CEDH · CASELAW;JUDGMENTS;COMMITTEE;ENG — 9 novembre 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 } .sD9DA4929 { margin-top:72pt; 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 } .s10950C61 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify } .s82B4DA5F { page-break-before:right; clear:both; mso-break-type:section-break } .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 } .sD11CFAB7 { margin-top:14pt; margin-left:15.01pt; margin-bottom:3pt; text-align:justify; padding-left:1.99pt; font-family:Arial } .sFBC99493 { font-style:italic } .sD58C010 { margin-top:14pt; margin-left:15.01pt; margin-bottom:3pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; padding-left:1.99pt; font-family:Arial } .sBB6E85D0 { margin-top:0pt; margin-left:34pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:-17pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .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 } .s3DF5EF88 { width:128.75pt; 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 } .s5FFF0A7E { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:8pt } .sF6A12959 { width:33%; height:1px; text-align:left } .sA4BC3E2E { font-family:Arial; font-size:5.33pt; vertical-align:super; color:#000000 }       THIRD SECTION CASE OF SARANCHUK AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA (Applications nos. 15326/19 and 24 others – see appended list)         JUDGMENT   STRASBOURG 9 November 2023         This judgment is final but it may be subject to editorial revision.   In the case of Saranchuk and Others v. Russia, The European Court of Human Rights (Third Section), sitting as a Committee composed of:   Peeter Roosma , President ,   Ioannis Ktistakis,   Andreas Zünd , judges , and Viktoriya Maradudina, Acting Deputy Section Registrar, Having deliberated in private on 19 October 2023, Delivers the following judgment, which was adopted on that date: PROCEDURE 1.     The case originated in applications against Russia lodged with the Court under Article   34 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (“the Convention”) on the various dates indicated in the appended table. 2.     The Russian Government (“the   Government”) were given notice of the applications. THE FACTS 3.     The list of applicants and the relevant details of the applications are set out in the appended table. 4.     The applicants complained of the disproportionate measures taken against them as organisers or participants of public assemblies. They also raised other complaints under the provisions of the Convention. THE LAW 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 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 and its Protocols, given the relevant well-established case-law of the Court (see appended table). These complaints are not manifestly ill-founded within the meaning of Article 35 § 3 (a) of the Convention, nor are they inadmissible on any other ground. Accordingly, they must be declared admissible. 13.     Having examined all the material before it, the Court concludes that these complaints also disclose violations of the Convention and its Protocols in the light of its findings in Butkevich v. Russia , no.   5865/07, §§   63-65, 13   February 2018, Tsvetkova and Others v. Russia , nos.   54381/08 and 5   others, §§ 115-31, 10 April 2018, and Korneyeva v.   Russia , no.   72051/17, §§ 34-36, 8 October 2019, as to various aspects of unlawful deprivation of liberty of organisers or participants of public assemblies; Karelin v. Russia , no. 926/08, §§ 58-85, 20 September 2016, concerning the absence of a prosecuting party in the proceedings under the Code of Administrative Offences (the CAO); Elvira Dmitriyeva v. Russia , nos. 60921/17 and 7202/18, §§ 77-90, 30 April 2019, concerning administrative convictions for making calls to participate in public events; Karuyev v. Russia , no. 4161/13, §§ 15-26, 18 January 2022, concerning interference in the applicant’s freedom of expression in a form of administrative conviction for petty hooliganism without specific offence elements; Martynyuk v.   Russia , no.   13764/15, §§ 38-42, 8 October 2019, and Tsvetkova and Others , cited above, §§ 178-88, related to the lack of suspensive effect of an appeal against the sentence of administrative detention. REMAINING COMPLAINTS 14.     