB62139 { margin-right:auto; margin-left:auto; border-collapse:collapse } .s3695F815 { border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .sDF237D91 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; font-size:8pt } .sEECE831 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; color:#474747 } .s7ED160F0 { text-decoration:none } .sC39F4804 { font-family:Arial; font-size:5.33pt; font-weight:bold; vertical-align:super; color:#474747 } .sE8934522 { border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s4F2ADFDB { text-align:center; font-family:Arial; font-size:8pt; list-style-position:inside } .sBB6163A7 { width:2.48pt; font:7pt 'Times New Roman'; display:inline-block } .s6974B119 { height:140.25pt } .s55B086CD { height:173pt } .s86AB2762 { height:96.1pt } .sF6A12959 { width:33%; height:1px; text-align:left } .s5FFF0A7E { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:8pt } .sA4BC3E2E { font-family:Arial; font-size:5.33pt; vertical-align:super; color:#000000 }     FIRST SECTION CASE OF ROGACHEV AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA (Applications nos. 64754/14 and 19 others – see appended list)             JUDGMENT   STRASBOURG 23 March 2023   This judgment is final but it may be subject to editorial revision. In the case of Rogachev and Others v. Russia, The European Court of Human Rights (First Section), sitting as a Committee composed of:   Lətif Hüseynov , President ,   Ivana Jelić,   Erik Wennerström , judges , and Viktoriya Maradudina, Acting Deputy Section Registrar, Having deliberated in private on 2 March 2023, Delivers the following judgment, which was adopted on that date: PROCEDURE 1.     The case originated in applications against Russia lodged with the Court under Article   34 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (“the Convention”) on the various dates indicated in the appended table. 2.     The Russian Government (“the Government”) were given notice of the applications. THE FACTS 3.     The list of applicants and the relevant details of the applications are set out in the appended table. 4.     The applicants complained of the disproportionate measures taken against them as participants of public assemblies. They also raised other complaints under the provisions of the Convention. THE LAW 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. ALLEGED VIOLATION OF ARTICLE   11 OF THE CONVENTION 6.     The applicants complained principally of disproportionate measures taken against them as participants of public assemblies, namely the dispersal of these assemblies, as well as their arrest followed by conviction for administrative offence. They relied, expressly or in substance, on Article 11 of the Convention. 7.     The Court refers to the principles established in its case-law regarding freedom of assembly (see Kudrevičius and Others v. Lithuania [GC], no.   37553/05, ECHR 2015, with further references) and proportionality of interference with it (see Oya Ataman v. Turkey , no. 74552/01, ECHR   2006 ‑ XIV, and Hyde Park and Others v. Moldova , no. 33482/06, 31   March 2009). 8.     In the leading cases of Frumkin v. Russia, no. 74568/12, ECHR 2016 (extracts), Navalnyy and Yashin v. Russia, no. 76204/11, 4 December 2014 and Kasparov and Others v. Russia, no. 21613/07, 3 October 2013, the Court already found a violation in respect of issues similar to those in the present case. 9.     Having examined all the material submitted to it, the Court has not found any fact or argument capable of persuading it to reach a different conclusion as to the admissibility and merits of these complaints. Having regard to its case-law on the subject, the Court considers that in the instant case the interference with the applicants’ freedom of assembly was not “necessary in a democratic society”. 10.     These complaints are therefore admissible and disclose a breach of Article 11 of the Convention. OTHER ALLEGED VIOLATIONS UNDER WELL-ESTABLISHED CASE-LAW 11.     