CEDH · CASELAW;JUDGMENTS;COMMITTEE;ENG — 27 avril 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 } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .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 } .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 } .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 } .s3A97705A { margin-top:14pt; margin-left:14.2pt; margin-bottom:3pt; text-align:justify; 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 } .s4598CDF { width:70.9pt; display:inline-block } .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 } .sBE1F2EFF { height:173.95pt } .sC34EF596 { height:131.45pt } .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 KARPOV AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA (Applications nos. 11042/19 and 49 others – see appended list)             JUDGMENT   STRASBOURG 27 April 2023   This judgment is final but it may be subject to editorial revision. In the case of Karpov 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 6 April 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 country-wide protests against retirement age hike organised by Aleksey Navalnyy on 9 September 2018. The applicants 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. 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). ALLEGED VIOLATION OF ARTICLE   11 OF THE CONVENTION 7.     The applicants complained principally of disproportionate measures taken against them as organisers and/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. OTHER ALLEGED VIOLATIONS UNDER WELL-ESTABLISHED CASE-LAW 12.     Some 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. 13 .     Having examined all the material before it, the Court concludes that they also disclose violations of the Convention and its Protocols in the light of its findings in Butkevich v. Russia , no. 5865/07, §§ 61-65, 13 February 2018, and Korneyeva v. Russia , no. 72051/17, §§ 34-36, 8 October 2019, as to administrative escorting to and detention in a police station beyond three hours without any justification; and Karelin v. Russia , no. 926/08, §§ 58-85, 20 September 2016, related to the absence of a prosecuting party in criminal proceedings governed by the Code of Administrative Offences (“the CAO”). REMAINING COMPLAINTS 14.     Some applicants also raised other complaints under various Articles of the Convention. 15.     Firstly, the Court considers that, in view of its findings in paragraphs   11 and 13 above, there is no need to deal separately with the remaining complaints raised by some applicants under Article 5 of the Convention with regard to their alleged deprivation of liberty and Article 6 of the Convention concerning other aspects of the fairness of the administrative-offence proceedings. 16.     Furthermore, the Court has 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. 17.     It follows that this part of the applications must be rejected in accordance with Article   35   §   4 of the Convention. APPLICATION OF ARTICLE 41 OF THE CONVENTION 18.     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.” 19.     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, Decides to join the applications; Holds that it has jurisdiction to deal with the applicants’ complaints as they relate to facts that took place before 16 September 2022; Declares the complaints under Article 11 of the Convention and the other complaints under well-established case-law of the Court, as set out in the appended table, admissible,   finds that there is no need to examine separately the remaining complaints under Articles 5 and 6 of the Convention and declares the remainder of the applications inadmissible; Holds that these complaints disclose a breach of Article   11 of the Convention; Holds that there has been a violation of the Convention as regards the other complaints raised under the 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 27 April 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 Location   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]     11042/19 06/02/2019 Vitaliy Gennadyevich KARPOV 1989 Pomazuyev Aleksandr Yevgenyevich Vilnius St Petersburg     Article 20.2 § 6.1 of CAO fine of RUB 10,000 St Petersburg