Some applicants raised further additional complaints under Article 6 of the Convention concerning the fairness of the administrative-offence proceedings. In view of the findings in paragraphs above, the Court considers that there is no need to deal separately with these remaining complaints. APPLICATION OF ARTICLE 41 OF THE CONVENTION 15.     Regard being had to the documents in its possession and to its case ‑ law (see in particular Navalnyy and Others v. Russia [Committee], nos.   25809/17 and 14 others, §   22, 4   October 2022), the Court finds it reasonable to award the sums indicated in the appended table. FOR THESE REASONS, THE COURT, UNANIMOUSLY, Decides to join the applications; Holds that it has jurisdiction to deal with these applications 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, and finds that there is no need to examine separately the remaining complaints under Article 6 of the Convention; Holds that there has been a breach of Article   11 of the Convention; 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); 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 9 November 2023, pursuant to Rule   77   §§   2 and   3 of the Rules of Court.     Viktoriya Maradudina   Peeter Roosma   Acting Deputy Registrar   President     APPENDIX List of applications raising complaints under Article 11 of the Convention (disproportionate measures against organisers and participants of public assemblies) No. Application no. Date of introduction Applicant’s name Year of birth   Representative’s name and location Name of the public event Location Date Administrative charges Penalty Final domestic decision Court Name Date Other complaints under well-established case-law Amount awarded for pecuniary and non-pecuniary damage and costs and expenses (in euros) [1]     15326/19 11/03/2019 Irina Vladimirovna SARANCHUK 1990 Ivanets Vyacheslav Sergeyevich Tbilisi, Georgia Rally in support of Mr A. Navalnyy     Irkutsk   10/10/2020       Political rally   Irkutsk   04/05/2018 article 20.2 § 5 of CAO                 Article 20.2 § 6 of CAO fine of RUB   11,000                 fine of RUB   10,000 Irkutsk Regional Court 03/03/2021             Irkutsk Regional Court 28/11/2018 Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in all sets of the administrative-offence proceedings – final decisions: Irkutsk Regional Court, 03/03/2021 and 28/11/2018 4,000     20684/19 02/04/2019 Aleksey Aleksandrovich LAVRINENKOV 1982 Glukhov Aleksey Vladimirovich Novocheboksarsk Rally against the pension reform   Smolensk   01/07/2018 article 20.2 § 2 of CAO fine of RUB   10,000 Smolensk Regional Court 03/10/2018 Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in all sets of the administrative-offence proceedings – final decisions: Smolensk Regional Court, 03/10/2018 and 10/10/2018;   Art. 10 (1) - conviction for making calls to participate in public events - conviction for an administrative offence for calling on the public to participate in an unauthorised public event (rally against the pension reform on 09/09/2018), art. 20.2 § 8 of the CAO, administrative detention of one day. Final decision: Smolensk Regional Court, 10/10/2018   4,000     28028/19 14/05/2019 Nataliya Mikhaylovna SAVOSKINA 1980 Kiselyov Roman Denisovich Moscow Rally in support of Mr O. Sentsov   Moscow   18/06/2018     Rally in support of Mr A. Navalnyy   Moscow   31/01/2021 article 20.2 § 5 of CAO             article 20.2 § 5 of CAO fine of RUB   15,000             fine of RUB   10,000 Moscow City Court 14/11/2018           Moscow City Court 11/05/2021 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty: - escorting to a police station for the purpose of drawing up a record of administrative offence; from 5.00 p.m. to 7.20 p.m. on 18/06/2018, - escorting to a police station for the purpose of drawing up a record of administrative offence and detention in excess of 3 hours and without “exceptional circumstances”, from 2.20 p.m. to 7.50 p.m. on 31/01/2021;   Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in all sets of the administrative-offence proceedings – final decisions: Moscow City Court, 14/11/2018 and 11/05/2021 5,000     28491/19 16/05/2019 Olga Igorevna KUZNETSOVA 1962 Pomazuyev Aleksandr Yevgenyevich Vilnius “Hybrid” rally against the pension reform   Arkhangelsk   09/09/2018           Rally in support of Mr A. Navalnyy   Arkhangelsk   23/01/2021 article 20.2 § 5 of CAO                     article 20.2 § 2 of