CEDH · CASELAW;JUDGMENTS;COMMITTEE;ENG — 14 décembre 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 } .s10950C61 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .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 } .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 } .s76EF0776 { height:52.1pt } .s5FFF0A7E { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:8pt } .s3667E82D { height:4.25pt } .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 DORONIN AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA (Applications nos. 44105/21 and 29 others – see appended list)           JUDGMENT   STRASBOURG 14 December 2023         This judgment is final but it may be subject to editorial revision.   In the case of Doronin 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 23 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 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); and Martynyuk v.   Russia , no.   13764/15, §§ 38-42, 8   October 2019, relating 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 other aspects of fairness of the administrative ‑ offence proceedings. In view of the findings in paragraphs 12 and 13 above, the Court considers that there is no need to deal separately with these remaining complaints. 15.     The Court has further 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 or the Protocols thereto. 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 16.     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 the 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 Article 6 of the Convention, and declares the remainder of the applications inadmissible; Holds that these applications disclose 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 14 December 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 per applicant (in euros) [1]     44105/21 30/08/2021 Vladimir Dmitriyevich DORONIN 1991 Memorial Human Rights Centre Moscow Rally "Free Navalnyy"   Volgograd   31/01/2021 article 20.2 § 5 of CAO fine of RUB 10,000 Volgograd Regional Court 04/03/2021 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - escorting to and detention at the police station on 31/01/2021 for compiling an offence record between 1.30 p.m. and 9.00 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. 4,000     44369/21 12/08/2021 Yevgeniy Olegovich TIKHONOV 2000 Glukhov Aleksey Vladimirovich Novocheboksarsk Rally "Free Navalnyy"   Cheboksary   23/01/2021 article 20.2 § 5 of CAO fine of RUB 15,000 Supreme Court of the Chuvashia Republic 26/03/2021 Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings. 3,500     44373/21 12/08/2021 Artem Aleksandrovich MAKAROV 1989 Glukhov Aleksey Vladimirovich Novocheboksarsk Rally "Free Navalnyy"   Cheboksary   23/01/2021   article 20.2 § 5 of CAO fine of RUB 10,000 Supreme Court of the Chuvashia Republic 30/03/2021 Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings. 3,500     44380/21 12/08/2021 Ivan Igorevich KUZNETSOV 1995 Glukhov Aleksey Vladimirovich Novocheboksarsk Rally "Free Navalnyy"   Cheboksary   23/01/2021 article 20.2 § 5 of CAO fine of RUB 12,000 Supreme Court of the Chuvashia Republic 15/04/2021 Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings. 3,500     44383/21 12/08/2021 Aleksey Dmitriyevich MAKSIMOV 2001 Glukhov Aleksey Vladimirovich Novocheboksarsk Rally "Free Navalnyy"   Cheboksary   23/01/2021 article 20.2 § 5 of CAO fine of RUB 10,000 Supreme Court of the Chuvashia Republic   23/03/2021 Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings. 3,500     44425/21 17/08/2021 Aleksandr Ivanovich DYAKOV 1988 Solovyev Stanislav Vyacheslavovich Moscow Rally "Free Navalnyy"   Moscow   31/01/2021 article 20.2 §   6.1 of CAO fine of RUB 20,000 Moscow City Court 18/02/2021 Art. 5 (1) – unlawful detention - escorting to and detention at the police station after compiling an offence record between 4.10 p.m. on 31/01/2021 and 02/02/2021;   Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings. 4,000     44668/21 12/08/2021 Aleksandr Andreyevich KUDRYASHOV 1993 Glukhov Aleksey Vladimirovich Novocheboksarsk Rally "Free Navalnyy"   Cheboksary   23/01/2021     article 20.2 § 5 of CAO fine of RUB 10,000 Supreme Court of Chuvashia 04/05/2021 Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings. 3,500     44693/21 12/08/2021 Arkadiy Nikolayevich MITROSHKIN 2021 Glukhov Aleksey Vladimirovich Novocheboksarsk Rally "Free Navalnyy"   Cheboksary   23/01/2021 article 20.2 § 5 of CAO fine of RUB 12,000 Supreme Court of the Chuvashia Republic 06/04/2021 Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings. 3,500     44699/21 12/08/2021 Pavel Vadimovich PETROV 2001 Glukhov Aleksey Vladimirovich Novocheboksarsk Rally "Free Navalnyy"   Cheboksary   23/01/2021 article 20.2 § 5 of CAO fine of RUB 10,000 Supreme Court of Chuvashia 06/04/2021 Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings. 3,500   44706/21 12/08/2021 Anzhelika Nikolayevna