City Court 09/10/2018 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty –detention at the police station in excess of three hours after the administrative offence report was compiled; arrested at 6.40 p.m. on 09/09/2018, detention recorded at 7 p.m., released at 10.07 a.m. on 10/09/2018;   Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings under Article 20.2 § 6.1 of CAO. 4,000     12551/19 21/02/2019 Yelena Aeksandrovna GUSEVA 1967 Zhdanov Ivan Yuryevich Vilnius St Petersburg     Article 20.2 § 6.1 of CAO fine of RUB 10,000 St Petersburg City Court 11/10/2018 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty –detention at the police station in excess of three hours after the administrative offence report was compiled: arrested at 6.50 p.m. on 09/09/2018, detention recorded at 7 p.m., released at 10.40 a.m. on 10/09/2018;   Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings under Article 20.2 § 6.1 of CAO. 4,000     13234/19 21/02/2019 Sergey Viktorovich MOSALEV 1957 Zhdanov Ivan Yuryevich Vilnius Ufa     Article 20.2 § 5 of CAO fine of RUB 10,000 Supreme Court of the Bashkortostan Republic 08/10/2018 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty – arrest and escorting to the police station on 09/09/2018 for the sole purpose of compiling an administrative offence report;   Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings under Article 20.2 § 5 of CAO. 4,000     13767/19 28/02/2019 Sergey Viktorovich BALDIN 1989 Zhdanov Ivan Yuryevich Vilnius St Petersburg     Article 20.2 § 6.1 of CAO fine of RUB 10,000 St Petersburg City Court 11/10/2018 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty –detention at the police station in excess of three hours after the administrative offence report was compiled: arrested at 6.09 p.m. on 09/09/2018, brought to police station at 8.50 p.m., released at unknown time on 10/09/2018;   Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings under Article 20.2 § 6.1 of CAO. 4,000     14717/19 04/03/2019 Andrey Konstantinovich PYSTOGOV 1996 Pomazuyev Aleksandr Yevgenyevich Vilnius Perm     Article 20.2 § 6.1 of CAO community work of 80 hours Perm Regional Court 12/10/2018 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty –detention at the police station in excess of three hours after the administrative offence report was compiled: arrested at 5.20 p.m. on 09/09/2018, brought to police station at 8.05 p.m., released at 12.45 p.m. on 11/09/2018;   Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings under Article 20.2 § 6.1 of CAO. 4,000     14935/19 28/02/2019 Antonina Nikolayevna ANUSHINA 1981 Pomazuyev Aleksandr Yevgenyevich Vilnius St Petersburg     Article 20.2 § 6.1 of CAO detention of 2 days St Petersburg City Court 11/10/2018 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty –detention at the police station in excess of three hours after the administrative offence report was compiled: arrested at 6 p.m. on 09/09/2018, brought to police station at 7.45 p.m., released at 10 a.m. on 11/09/2018;   Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings under Article 20.2 § 6.1 of CAO. 5,000     15041/19 04/03/2019 Dmitriy Vyongovich NGUYEN 1998 Zhdanov Ivan Yuryevich Vilnius St Petersburg     Article 20.2 § 6.1 of CAO fine of RUB 10,000 St Petersburg City Court 16/10/2018 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty –detention at the police station in excess of three hours after the administrative offence report was compiled: arrested at 5.45 p.m. on 09/09/2018, brought to a police station at 6.10 p.m., released at 10.07 a.m. on 10/09/2018;   Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings under Article 20.2 § 6.1 of CAO. 4,000     15092/19 06/03/2019 Vasiliy Mikhaylovich DANILOV 1989 Pomazuyev Aleksandr Yevgenyevich Vilnius Tver     Article 20.2 § 6.1 of CAO fine of RUB 15,000 Tver Regional Court 17/10/2018 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty –arrest, escorting to and detention at the police station in excess of three hours after the administrative offence report was compiled: arrested and brought to police station at 3 p.m. on 09/09/2018, released at 1.00 a.m. on 10/09/2018;   Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings under Article 20.2 § 6.1 of CAO. 4,000     15403/19 11/03/2019 Ivan Konstantinovich SABREKOV 2000 Pomazuyev Aleksandr Yevgenyevich Vilnius Perm     Article 20.2 § 6.1 of CAO community work of 50 hours Perm Regional Court 22/10/2018 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty –detention at the police station in excess of three hours after the administrative offence report was compiled: arrested at 5.20 p.m. on 09/09/2018, brought to police station at 8.55 p.m., released at 3 p.m. on 11/09/2018;   Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings under Article 20.2 § 6.1 of CAO. 4,000   15666/19 04/03/2019 Kirill Aleksandrovich STRIKHA 1998 Zhdanov Ivan Yuryevich Vilnius St Petersburg     Article 20.2 § 6.1 of CAO detention of 5 days St Petersburg City Court 16/10/2018 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty –detention at the police station in excess of three hours after the administrative offence report was compiled: arrested at 5.30 p.m. on 09/09/2018, brought to police station at 10.40 p.m., released at 10.25 a.m. on 10/09/2018;   Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings under Article 20.2 § 6.1 of CAO. 5,000   16054/19 11/03/2019 Aleksandr Konstantinovich SABREKOV 1997 Pomazuyev Aleksandr Yevgenyevich Vilnius Perm     Article 20.2 § 6.1 of CAO community work of 60 days Perm Regional Court 23/10/2018 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty –detention at the police station in excess of three hours after the administrative offence report was compiled: arrested at 5.20 p.m. on 09/09/2018, brought to police station at 8.25 p.m., released at 3 p.m. on 11/09/2018;   Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings under Article 20.2 § 6.1 of CAO. 4,000   17020/19 15/03/2019 Yevgeniy Aleksandrovich PROSKURIN 1988 Zhdanov Ivan Yuryevich Vilnius Lipetsk     Article 20.2 § 2 of CAO fine of RUB 10,000 Lipetsk Regional Court 18/10/2018 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty – arrest and escorting to the police station on 09/09/2018 for the sole purpose of compiling an administrative offence report;   Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings under Article 20.2 § 2 of CAO. 4,000   18965/19 11/03/2019 Konstantin Nasyrovich SABREKOV 1964 Pomazuyev Aleksandr Yevgenyevich Vilnius Perm     Article 20.2 § 6.1 of CAO community work of 20 hours Perm Regional Court 24/10/2018 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty –detention at the police station in excess of three hours after the administrative offence report was compiled: arrested at 5.20 p.m. on 09/09/2018, brought to a police station at 8.20 p.m., released at 3 p.m. on 11/09/2018;   Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings under Article 20.2 § 6.1 of CAO. 4,000   19087/19 13/03/2019 Dmitriy Anatolyevich KULYASOV 1990 Zhdanov Ivan Yuryevich Vilnius Lipetsk     Article 20.2 § 5 of CAO fine of RUB 10,000 Lipetsk Regional Court 18/10/2018 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty – arrest and escorting to the police station on 09/09/2018 for the sole purpose of compiling an administrative offence report;   Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings under Article 20.2 § 5 of CAO. 4,000     19617/19 02/04/2019 Mikhail Pavlovich STRIKHAR 1969 Pomazuyev Aleksandr Yevgenyevich Vilnius Yekaterinburg     Article 20.2 § 5 of CAO fine of RUB 10,000 Sverdlovsk Regional Court 15/01/2019 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty – arrest and escorting to the police station on 09/09/2018 for the sole purpose of compiling an administrative offence report; detention in excess of three hours: arrested and brought to police station at 4 p.m. on 09/09/2018, released at 8.50 p.m. according to the Government or at 12.30 a.m. on 10/09/2018 according to the applicant;   Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings under Article 20.2 § 5 of CAO. 4,000   19724/19 01/04/2019 Marina Valeryevna KUNAKH 1971 Pomazuyev Aleksandr Yevgenyevich Vilnius St Petersburg     Article 20.2 § 5 of CAO fine of RUB 10,000 St Petersburg City Court 14/02/2019 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty –detention at the police station in