CAO, article 20.2 § 5 of CAO two fines of RUB   14,000 and 15,000 respectively                 two fines of RUB   25,000 and 15,000 respectively Arkhangelsk Regional Court, 20/11/2018 and 29/01/2019             Arkhangelsk regional Court, 12/03/2021 and 03/06/2021 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty: escorting to a police station for the purpose of drawing up a record of administrative offence; detention in excess of 3 hours and without “exceptional circumstances”: - from 2.30 p.m. on 23/01/2021 to 24/01/2021, the hearing in the applicant’s administrative offence case, - unrecorded escorting on 21/04/2021;   Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in all sets of the administrative-offence proceedings – final decisions: Arkhangelsk Regional Court, 20/11/2018, 29/01/2019 12/03/2021 and 03/06/2021   5,000     30007/19 18/05/2019 Dmitriy Germanovich GUSEV 1976 Grachev Anton Sergeyevich Gatchina Rally in support of the accused in "Novoye Velichiye" and "Set" criminal cases   St Petersburg   28/10/2018 Article 20.2.2 §   1 of CAO fine of RUB   10,000 St Petersburg City Court 13/12/2018 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty: 1) escorting to a police station for the purpose of drawing up a record of administrative offence; detention in excess of 3 hours and without “exceptional circumstances”: - from 2.40 p.m. on 28/10/2018 to 29/10/2018, - from 9.13 p.m. on 06/08/2019 to 7.00 p.m. on 08/08/2019. Both times, the applicant was detained until the hearings in his administrative-offence case;   2) unlawful escorting to a police station for the purpose of drawing up a record of administrative offence on 23/01/2021;   Art. 10 (1) - various restrictions on the right to freedom of expression - on 03/08/2019 the applicant pronounced a speech during an authorised public rally for fair elections in St Petersburg. On 06/08/2019 he was arrested and escorted to a police station where he was charged with an administrative offence under art. 20.1 § 1 of the CAO (petty hooliganism) for having used a swearword in his speech in respect of Mr Putin. He was further convicted for administrative offence and sentenced to a 10-day administrative detention. Final decision: St   Petersburg City Court, 14/08/2019;   Art. 10 (1) - conviction for making calls to participate in public events - conviction under art. 20.2 § 2 of the CAO, administrative detention of 8 days for calling on the public to participate in an unauthorised public event scheduled for 23/01/2021 in support to Mr A Navalnyy. Final decision: St   Petersburg City Court, 04/03/2021   5,000     37292/19 24/06/2019 Yegor Mikhaylovich KARASEV 1998 Zakhvatov Dmitriy Igorevich Moscow Rally against isolation of Russian internet   Moscow   10/03/2019     Rally in support of Mr A. Navalnyy   Moscow   02/02/2021 article 20.2 § 5 of CAO               article 20.2 § 5 of CAO fine of RUB   10,000               fine of RUB   15,000 Moscow City Court 18/04/2019             Moscow City Court 03/06/2021 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty: escorting to a police station for the purpose of drawing up a record of administrative offence; detention in excess of 3 hours and without “exceptional circumstances”: - from 12.30 p.m. to 6.00 p.m. on 10/03/2019, - from 11.50 p.m. on 02/02/2021 to 8.30 a.m. on 03/02/2021;   Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings – final decision: Moscow City Court, 18/04/2019 5,000     39338/19 12/07/2019 Ilya Vladimirovich KOROBKOV 1986     Rally against pension reform   Yekaterinburg   09/09/2018 Article 20.2 § 5 of CAO fine of RUB   15,000 Sverdlovsk Regional Court 16/01/2019 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty: escorting to a police station for the purpose of drawing up a record of administrative offence; detention in excess of 3 hours and without “exceptional circumstances”, from 5.20   p.m. on 09/09/2018 to 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 – final decision: Sverdlovsk Regional Court, 16/01/2019     5,000     42030/19 19/07/2019 Boris Vadimovich FEDYUKIN 1989 Pomazuyev Aleksandr Yevgenyevich Vilnius Rally against the pension reform   Samara   09/09/2018     March in support of Mr A. Navalnyy   Samara   21/04/2021 article 20.2 § 5 of CAO             article 20.2 § 5 of CAO fine of RUB   10,000             fine of RUB   10,000 Samara Regional Court 31/01/2019         