The applicants submitted other complaints which also raised issues under the Convention, given the relevant well-established case-law of the Court (see appended table). These complaints are not manifestly ill-founded within the meaning of Article   35   §   3   (a) of the Convention, nor are they inadmissible on any other ground. Accordingly, they must be declared admissible. Having examined all the material before it, the Court concludes that they also disclose violations of the Convention in the light of its well ‑ established case-law (see Tsvetkova and Others v. Russia , nos. 54381/08 and 5 others, §§ 84-138, 10 April 2018, as regards unlawful administrative arrest, and Karelin v. Russia , no. 926/08, 20 September 2016, concerning examination of criminal cases in the absence of a prosecuting party in the judicial proceedings governed by the Federal Code of Administrative Offences). REMAINING COMPLAINTS 12.     In view of its findings above, the Court considers that there is no need to deal separately with the remaining complaints under Article 6 of the Convention raised by some of the applicants in relation to other aspects of the fairness of the proceedings. APPLICATION OF ARTICLE 41 OF THE CONVENTION 13.     Article 41 of the Convention provides: “If the Court finds that there has been a violation of the Convention or the Protocols thereto, and if the internal law of the High Contracting Party concerned allows only partial reparation to be made, the Court shall, if necessary, afford just satisfaction to the injured party.” 14.     Regard being had to the documents in its possession and to its case ‑ law (see, in particular, Saidov v. Russia [Committee], no. 31872/19, §   23, 26 July 2022), the Court finds it reasonable to award the sums indicated in the appended table. FOR THESE REASONS, THE COURT, UNANIMOUSLY, Decides to join the applications; Declares the complaints concerning the right to peaceful assembly and the other complaints under well-established case-law of the Court, as set out in the appended table, admissible, and decides that it is not necessary to examine separately the remaining complaints under Article   6 of the Convention concerning other aspects of the fairness of the proceedings, Holds that these applications disclose a breach of Article   11 of the Convention concerning the right to peaceful assembly; Holds that there has been a violation of the Convention as regards the other complaints raised under well-established case-law of the Court (see appended table); Holds (a)   that the respondent State is to pay the applicants, within three months, the amounts indicated in the appended table, to be converted into the currency of the respondent State at the rate applicable at the date of settlement; (b)   that from the expiry of the above-mentioned three months until settlement simple interest shall be payable on the above amounts at a rate equal to the marginal lending rate of the European Central Bank during the default period plus three percentage points. Done in English, and notified in writing on 23 March 2023, pursuant to Rule   77   §§   2 and   3 of the Rules of Court.   Viktoriya Maradudina   Lətif Hüseynov   Acting Deputy Registrar   President     APPENDIX List of applications raising complaints under Article 11 of the Convention (disproportionate measures against organisers and participants of public assemblies) No. Application no. Date of introduction Applicant’s name Year of birth   Representative’s name and location Name of the public event Location Date Administrative charges Penalty Final domestic decision Court Name Date Other complaints under well ‑ established case-law Amount awarded for pecuniary and non-pecuniary damage and costs and expenses per applicant (in euros) [1]     64754/14 16/09/2014 Mikhail Borisovich ROGACHEV 1952 Mezak Ernest Aleksandrovich Saint-Barthélemy d’Anjou Manifestation against the war in Ukraine   Syktyvkar   16/03/2014 Article 20.2 § 5 of CAO fine of RUB   10,000 Supreme Court of the Komi Republic 10/09/2014 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty, including unrecorded detention and detention without a judicial order and any other legal basis - arrest on 16/03/2014; detention in excess of 3   hours,   Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of tribunal - lack of the prosecuting party in the administrative proceedings: Final decision: Supreme Court of the