excess of three hours after the administrative offence report was compiled: arrested at 2 p.m. on 09/09/2018, brought to a police station at 3 p.m., released at 11.17 p.m.;   Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings under Article 20.2 § 5 of CAO. 4,000   19792/19 01/04/2019 Viktor Viktorovich SANZHENAKOV 1974 Pomazuyev Aleksandr Yevgenyevich Vilnius Samara     Article 20.2 § 5 of CAO fine of RUB 10,000 Samara Regional Court 20/12/2018 Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings under Article 20.2 § 5 of CAO. 3,500   19845/19 02/04/2019 Darya Sergeyevna PLESHAKOVA 1984 Pomazuyev Aleksandr Yevgenyevich Vilnius Khabarovsk     Article 20.2 § 5 of CAO fine of RUB 10,000 Khabarovsk Regional Court 23/11/2018 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty – arrest and escorting to the police station on 09/09/2018 for the sole purpose of compiling an administrative offence report;   Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings under Article 20.2 § 5 of CAO. 4,000   19851/19 02/04/2019 Mariya Aleksandrovna SEMENYUK 1986 Pomazuyev Aleksandr Yevgenyevich Vilnius Ekaterinburg     Article 20.2 § 5 of CAO fine of RUB 10,000 Sverdlovsk Regional Court 12/12/2018 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty – arrest and escorting to the police station on 09/09/2018 for the sole purpose of compiling an administrative offence report;   Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings under Article 20.2 § 5 of CAO. 4,000   19893/19 01/04/2019 Yelena Mikhaylovna KUPRIYANOVA 1991 Pomazuyev Aleksandr Yevgenyevich Vilnius St Petersburg     Article 20.2 § 6.1 of CAO fine of RUB 10,000 St Petersburg City Court 20/12/2018 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty –detention at the police station in excess of three hours after the administrative offence report was compiled: arrested at 6.27 p.m. on 09/09/2018, brought to police station at 7 p.m., released in the morning on 10/09/2018 as alleged by the applicant;   Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings under Article 20.2 § 6.1 of CAO. 4,000   19944/19 02/04/2019 Dmitriy Viktorovich SEMENYUK 1992 Pomazuyev Aleksandr Yevgenyevich Vilnius Yekaterinburg     Article 20.2 § 5 of CAO fine of RUB 10,000 Sverdlovsk Regional Court 25/12/2018 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty – arrest and escorting to the police station on 09/09/2018 for the sole purpose of compiling an administrative offence report;   Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings under Article 20.2 § 5 of CAO. 4,000   19958/19 02/04/2018 Sergey Anatolyevich ZAYTSEV 1964 Zhdanov Ivan Yuryevich Vilnius St Petersburg     Article 20.2 § 6.1 of CAO fine of RUB 10,000 St Petersburg City Court 25/10/2018 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty –detention at the police station in excess of three hours after the administrative offence report was compiled: arrested at 5.20 p.m. on 09/09/2018, brought to the police station at 7 p.m., released late in the evening on that day;   Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings under Article 20.2 § 6.1 of CAO. 4,000   19999/19 01/04/2019 Anna Vladimirovna BALDINA 1991 Zhdanov Ivan Yuryevich Vilnius St Petersburg     Article 20.2 § 6.1 of CAO fine of RUB 10,000 St Petersburg City Court 15/11/2018 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty –detention at the police station in excess of three hours after the administrative offence report was compiled: arrested at 6.03 p.m. on 09/09/2018, brought to a police station at 8.50 p.m., released at 2.45 p.m. on 10/09/2018;   Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings under Article 20.2 § 6.1 of CAO. 4,000   20002/19 02/04/2019 Ivan Nikolayevich VOLKOV 1984 Pomazuyev Aleksandr Yevgenyevich Vilnius Yekaterinburg     Article 20.2 § 5 of CAO fine of RUB 10,000 Sverdlovsk Regional Court 25/12/2018 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty – arrest and escorting to the police station on 09/09/2018 for the sole purpose of compiling an administrative offence report;   Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings under Article 20.2 § 5 of CAO. 4,000   20029/19 01/04/2019 Ivan Vladimirovich