ROMANOVA 1995 Glukhov Aleksey Vladimirovich Novocheboksarsk Rally "Free Navalnyy"   Cheboksary   23/01/2021 article 20.2 § 5 of CAO fine of RUB 10,000 Supreme Court of the Chuvashia Republic   31/03/2021 Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings. 3,500   44967/21 18/08/2021 Svetlana Mikhaylovna KRIVITSKAYA 1972 Vasilyev Nikolay Vladimirovich Moscow Eco-protest   Moscow   27/09/2020 article 20.2 § 5 of CAO fine of RUB 10,000 Moscow City Court 18/02/2021 Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings. 3,500   45001/21 20/08/2021 Darya Dmitriyevna VIKULOVA 1997 Krasikov Vladimir Vladimirovich Samara Rally "Free Navalnyy"   Samara   31/01/2021 article 20.2 § 5 of CAO fine of RUB 10,000 Samara Regional Court 18/05/2021 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - escorting to the police station on 31/01/2021 for compiling an offence record;   Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings. 4,000   45022/21 03/09/2021 Pavel Sergeyevich LEVITSKIY 1986 Zhdanov Ivan Yuryevich Vilnius Rally "Free Navalnyy"   Kurgan   23/01/2021 article 20.2 § 5 of CAO 20 hours of community work Kurgan Regional Court 17/03/2021 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - escorting to the police station on 23/01/2021 for compiling an offence record;   Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings. 4,000   45056/21 25/08/2021 Aleksandra Aleksandrovna SHNAYDER 2000     Rally "Free Navalnyy"   Novosibirsk   23/01/2021 article 20.2 § 2 of CAO detention for 8 days Novosibirsk Regional Court 25/02/2021 Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings;   Prot. 7 Art. 2 - Right of appeal against criminal conviction/sentence - The sentence of administrative detention imposed on the applicant was executed immediately, on account of the lack of suspensive effect of an appeal under the CAO. 5,000   45255/21 30/08/2021 Inna Vyacheslavovna TITOVA 1985 Vasin Vladimir Valeryevich Krasnoyarsk Rally "Free Navalnyy"   Krasnoyarsk   31/01/2021 article 20.2 § 5 of CAO fine of RUB 10,000 Krasnoyarsk Regional Court 13/05/2021 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - escorting to and detention at the police station for compiling an offence record 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. 4,000   45264/21 30/08/2021 Marina Yuryevna KADETOVA 1996 Vasin Vladimir Valeryevich Krasnoyarsk Rally "Free Navalnyy"   Krasnoyarsk   31/01/2021 article 20.2 § 5 of CAO fine of RUB 10,000 Krasnoyarsk Regional Court 19/04/2021 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - escorting to the police station for compiling an offence 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. 4,000   45271/21 30/08/2021 Pavel Olegovich GERASIMENKO 2001 Vasin Vladimir Valeryevich Krasnoyarsk Rally "Free Navalnyy"   Krasnoyarsk   31/01/2021 article 20.2 § 5 of CAO fine of RUB 10,000 Krasnoyarsk Regional Court 13/05/2021 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - escorting to the police station for compiling an offence record 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.     4,000   45276/21 30/08/2021 Valentina Mikhaylovna VESNYANKO 1999 Vasin Vladimir Valeryevich Krasnoyarsk Rally "Free Navalnyy"   Krasnoyarsk   23/01/2021 article 20.2 § 5 of CAO fine of RUB 20,000 Krasnoyarsk Regional Court 03/06/2021 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - escorting to the police station for compiling an offence record 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,     4,000   46593/21 31/08/2021 Yana Aleksandrovna ZENKINA 1993 Memorial Human Rights Centre Moscow Rally "Free Navalnyy"   Tambov   23/01/2021 article 20.2 § 2 of CAO fine of RUB 20,000 Tambov Regional Court 01/03/2021 Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings. 3,500   47098/21 16/09/2021 Vladislav Andreyevich LYGIN 1998 Memorial Human Rights Centre Moscow Rally "Free Navalnyy"   Volgograd   23/01/2021 article 20.2 § 5 of CAO fine of RUB 10,000 Volgograd Regional Court 17/03/2021 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - escorting to and detention at the police station for compiling an offence record 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. 4,000   47146/21 07/09/2021 Stanislav Vladimirovich MERENKOV 1991 Memorial Human Rights Centre Moscow Rally "Free Navalnyy"   Moscow   31/01/2021 article 20.2 §   6.1 of CAO detention for 10 days Moscow City Court 18/03/2021 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - escorting to and detention at the police station for compiling an offence record between 1.20 p.m. on 31/01/2021 and 7.30 p.m. on 01/02/2021;   Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in both sets of administrative-offence proceedings;   Prot. 7 Art. 2 - delayed review of conviction by a higher tribunal - the sentence of administrative detention imposed on the applicant was executed immediately, on account of the lack of suspensive effect of an appeal