CEDH · CASELAW;JUDGMENTS;COMMITTEE;ENG — 23 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 } .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 } .s434D37A9 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s58699FB5 { margin-top:14pt; margin-bottom:12pt; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .s6B505E72 { margin:0pt; padding-left:0pt } .s29A3AC47 { margin-left:11.67pt; margin-bottom:12pt; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; padding-left:6.18pt; font-family:Arial; text-transform:uppercase } .s37072F3C { margin-top:14pt; margin-left:15pt; margin-bottom:12pt; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; padding-left:2.85pt; font-family:Arial; text-transform:uppercase } .s9A177BD5 { margin-top:14pt; margin-left:17.85pt; margin-bottom:12pt; 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 } .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 } .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 } .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 } .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 } .sC60B69EF { width:127.74pt; 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 } .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 }       FOURTH SECTION CASE OF BUZIN AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA (Applications nos. 65015/19 and 20 others – see appended list)             JUDGMENT   STRASBOURG 23 November 2023   This judgment is final but it may be subject to editorial revision. In the case of Buzin and Others v. Russia, The European Court of Human Rights (Fourth Section), sitting as a Committee composed of:   Branko Lubarda , President ,   Armen Harutyunyan,   Ana Maria Guerra Martins , judges , and Viktoriya Maradudina, Acting Deputy Section Registrar, Having deliberated in private on 2 November 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 lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of the prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings. Some applicants also raised other complaints under the provisions of the Convention and Protocols thereto. 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 6 § 1 of the Convention 7.     The applicants complained principally of the lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of the prosecuting party in administrative ‑ offence proceedings. They relied, expressly or in substance, on Article 6 § 1 of the Convention. 8.     In the leading case of Karelin v. Russia, no. 926/08, 20 September 2016, the Court already found a violation in respect of issues similar to those in the present case. 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 on the admissibility and merits of these complaints. 9.     These complaints are therefore admissible and disclose a breach of Article   6 § 1 of the Convention. OTHER ALLEGED VIOLATIONS UNDER WELL-ESTABLISHED CASE-LAW 10.     Some applicants submitted other complaints which also raised issues under the Convention and the Protocols thereto, 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 and the Protocols thereto 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; Korneyeva v.   Russia , no.   72051/17, §§   34-36, 8 October 2019; and Teslenko and Others v. Russia , nos. 49588/12 and 3 others, §§ 72-74 and 81-82, 5 April 2022, concerning various aspects of unlawful deprivation of liberty, and Tsvetkova and Others , cited above, §§ 179-91, and Martynyuk v. Russia , no. 13764/15, §§ 38-42, 8   October 2019, concerning the lack of suspensive effect of an appeal in the administrative-offence proceedings. REMAINING COMPLAINTS 11.     In view of the above findings, the Court considers that there is no need to examine separately the applicants’ complaints under Article 6 of the Convention concerning other aspects of the fairness of the administrative offence proceedings. APPLICATION OF ARTICLE   41 OF THE CONVENTION 12.     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.” 13.     Regard being had to the documents in its possession and to its case ‑ law (see, in particular, Kuratov and Others v. Russia [Committee], nos.   24377/15 and 2 others, 22 October 2019), the Court considers 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 6 § 1 of the Convention concerning the absence of the prosecuting party in the administrative-offence proceedings and the other complaints raised under the well-established case-law (see appended table), admissible, and finds that there is no need to examine separately the remaining complaints of the applicants under Article 6 of the Convention; Holds that these applications disclose a breach of Article 6 § 1 of the Convention concerning the lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of the prosecuting party in the administrative-offence proceedings; 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 23 November 2023, pursuant to Rule   77   §§   2 and   3 of the Rules of Court.     