Komi Republic on 10/09/2014 4,000     54040/17 17/07/2017 Ivan Sergeyevich DOLIN 1986 Terekhov Konstantin Ilyich Moscow Anti-corruption manifestation   Tula   26/03/2017 Article 20.2 § 5 of CAO fine of RUB   10,000 Tula Regional Court 26/04/2017 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty, including unrecorded detention and detention without a judicial order and any other legal basis - unlawful and disproportionate administrative escorting and arrest on 26/03/2017 (it was possible to draw up a record on the spot; detention over 3   hours in breach of Article §   27.5 CAO),   Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of tribunal in view of the absence of the prosecuting party in the administrative proceedings: Final decision: Tula Regional Court on 26/04/2017 4,000     79261/17 02/11/2017 Anatoliy Vladimirovich MAKAROV 1989 Glukhov Aleksey Vladimirovich Novocheboksarsk Anti-corruption manifestation   Nizhny Novgorod   26/03/2017 Article 19.3 § 1 of CAO, Article 20.2 § 5 of CAO fines of RUB 500 and RUB   10,000 Nizhniy Novgorod Regional Court 03/05/2017 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty, including unrecorded detention and detention without a judicial order and any other legal basis - arrested at 2.40   p.m. on 26/03/2017, brought to a police station to draw up a record of administrative offence; released on the following day at 1.05 p.m. 4,000     79264/17 02/11/2017 Vladislav Gennadyevich POPOV 1992 Glukhov Aleksey Vladimirovich Novocheboksarsk Anti-corruption manifestation   Nizhny Novgorod   26/03/2017 Article 20.2 § 5 of CAO, Article 19.3 § 1 of CAO fine of RUB   10,000 and RUB   500, respectively Nizhniy Novgorod Regional Court 23/05/2017   Nizhniy Novgorod Regional Court 04/05/2017 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty, including unrecorded detention and detention without a judicial order and any other legal basis - arrested at 2.40   p.m. on 26/03/2017, brought to a police station to draw up a record of administrative offence; released on the following day at 1.05 p.m. 4,000     80804/17 16/11/2017 Dmitriy Andreyevich KRYUKOV 1993 Glukhov Aleksey Vladimirovich Novocheboksarsk Anti-corruption manifestation   Nizhniy Novgorod   26/03/2017 Article 20.2 § 5 of CAO fine of RUB   10,000 Nizhniy Novgorod Regional Court 17/05/2017 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty, including unrecorded detention and detention without a judicial order and any other legal basis - arrested on 26/03/2017 at 4.10 p.m. during the assembly; brought to the police station to draw up a record of administrative arrest; released on the same day at 9 p.m.; the issue of the detention was examined by the appeal court,   Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of tribunal - prosecuting party absent in administrative proceedings: Final decision: Nizhniy Novgorod Regional Court on 17/05/2017 4,000     80808/17 16/11/2017 Vladimir Aleksandrovich MICHUROV 1965 Glukhov Aleksey Vladimirovich Novocheboksarsk Anti-corruption demonstration   Nizhniy Novgorod   26/03/2017 Article 20.2 § 5 of CAO fine of RUB   10,000 Nizhniy Novgorod Regional Court 17/05/2017 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty, including unrecorded detention and detention without a judicial order and any other legal basis - arrested on 26/03/2017 at 4.10 p.m. during the assembly; brought to the police station to draw up a record of administrative arrest; released on the same day at 9 p.m.; the issue of the detention was examined by the appeal court,   Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of tribunal - lack of the prosecuting party in the administrative proceedings: Final decision: Nizhniy Novgorod Regional Court on 17/05/2017 4,000     285/18 07/12/2017 Pavel Sergeyevich DEGTEV 1993 Glukhov Aleksey Vladimirovich Novocheboksarsk Anti-corruption manifestation   Nizhniy Novgorod   26/03/2017 Article 20.2 § 5 of CAO fine of RUB   10,000 Nizhniy Novgorod Regional Court 15/06/2017 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty, including unrecorded detention and detention without a judicial order and any other legal basis - arrested on 26/03/2017 at 2.10 p.m. during the