KOCHKIN 1989 Pomazuyev Aleksandr Yevgenyevich Vilnius Perm     Article 20.2 § 5 of CAO fine of RUB 10,000 Perm Regional Court 08/11/2018 Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings under Article 20.2 § 5 of CAO. 3,500   20075/19 01/04/2019 Yevgeniy Valeryevich SVETLOV 1980 Zhdanov Ivan Yuryevich Vilnius Belgorod     Article 20.2 § 5 of CAO community work of 40 hours Belgorod Regional Court 29/10/2018 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty – arrest and escorting to the police station on 09/09/2018 for the sole purpose of compiling an administrative offence report;   Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings under Article   20.2 § 5 of CAO. 4,000   20118/19 01/04/2019 Vadim Borisovich LIVSHITS 1968 Zhdanov Ivan Yuryevich Vilnius Yekaterinburg     Article 20.2 § 5 of CAO fine of RUB 10,000 Sverdlovsk Regional Court 07/11/2018     Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty – arrest and escorting to the police station on 09/09/2018 for the sole purpose of compiling an administrative offence report;   Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings under Article   20.2 § 5 of CAO. 4,000   20163/19 05/04/2019 Dmitriy Vyacheslavovich CHIRMAN 1992 Pomazuyev Aleksandr Yevgenyevich Vilnius Murmansk     Article 20.2 § 5 of CAO fine of RUB 10,000 Murmansk Regional Court 19/11/2018 Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings under Article   20.2 § 5 of CAO. 3,500   20257/19 01/04/2019 Vasiliy Mikhaylovich PAVLOV 1994 Zhdanov Ivan Yuryevich Vilnius Belgorod     Article 20.2 § 5 of CAO community work of 40 hours Belgorod Regional Court 29/10/2018 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty – arrest and escorting to the police station on 09/09/2018 for the sole purpose of compiling an administrative offence report;   Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings under Article 20.2 § 5 of CAO. 4,000   20292/19 01/04/2019 Natalya Vyacheslavovna NIKIFOROVA 1970 Pomazuyev Aleksandr Yevgenyevich Vilnius Yekaterinburg     Article 20.2 § 5 of CAO   fine of RUB 10,000 Sverdlovsk Regional Court 12/12/2018 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty – arrest and escorting to the police station on 09/09/2018 for the sole purpose of compiling an administrative offence report;   Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings under Article 20.2 § 5 of CAO. 4,000   20317/19 02/04/2019 Mariya Nikolayevna KAYGORODOVA 1995 Zhdanov Ivan Yuryevich Vilnius St Petersburg     Article 20.2 § 6.1 of CAO fine of RUB 15,000 St Petersburg City Court 29/11/2018 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty –detention at the police station in excess of three hours after the administrative offence report was compiled: arrested at 5.15 p.m. on 09/09/2018, brought to a police station at midnight on 10/09/2018 and released at 8 a.m. that day (according to the Government) or after 5 p.m. (according to the applicant);   Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings under Article 20.2 § 6.1 of CAO. 4,000   20439/19 02/04/2019 Pavel Borisovich TUDVASEV 1964 Pomazuyev Aleksandr Yevgenyevich Vilnius Perm     Article 20.2 § 6.1 of CAO community work of 20 hours Perm Regional Court 16/01/2019 Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings under Article 20.2 § 6.1 of CAO. 3,500   20606/19 01/04/2019 Yuliya Aleksandrovna ZAYTSEVA 1969 Zhdanov Ivan Yuryevich Vilnius St Petersburg     Article 20.2 § 6.1 of CAO fine of RUB 10,000 St Petersburg City Court 25/10/2018 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty –detention at the police station in excess of three hours after the administrative offence report was compiled: arrested at 3.30 p.m. on 09/09/2018, brought to the police station at 5 p.m. and released at 8.20 a.m. on 10/09/2018 (according to the Government);   Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings under Article 20.2 § 6.1 of CAO. 4,000   20615/19 01/04/2019 Kirill Pavlovich FABRITSIYEV 1988 Zhdanov Ivan Yuryevich Vilnius Volgograd     Article 20.2 § 5 of CAO fine of RUB 10,000 Volgograd Regional Court 25/10/2018 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty – arrest and escorting to the police station on 09/09/2018 