Samara Regional Court 20/07/2021 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty, including unrecorded detention and detention without a judicial order and any other legal basis - escorting to a police station for the purpose of drawing up a record of administrative offence, on 08/11/2018 and on 26/04/2021;   Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in all sets of the administrative-offence proceedings – final decisions: Samara Regional Court, 31/01/2019 and 20/07/2021 5,000     42221/19 16/07/2019 Viktor Romanovich KAZANTSEV 2000 Vasin Vladimir Valeryevich Krasnoyarsk Rally against Mr   Putin’s re ‑ election as President   Krasnoyarsk   05/05/2018     Rally in support of Mr A. Navalnyy   Krasnoyarsk   31/01/2021 article 20.2 § 5 of CAO                 article 20.2 § 5 of CAO fine of RUB   10,000                 fine of RUB   20,000 Krasnoyarsk Regional Court 17/01/2019             Krasnoyarsk Regional Court 20/04/2021 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty: 1) escorting to a police station for the purpose of drawing up a record of administrative offence; detention in excess of 3 hours and without “exceptional circumstances”: - from 4.00 p.m. to 09.00 p.m. on 05/05/2018, while the said record was drawn up only on 15/05/2018, - from 1.20 p.m. to 10.55 p.m. on 31/01/2021, while the said record was drawn up only on 12/02/2021, 2) unlawful escorting to a police station for the purpose of drawing up a record of administrative offence on 23/01/2021;   Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in all sets of the administrative-offence proceedings – final decisions: Sverdlovsk Regional Court, 11/03/2021, and Krasnoyarsk Regional Court, 20/04/2021;   Art. 10 (1) - conviction for making calls to participate in public events - conviction under art. 20.2 § 2 of the CAO, fine of RUB   20,000 for calling on the public to participate in an unauthorised public event scheduled for 23/01/2021 in support to Mr   A.   Navalnyy. Final decision: Sverdlovsk Regional Court, 11/03/2021   5,000   42683/19 08/08/2019 Dmitriy Gennadyevich GUDKOV 1980 Bochilo Anna Yevgenyevna Barnaul Rally in support to fair elections to Mosgorduma   Moscow   14/07/2019     Rally in support of Mr A. Navalnyy   Moscow   23/01/2021 article 20.2 § 8 of CAO               article 20.2 § 5 of CAO administrative detention of 30 days             fine of RUB   10,000 Moscow City Court 01/08/2019             Moscow City Court 29/09/2021 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty, including unrecorded detention and detention without a judicial order and any other legal basis - escorting to a police station for the purpose of drawing up a record of administrative offence; detention in excess of 3 hours and without “exceptional circumstances”, - from 2.55 p.m. to 5.55 p.m. on 27/07/2019, - from 3.30 p.m. on 28/07/2019 to 5.13 p.m. on 30/07/2019, hearing in the applicant’s administrative-offence case;   Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in all sets of the administrative-offence proceedings – final decisions: Moscow City Court, 01/08/2019, 04/10/2019 and 29/09/2021;   Art. 10 (1) - conviction for making calls to participate in public events - conviction under art. 20.2 § 2 of the CAO, administrative detention of 10 days, for an administrative offence of calling on the public to participate in an unauthorised public event scheduled for 27/07/2019 for fair elections to Mosgorduma. Final decision: Moscow City Court, 04/10/2019       6,000   10059/21 16/02/2021 Maksim Ruslanovich KONYUKHOV 1990 Zboroshenko Nikolay Sergeyevich Mytishchi Rally in support of Mr A. Navalnyy   Moscow   31/01/2021 article 20.2 §   6.1 of CAO administrative detention of 15 days (partly exempted for health reasons by the Moscow City Court) Moscow City Court 05/02/2021 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty: escorting to a police station for the purpose of drawing up a record of administrative offence; detention in excess of 3 hours and without “exceptional circumstances”, from 31/01/2021 to 01/02/2021, hearing in the applicant’s administrative-offence case;   Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings – final decision: Moscow City Court, 05/02/2021   5,000   16344/21 08/03/2021 Nikita Alekseyevich DOBRYNIN 1993 Sirosh Fedor Yevgenyevich Moscow Political rally   Moscow   24/03/2020 article 20.2 § 5 of CAO fine of RUB   10,000 Moscow City Court 10/09/2020 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty, including unrecorded detention and detention without a judicial order and any other legal basis - unlawful deprivation of liberty: escorting to a police station for the purpose of drawing up a record of administrative offence; from 5.30 p.m. to 7.20 p.m. on 24/03/2020;   Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings – final decision: Moscow City Court, 10/09/2020   5,000   24360/21 17/04/2021 Yevgeniya Vladimirovna VAZHENINA 1987 Cherkasov Vitaliy Viktorovich St Petersburg Rally in support of the governor of the Khabarovsk Region, Mr   S.   Furgal   Khabarovsk   07/11/2020   Rally in support of the governor of the Khabarovsk Region, Mr   S.   Furgal   Khabarovsk   26/12/2020 article 20.2 § 8 of CAO                 article 20.2 § 8 of CAO administrative detention of 9   days               fine of RUB   150,000 Khabarovsk Regional Court 18/11/2020             Khabarovsk Regional Court 30/03/2021 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty, including unrecorded detention and detention without a judicial order and any other legal basis - escorting to a police station for the purpose of drawing up a record of administrative offence; detention in excess of 3 hours and without “exceptional circumstances”: - from 2.00 p.m. on 07/11/2020 to 10.00 a.m. on 09/11/2020, - from 1.00 p.m. on 15/02/2021 to 16/02/2021, the hearing in the applicant’s administrative offence case,   Prot. 7 Art. 2 - delayed review of conviction by a higher tribunal - the sentence of administrative detention imposed on the applicant by the court of first instance was executed immediately, on account of the lack of suspensive effect of an appeal under the CAO   6,000   25053/21 20/04/2021 Aleksandr Vasilyevich VASILYEV 1979 Bubon Konstantin Vladimirovich Khabarovsk Rally in support of the governor of the Khabarovsk Region, Mr   S.   Furgal   Khabarovsk   10/10/2020 article 20.2 § 8 of CAO administrative detention of 20 days Khabarovsk Regional Court 20/10/2020 Prot. 7 Art. 2 - delayed review of conviction by a higher tribunal - the sentence of administrative detention imposed on the applicant by the court of first instance was executed immediately, on account of the lack of suspensive effect of an appeal under the CAO 5,000   26915/21 08/05/2021 Mikhail Yevgenyevich PARFENYUK 1996 Ivanets Vyacheslav Sergeyevich Tbilisi Political rally   Irkutsk   23/01/2021 article 20.2 § 2 of CAO administrative detention of 10 days Irkutsk Regional Court 28/01/2021 Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings – final decision: Irkutsk regional Court, 28/01/2021               5,000   28225/21 30/04/2021 Yelizaveta Aleksandrovna KLEPIKOVA 2000 Memorial Human Rights Centre Moscow Rally in support of Mr A. Navalnyy   Moscow   23/01/2021 article 20.2 § 5 of CAO fine of RUB   13,000 Moscow City Court 11/02/2021 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty: escorting to a police station for the purpose of drawing up a record of administrative offence; detention in excess of 3 hours and without “exceptional circumstances”, from 4.00 p.m. to 11.30 p.m. on 23/01/2021;   Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings – final decision: Moscow City Court, 11/02/2021   5,000   28370/21 04/05/2021 Lada Sergeyevna SOKOLOVA 2021     Political rally   Moscow   29/05/2020 article 20.2 § 5 of CAO fine of RUB   15,000 Moscow City Court 06/11/2020 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty: escorting to a police station for the purpose of drawing up a record of administrative offence; detention there from 4.35 p.m. to 7.20 p.m. on 29/05/2020;   Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings – final decision: Moscow City Court, 06/11/2020   5,000   28581/21 02/06/2021 Syldys Aleksandrovich KHOMUSHKU 1984 Memorial Human Rights Centre Moscow Rally in support of Mr A. Navalnyy   Moscow   31/01/2021 article 20.2 § 5 of CAO fine of RUB   10,000 Moscow City Court 22/03/2021 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty: escorting to a police station for the purpose of drawing up a record of administrative offence; detention in excess of 3 hours and without “exceptional circumstances”, from 5.30 p.m. to 11.50 p.m. on 31/01/2021;   Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings – final decision: Moscow City Court, 22/03/2021       5,000   31621/21 07/06/2021 Yaroslav Ruslanovich MAYKOV 1990 Memorial Human Rights Centre Moscow Rally in support of Mr A. Navalnyy   Moscow   31/01/2021 article 20.2 § 5 of CAO fine of RUB   10,000 Moscow City Court 18/03/2021 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty: escorting to a police station for the purpose of drawing up a record of administrative offence; detention in excess of 3 hours and without “exceptional circumstances”, from 11.45 a.m. to 9.30 p.m. on 31/01/2021;   Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings – final decision: Moscow City Court, 18/03/2021   5,000   31684/21 07/06/2021 Nikolay Sergeyevich AGAPOV 1993 Memorial Human Rights Centre Moscow Rally in support of Mr A. Navalnyy   Moscow   23/01/2021 article 20.2 § 5 of CAO fine of RUB   15,000 Moscow City Court 20/04/2021 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty: escorting to a police station for the purpose of drawing up a record of administrative offence; detention in excess of 3 hours and without “exceptional circumstances”, from 8.25 p.m. on 23/01/2021 to 2.40 a.m. on 24/01/2021;   Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings – final decision: Moscow City Court, 20/04/2021   5,000   32175/21 11/06/2021 Dmitriy Andreyevich PEREGON 1999 Memorial Human Rights Centre Moscow Rally in support of Mr A Navalnyy   Vladivostok   31/01/2021 article 20.2 § 5 of CAO fine of RUB   15,000 Primorye Regional Court 13/04/2021 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty: escorting to a police station for the purpose of drawing up a record of administrative offence; detention in excess of 3 hours and without “exceptional circumstances”, from 3.50 p.m. on 31/01/2021 to 4.15 a.m. on 01/02/2021; the applicant spent more than 4   hours in the police van;   Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings – final decision: Primorye Regional Court, 13/04/2021   5,000   32607/21 29/05/2021 Yelena Sergeyvna BEREZHNAYA 1992 Sirosh Fedor Yevgenyevich Moscow Environmental rally   Moscow   16/08/2020 article 20.2 § 5 of CAO fine of RUB   15,000 Moscow City Court 30/11/2020 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty: escorting to a police station for the purpose of drawing up a record of administrative offence; detention in excess of 3 hours and without “exceptional circumstances”, from 6.25 p.m. to 9.25 p.m. on 16/08/2020;   Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings – final decision: Moscow City Court, 30/11/2020   5,000   32652/21 29/05/2021 Diana Yevgenyevna BORISEVICH 1997 Sirosh Fedor Yevgenyevich Moscow Environmental rally   Moscow   16/08/2020 article 20.2 § 5 of CAO fine of RUB   10,000 Moscow City Court 04/12/2020 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty: escorting to a police station for the purpose of drawing up a record of administrative offence; from 6.25   p.m. to 9.05 p.m. on 16/08/2020,   Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings – final decision: Moscow City Court, 04/12/2020 5,000   32654/21 29/05/2021 Aliya Makhmutovna GIZETDINOVA 1992 Sirosh Fedor Yevgenyevich Moscow Environmental rally   Moscow   16/08/2020 article 20.2 § 5 of CAO fine of RUB   10,000 Moscow City Court 04/12/2020 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty: escorting to a police station for the purpose of drawing up a record of administrative offence; detention in excess of 3 hours and without “exceptional circumstances”, from 6.25 p.m. to 9.25 p.m. on 16/08/2020;   Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings – final decision: Moscow City Court, 04/12/2020         5,000   52100/21 12/10/2021 Boris Leonidovich KROTOV 1971 Pershakova Yelena Yuryevna Moscow Rally in support of Mr A. Navalnyy   Moscow   02/02/2021 article 20.2 § 6.1 of CAO fine of RUB   20,000 Moscow City Court 12/04/2021 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty escorting to a police station for the purpose of drawing up a record of administrative offence; detention in excess of 3 hours and without “exceptional circumstances”, from 11.40   a.m. on 02/02/2021 to 03/02/2021, hearing in the applicant’s administrative-offence case;   Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings – final decision: Moscow City Court, 12/04/2021   5,000     [1] Plus any tax that may be chargeable to the applicants.