assembly; brought to the police station to draw up a record of administrative arrest; released on the same day at 7.30 p.m.; the issue of the detention was examined by the appeal court,   Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of tribunal - lack of the prosecuting party in the administrative proceedings: Final decision: Nizhniy Novgorod Regional Court on 15/06/2017 4,000     2443/18 08/12/2017 Eduard Yuryevich BESHLIYEV 1991 Glukhov Aleksey Vladimirovich Novocheboksarsk Anti-corruption manifestation   Nizhniy Novgorod   26/03/2017 Article 20.2 § 5 of CAO fine of RUB   10,000 Nizhniy Novgorod Regional Court 15/06/2017 Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of tribunal - lack of the prosecuting party in the administrative proceedings: Final decision: Nizhniy Novgorod Regional Court on 15/06/2017 3,500     2455/18 30/11/2017 Eduard Georgiyevich CHUPROV 1976 Glukhov Aleksey Vladimirovich Novocheboksarsk Anti-corruption manifestation   Nizhniy Novgorod   26/03/2017 Article 20.2 § 5 of CAO fine of RUB   10,000 Nizhniy Novgorod Regional Court 08/06/2017 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty, including unrecorded detention and detention without a judicial order and any other legal basis - Unrecorded detention for four hours on 26/03/2017, raised on appeal,   Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of tribunal - lack of the prosecuting party in the administrative proceedings: Final decision: Nizhniy Novgorod Regional Court on 08/06/2017 4,000   2471/18 30/11/2017 Yevgeniy Aleksandrovich LAZAREV 1990 Glukhov Aleksey Vladimirovich Novocheboksarsk Anti-corruption manifestation   Nizhniy Novgorod   26/03/2017 Article 20.2 § 5 of CAO fine of RUB   10,000 Nizhniy Novgorod Regional Court 15/06/2017 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty, including unrecorded detention and detention without a judicial order and any other legal basis - arrest on 26/03/2017 during the manifestation for the sole purpose of drawing up a record, issue examined by the appeal court,   Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of tribunal - lack of the prosecuting party in the administrative proceedings: Final decision: Nizhniy Novgorod Regional Court on 15/06/2017 4,000   2474/18 30/11/2017 Yelena Vasilyevna AYBAZOVA 1961 Glukhov Aleksey Vladimirovich Novocheboksarsk Anti-corruption manifestation   Nizhniy Novgorod   26/03/2017 Article 20.2 § 5 of CAO fine of RUB   10,000 Nizhniy Novgorod Regional Court 01/06/2017 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty, including unrecorded detention and detention without a judicial order and any other legal basis - arrest on 26/03/2017 during the manifestation for the sole purpose of drawing up a record of an administrative offence, issue examined by the appeal court,   Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of tribunal - lack of the prosecuting party in the administrative proceedings: Final decision: Nizhniy Novgorod Regional Court on 01/06/2017 4,000   2478/18 30/11/2017 Sergey Vladimirovich KOROTKOV 1983 Glukhov Aleksey Vladimirovich Novocheboksarsk Anti-corruption manifestation   Nizhniy Novgorod   26/03/2017 Article 20.2 § 5 of CAO fine of RUB   10,000 Nizhniy Novgorod Regional Court 15/06/2017 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty, including unrecorded detention and detention without a judicial order and any other legal basis - arrest on 26/03/2017 during the manifestation for the sole purpose of drawing up a record of an administrative offence, issue examined by the appeal court,   Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of tribunal - lack of the prosecuting party in the administrative proceedings: Final decision: Nizhniy Novgorod Regional Court on 15/06/2017 4,000   2483/18 30/11/2017 Dmitriy Alekseyevich OSTAPETS 1997 Glukhov Aleksey Vladimirovich Novocheboksarsk Anti-corruption manifestation   Nizhniy Novgorod   26/03/2017 Article 20.2 § 5 of CAO fine of RUB   10,000 Nizhniy Novgorod Regional Court 15/06/2017 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty, including unrecorded detention and detention without a judicial order and any other legal basis - arrest on 26/03/2017 during