Viktoriya Maradudina   Branko Lubarda   Acting Deputy Registrar   President     APPENDIX List of applications raising complaints under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention (lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of the prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings) No. Application no. Date of introduction Applicant’s name Year of birth   Representative’s name and location Penalty Date of final domestic decision Name of court Other complaints under well-established case-law Amount awarded for pecuniary and non ‑ pecuniary damage and costs and expenses per applicant (in euros) [1]     65015/19 05/12/2019 Konstantin Andreyevich BUZIN 1978     fine of RUB 15,000 28/08/2019, Moscow City Court   1,000     27436/21 27/04/2021 Denis Vladimirovich VASILENKO 1989 Aleksey Valeryevich Vlasov Tula administrative detention of 3 days     administrative detention of 8   days 27/10/2020, Tula Regional Court   20/10/2021, Tula Regional Court   1,000     29209/21 17/05/2021 German Aleksandrovich KOBYCHEV 1998 Konstantin Aleksandrovich Markin Velikiy Novgorod fine of RUB 5,000 19/11/2020, Tsentralnyy District Court of Sochi   1,000     1430/22 14/12/2021 Yevgeniy Aleksandrovich TOPOROV 1989     fine of RUB 30,000   suspension of the driving licence for 1   year and 6 months 13/09/2021, Isakogorskiy District Court of Arkhangelsk   1,000     3175/22 24/12/2021 Sergey Vladimirovich GORLOV 1978 Valeriy Viktorovich Kanayev Diveyevo fine of RUB 30,000, suspension of the driving licence for 1   year and 6   months 27/07/2021, Ardatovskiy District Court of the Nizhniy Novgorod Region   1,000     3507/22 22/12/2021 Andrey Yuryevich PODKIDYSHEV 1960 Andrey Yevgenyevcich Shchukin Nizhniy Tagil fine of RUB 2,000, administrative detention of 12 days   25/11/2021, Sverdlovsk Regional Court   03/03/2022, Sverdlovsk Regional Court Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty – arrest and escorting to the police station on 18/11/2021, detention in excess of 3 hours 3,900     4501/22 10/01/2022 Dmitriy Olegovich MOREV 2001 Ivan Yuryevich Zhdanov Vilnius fine of RUB 10,000 31/08/2021, Voronezh Regional Court Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - arrest and detention on 21/04/2021 for the sole purpose of drawing up a record of administrative offence 3,900     16125/22 26/02/2022 Vasiliy Aleksandrovich KOCHKIN 1988 Valeriy Viktorovich Kanayev Diveyevo fine of RUB 30,000, suspension of the driving licence 15/02/2022, Diveyevskiy District Court of the Nizhniy Novgorod Region   1,000     24461/22 05/03/2022 Ruslan Gennadyevich OVSYANNIKOV 1983     fine of RUB 1,000 02/11/2021, Saratov Regional Court   1,000   29895/22 06/05/2022 Sergey Vladimirovich SHESHENIN 1970 Valeriy Viktorovich Kanayev Diveyevo fine of RUB 30,000 suspension of driving licence for 1 year and 6 months 26/04/2022, Diveyevskiy District Court of the Nizhniy Novgorod Region   1,000   30994/22 08/06/2022 Aleksandr Anatolyevich PRIKHOZHDENKO 1993 Timofey Borisovich Ushakov Kokoshkino fine of RUB 30,000, suspension of the driving licence for 1 year and 6 months   09/12/2021, Moscow City Court   1,000   32764/22 11/06/2022 Aleksandr Anatolyevich RYBKOV 1974 Aleksey Borisovich Vologin Volsk suspension of the driving licence for 1 year 21/01/2022, Shchelkovskiy District Court of the Moscow Region   1,000   34291/22 30/06/2022 Aleksandr Yevgenyevich AKIMOV 1995 Aleksandr Yevgenyevich Ushakov Kokoshkno fine of RUB 30,000, suspension of the driving licence for 1 year 02/03/2022, Butyrskiy District Court of Moscow   1,000   36331/22 18/07/2022 Grigoriy Vladimirovich ALEYNIKOV 1988 Anna Yevgenyevna Bochilo Barnaul administrative detention of 10 days 21/03/2022, St   Petersburg City Court Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - arrest and detention on 27/02/2022 in excess 3 hours for the sole purpose of drawing up a record of the administrative offence, the applicant was released on the following day;   Prot. 7 Art. 2 - delayed review of conviction by a higher tribunal - the sentence of administrative detention imposed on the applicant on 16/03/2022 was executed immediately, on account of the lack of suspensive effect of an appeal under the Code of Administrative Offences (CAO). 3,900   38591/22 07/07/2022 Mariya Vladimirovna KRIVENKO 1989 Irina Vladimirovna Gak Rostov-on-Don administrative detention of 10 days 11/03/2022,   Rostov Regional Court Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - arrest and detention on 06/03/2022 in excess of 3 hours for the sole purpose of drawing up a record of administrative offence, the applicant was released on the following day,   Prot. 7 Art. 2 - delayed review of conviction by a higher tribunal - the sentence of administrative detention imposed on the applicant on 07/03/2022 was executed immediately, on account of the lack of suspensive effect of an appeal under the CAO.     3,900   38786/22 25/07/2022 Aleksandr Aleksandrovich GONCHARUK 1981     fine of RUB 30,000, suspension of the driving licence for   1 year and 6 months 25/01/2022, Bureyskiy District Court of the Amur Region   1,000   39360/22 22/07/2022 Viktor Yevgenyevich YASINOVSKIY 1989 Aleksey Borisovich Vologin Volsk fine of RUB 30,000, suspension of the driving licence for 1 year and   8 months 19/05/2022, Bazarno-Karabulakskiy District Court of the Saratov Region   1,000   39365/22 22/07/2022 Andrey Viktorovich GALKIN 1983 Aleksey Borisovich Vologin Volsk fine of RUB 30,000, suspension of the driving licence for 1 year and   7 months 18/04/2022, Volsk District Court of the Saratov Region   1,000   45216/22 05/09/2022 Anastasiya Yevgenyevna AGEYEVA 1998 Vladimir Sergeyevich Nemanov Moscow administrative detention of 15 days 05/05/2022,   Moscow City Court Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty - arrest and detention on 29-30/04/2022 in excess of 3 hours for the sole purpose of drawing up a record of administrative offence 3,900   50884/22 15/10/2022 Dmitriy Aleksandrovich BOBOSHKO 1985     fine of RUB 30,000, suspension of the driving licence for 1 year and 7 months           12/07/2022, Volsk District Court of the Saratov Region   1,000   1412/23 22/12/2022 Nikolay Aleksandrovich TISHKIN 1985 Aleksey Borisovich Vologin Volsk fine of RUB, 30,000, suspension of the driving license for 1 year and 6 months 15/09/2022, Military Court of the Central Circuit   1,000   [1] Plus any tax that may be chargeable to the applicants.