for the sole purpose of compiling an administrative offence report;   Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings under Article 20.2 § 5 of CAO. 4,000   20621/19 01/04/2019 Albert Eduardovich MKHITARYAN 1995 Zhdanov Ivan Yuryevich Vilnius Tyumen     Article 20.2 § 1 of CAO fine of RUB 18,000 Tyumen Regional Court 24/10/2018 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty – arrest and escorting to the police station on 09/09/2018 for the sole purpose of compiling an administrative offence report;   Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings under Article 20.2 § 1 of CAO. 4,000   20626/19 01/04/2019 Aleksey Aleksandrovich KUPRIYANOV 1991 Pomazuyev Aleksandr Yevgenyevich Vilnius St Petersburg     Article 20.2 § 6.1 of CAO detention of 7 days St Petersburg City Court 08/11/2018 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty –detention at the police station in excess of three hours after the administrative offence report was compiled: arrested at 6.05 p.m. on 09/09/2018, brought to police station at 8.50 p.m. and released at 9.50 a.m. on 11/09/2018 (according to the Government);   Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings under Article 20.2 § 6.1 of CAO. 5,000   20911/19 01/04/2019 Olga Viktorovna BALASHOVA 1970 Pomazuyev Aleksandr Yevgenyevich Vilnius St Petersburg     Article 20.2 § 6.1 of CAO fine of RUB 10,000 St Petersburg City Court 11/10/2018 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty –detention at the police station in excess of three hours after the administrative offence report was compiled: arrested between 5.20 p.m. and 6.10 p.m. on 09/09/2018, brought to the police station at 6.50 p.m. and released at 11.30 a.m. on 10/09/2018 (according to the Government);   Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings under Article 20.2 § 6.1 of CAO. 4,000   21103/19 02/04/2019 Ivan Vladimirovich ZHELEZKIN 1986 Pomazuyev Aleksandr Yevgenyevich Vilnius Yekaterinburg     Article 20.2 § 5 of CAO fine of RUB 10,000 Sverdlovsk Regional Court 21/11/2018 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty – arrest and escorting to the police station on 09/09/2018 for the sole purpose of compiling an administrative offence report;   Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings under Article 20.2 § 5 of CAO. 4,000   21108/19 02/04/2019 Andrey Anatolyevich PUZATKIN 1986 Pomazuyev Aleksandr Yevgenyevich Vilnius Yekaterinburg     Article 20.2 § 5 of CAO fine of RUB 10,000 Sverdlovsk Regional Court 30/01/2019 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty – arrest and escorting to the police station on 09/09/2018 for the sole purpose of compiling an administrative offence report; detention in excess of three hours: arrested at 4.15 p.m. on 09/09/2018, brought to the police station at 4.40 p.m. and released at 12.10 a.m. on 10/09/2018 (according to the Government);   Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings under Article 20.2 § 5 of CAO. 4,000   21177/19 01/04/2019 Vladimir Aleksandrovich TRIFANOV 1959 Pomazuyev Aleksandr Yevgenyevich Vilnius Yekaterinburg     Article 20.2 § 5 of CAO fine of RUB 10,000 Sverdlovsk Regional Court 19/02/2019 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty – arrest and escorting to the police station on 09/09/2018 for the sole purpose of compiling an administrative offence report; detention in excess of three hours: arrested and brought to the police station at 4.40 p.m. on 09/09/2018, released after 12.30 a.m. on 10/09/2018;   Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings under Article 20.2 § 5 of CAO. 4,000   22409/19 02/04/2019 Stepan Alekseyevich VASILYEV 1994 Pomazuyev Aleksandr Yevgenyevich Vilnius Yekaterinburg     Article 20.2 § 5 of CAO fine of RUB 10,000 Sverdlovsk Regional Court 15/01/2019 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty – arrest and escorting to the police station on 09/09/2018 for the sole purpose of compiling an administrative offence report; detention in excess of three hours: arrested at 4 p.m. on 09/09/2018, brought to the police station at 4.40 p.m., released after 12.30 a.m. on 10/09/2018;   Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings under Article 20.2 § 5 of CAO. 4,000   25483/19 30/04/2019 Galina Dmitriyevna GLAVURDICH 1967 Pomazuyev Aleksandr Yevgenyevich Vilnius Magnitogorsk     Article 20.2 § 5 of CAO fine of RUB 10,000 Chelyabinsk Regional Court 01/11/2018 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty – arrest and escorting to the police station on 09/09/2018 for the sole purpose of compiling an administrative offence report;   Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings under Article 20.2 § 5 of CAO. 4,000   26475/19 08/05/2019 Svyatoslav Sergeyevich ALEKSEYEV 1998 Zhdanov Ivan Yuryevich Vilnius Yekaterinburg     Article 20.2 § 5 of CAO fine of RUB 10,000 Sverdlovsk Regional Court 21/11/2018 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty – arrest and escorting to the police station on 09/09/2018 for the sole purpose of compiling an administrative offence report;   Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings under Article 20.2 § 5 of CAO. 4,000   26946/19 08/05/2019 Dmitriy Alekseyevich SEMENKOV 1998 Pomazuyev Aleksandr Yevgenyevich Vilnius Murmansk     Article 20.2 § 8 of CAO fine of RUB 150,000 Murmansk Regional Court 06/12/2018 Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings under Article 20.2 § 8 of CAO. 5,000   27967/19 16/05/2019 Marina-Viktoriya Igorevna ARISTOVA 2000 Pomazuyev Aleksandr Yevgenyevich Vilnius Murmansk     Article 20.2 § 5 of CAO fine of RUB 10,000 Murmansk Regional Court 05/12/2018 Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings under Article 20.2 § 5 of CAO. 3,500   29241/19 21/05/2019 Danyel Sergeyevich VEBER 1997 Pomazuyev Aleksandr Yevgenyevich Vilnius Yekaterinburg     Article 20.2 § 5 of CAO fine of RUB 10,000 Sverdlovsk Regional Court 22/11/2018 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty – arrest and escorting to the police station on 09/09/2018 for the sole purpose of compiling an administrative offence report; detention in excess of three hours: arrested at 2.30 p.m. on 09/09/2018, brought to the police station at 3.20 p.m., released after 12 a.m. on 10/09/2018;   Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings under Article 20.2 § 5 of CAO. 4,000   29268/19 06/05/2019 Anna Aleksandrovna KULIKOVA 1977 Pomazuyev Aleksandr Yevgenyevich Vilnius Murmansk     Article 20.2 § 5 of CAO fine of RUB 10,000 Murmansk Regional Court 21/11/2018 Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings under Article 20.2 § 5 of CAO. 3,500   29929/19 24/05/2019 Aleksandr Anatolyevich KULAKOV 1983 Pomazuyev Aleksandr Yevgenyevich Vilnius Yekaterinburg     Article 20.2 § 5 of CAO fine of RUB 10,000 Sverdlovsk Regional Court 18/12/2018 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty – arrest and escorting to the police station on 09/09/2018 for the sole purpose of compiling an administrative offence report; detention in excess of three hours: arrested at 4.20 p.m. on 09/09/2018, brought to the police station at 4.40 p.m., released at 9.49 p.m.;   Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings under Article 20.2 § 5 of CAO. 4,000   30043/19 25/05/2019 Timur Alfredovich VALIULLIN 2001 Pomazuyev Aleksandr Yevgenyevich Vilnius Khabarovsk     Article 20.2 § 5 of CAO fine of RUB 10,000 Khabarovsk Regional Court 26/12/2018 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty – arrest and escorting to the police station on 09/09/2018 for the sole purpose of compiling an administrative offence report;   Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings under Article 20.2 § 5 of CAO. 4,000   33304/19 10/06/2019 Vadim Yevgenyevich PEKHOV 1979 Pomazuyev Aleksandr Yevgenyevich Vilnius Yekaterinburg     Article 20.2 § 5 of CAO fine of RUB 10,000 Sverdlovsk Region Court 16/01/2019 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty – arrest and escorting to the police station on 09/09/2018 for the sole purpose of compiling an administrative offence report; detention in excess of three hours: arrested at 4   p.m. on 09/09/2018, brought to the police station at 4.20 p.m., released after 1.15 a.m. on 10/09/2018;   Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings under Article 20.2 § 5 of CAO. 4,000   [1] Plus any tax that may be chargeable to the applicants.