under the CAO. 5,000   47239/21 16/09/2021 Khasana Aleksandrovna ROKOSSOVSKAYA 2000 Memorial Human Rights Centre Moscow Rally "Free Navalnyy"   Murmansk   23/01/2021 article 20.2 § 2 of CAO fine of RUB 10,000 Murmansk Regional Court 09/04/2021 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - escorting to and detention at the police station for compiling an offence record between 8.00 a.m. on 30/01/2021 and 7.00 p.m. on 01/02/2021;   Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in both sets of administrative-offence proceedings 4,000   28736/22 24/05/2022 Aleksey Igorevich NEFEDOV 1976     Rally "Free Navalnyy"   Novosibirsk   31/01/2021 article 20.2 § 5 of CAO fine of RUB 10,000 Novosibirsk Regional Court 24/11/2021 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - escorting to and detention at the police station for compiling an offence record between 1.20 p.m. and 6.00 p.m. on 31/01/2021,   Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in both sets of administrative-offence proceedings. 4,000   30801/22 09/06/2022 Gleb Yuryevich LEVOCHKIN 1992 Baranova Nataliya Andreyevna Moscow Rally "Free Navalnyy"   Moscow   21/04/2021 article 20.2 §   6.1 of CAO fine of RUB 10,000 Moscow City Court 09/02/2022 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - escorting to and detention at the police station for compiling an offence record between 7.30 p.m. on 24/02/2021 and 4.00 p.m. on 26/04/2021;   Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings 4,000   32624/22 09/06/2022 Anastasiya Georgiyevna TAYNS-KOVALEVSKAYA 1995     Rally "Free Navalnyy"   Moscow   21/04/2021 article 20.2 § 5 of CAO fine of RUB 10,000 Moscow City Court 09/12/2021 Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings. 3,500   35521/22 29/06/2022 Konstantin Sergeyevich MAKLYAK 1990 Levchenko Aleksey Alekseyevich Rostov-on-Don Anti-war rally   Rostov-on-Don   06/03/2022 article 19.3 § 1 of CAO detention for 15 days Rostov Regional Court 18/03/2022 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - escorting to and detention at the police station for compiling an offence record between 3.20 p.m. on 06/03/2022 and 8.10 a.m. on 07/03/2022;   Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings;   Prot. 7 Art. 2 - delayed review of conviction by a higher tribunal - the sentence of administrative detention imposed on the applicant was executed immediately, on account of the lack of suspensive effect of an appeal under the CAO.   5,000   35532/22 29/06/2022 Olesya Igorevna BAKHTIYAROVA 2003 Levchenko Aleksey Alekseyevich Rostov-on-Don Anti-war rally   Rostov-on-Don   06/03/2022 article 19.3 § 1 of CAO detention for 15 days Rostov Regional Court 10/03/2022 Art. 5 (1) -unlawful detention - escorting to and detention at the police station for compiling an offence record between 3.20 p.m. on 06/03/2022 and 10.00   a.m. on 07/03/2022;   Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings;   Prot. 7 Art. 2 - delayed review of conviction by a higher tribunal - the sentence of administrative detention imposed on the applicant was executed immediately, on account of the lack of suspensive effect of an appeal under the CAO. 5,000   36163/22 01/07/2022 Tatyana Vladimirovna CHECHETKINA 1991 Kabirov Rushan Rafisovich Kazan Anti-war rally   Kazan   27/02/2022 article 20.2 § 5 of CAO fine of RUB 10,000 Supreme Court of the Tatarstan Republic 27/04/2022 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - escorting to and detention at the police station for compiling an offence record between 4.00 p.m. on 27/02/2022 and the morning of 28/02/2022 when the applicant was transferred to the court;   Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings 4,000   36231/22 01/07/2022 Maksim Vladimirovich MURUGIN 1994 Levchenko Aleksey Alekseyevich Rostov-on-Don Anti-war rally   Rostov-on-Don   06/03/2022 article 19.3 § 1 of CAO detention for 15 days Sverdlovsk Regional Court 18/03/2022 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - escorting to and detention at the police station for compiling an offence record between 6.10 p.m. on 06/03/2022 and the morning of 07/03/2022;   Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings; Prot. 7 Art. 2 - delayed review of conviction by a higher tribunal - the sentence of administrative detention imposed on the applicant was executed immediately, on account of the lack of suspensive effect of an appeal under the CAO. 5,000   45186/22 06/09/2022 Vakhtang Anatolyevich PATALAKH 1977     Anti-war rally   Moscow   26/02/2022 article 20.2 § 5 of CAO fine of RUB 11,000 Moscow City Court 11/05/2022 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - escorting to and detention at the police station for compiling an offence record between 5.40 p.m. and 10.56 p.m. on 26/02/2022;   Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings.   4,000     [1] Plus any tax that may be chargeable to the applicants.