the manifestation for the sole purpose of drawing up a record of an administrative offence, issue examined by the appeal court,   Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of tribunal - lack of the prosecuting party in the administrative proceedings: Final decision: Nizhniy Novgorod Regional Court on 15/06/2017 4,000   2489/18 30/11/2017 Natalya Valeryevna REZONTOVA 1968 Glukhov Aleksey Vladimirovich Novocheboksarsk Anti-corruption manifestation   Nizhniy Novgorod   26/03/2017 Article 20.2 § 5 of CAO fine of RUB   15,000 Nizhniy Novgorod Regional Court 07/09/2017 Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of tribunal - lack of the prosecuting party in the administrative proceedings: Final decision: Nizhniy Novgorod Regional Court on 07/09/2017 3,500   2568/18 08/12/2017 Aleksey Nikolayevich MAKEYEV 1977 Glukhov Aleksey Vladimirovich Novocheboksarsk Anti-corruption manifestation   Nizhniy Novgorod   26/03/2017 Article 20.2 § 5 of CAO fine of RUB   10,000 Nizhniy Novgorod Regional Court 15/06/2017 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty, including unrecorded detention and detention without a judicial order and any other legal basis - applicant arrested on 26/03/2017 at 4.10 p.m. during the manifestation, taken to the police station to draw up a record of administrative offence and was released at approximately 9 p.m. on the same day; raised that complaint in the administrative proceedings,     Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of tribunal - lack of the prosecuting party in the administrative proceedings: Final decision: Nizhniy Novgorod Regional Court on 15/06/2017 4,000   2569/18 08/12/2017 Vladislav Igorevich BELOGLAZOV 1997 Glukhov Aleksey Vladimirovich Novocheboksarsk Anti-corruption manifestation   Nizhniy Novgorod   26/03/2017 Article 20.2 § 5 of CAO fine of RUB   10,000 Nizhniy Novgorod Regional Court 15/06/2017 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty, including unrecorded detention and detention without a judicial order and any other legal basis - the applicant was arrested on 26/03/2017 during the manifestation, at approximately 4.10 p.m., and taken to a police station to draw up a record of administrative offence; he was released at approximately 9 p.m. on the same day, the complaint was raised on appeal,   Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of tribunal - lack of the prosecuting party in the administrative proceedings: Final decision: Nizhniy Novgorod Regional Court on 15/06/2017 4,000   2570/18 08/12/2017 Oleg Vasilyevich IGNATOV 1990 Glukhov Aleksey Vladimirovich Novocheboksarsk Anti-corruption manifestation   Nizhniy Novgorod   26/03/2017 Article 20.2 § 5 of CAO fine of RUB   10,000 Nizhniy Novgorod Regional Court 13/09/2017 Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of tribunal - lack of the prosecuting party in the administrative proceedings: Final decision: Nizhniy Novgorod Regional Court on 13/09/2017 3,500   11462/18 07/02/2018 Sergey Andreyevich LUNTS 1981 Ratnikova Svetlana Sergeyevna St Petersburg Collection of appeals to the President of Russia   St Petersburg   29/04/2017 Article 20.2 § 5 of CAO fine of RUB   10,000 St Petersburg City Court 08/08/2017   3,500   12896/18 09/03/2018 Anastasiya Sergeyevna GROMYKO 1995 Dobralskiy Aleksandr Igorevich Kaliningrad Anti-corruption manifestation   Leninskiy Avenue, Kaliningrad   12/06/2017 Article 20.2 § 5 of CAO fine of RUB   10,000 Kaliningrad Regional Court 07/09/2017 (received on 26/09/2017) Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of tribunal - absence of a prosecuting party in administrative proceedings: Final decision: Kaliningrad Regional Court on 07/09/2017 (received on 26/09/2017) 3,500   17280/18 20/03/2018 Denis Vladimirovich ZUTIKOV 1998 Preobrazhenskaya Oksana Vladimirovna Strasbourg Anti-corruption demonstration   Moscow, Pushkin square   26/03/2017 Article 20.2 § 5 of CAO fine of RUB   15,000 Moscow City Court 10/10/2017 Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of tribunal - absence of a prosecuting party in administrative proceedings: Moscow City Court on 10/10/2017 3,500     [1] Plus any tax that may be chargeable to the applicants.