CEDH · CASELAW;JUDGMENTS;COMMITTEE;ENG — 22 février 2024

.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 } .sC986E16F { font-family:Arial; color:#ffffff } .sC646A315 { width:14.54pt; display:inline-block } .s7E447BAE { width:130.42pt; 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 }       FIFTH SECTION CASE OF NURUSHEV AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA (Applications nos. 46570/18 and 24 others – see appended list)         JUDGMENT   STRASBOURG 22 February 2024       This judgment is final but it may be subject to editorial revision.   In the case of Nurushev and Others v. Russia, The European Court of Human Rights (Fifth Section), sitting as a Committee composed of:   María Elósegui , President ,   Mattias Guyomar,   Kateřina Šimáčková , judges , and Viktoriya Maradudina, Acting Deputy Section Registrar, Having deliberated in private on 1 February 2024, 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; 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; Korneyeva , cited above, §§ 62-65 as to the right of the organisers or participants of public assemblies not to be tried and punished twice for the same offence. 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 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 the 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, and 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 22 February 2024, pursuant to Rule   77   §§   2 and   3 of the Rules of Court.     Viktoriya Maradudina   María Elósegui   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 offence (code of administrative offences, CAO) 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]     46570/18 19/09/2018 Ruslan Urazbayevich NURUSHEV 1973     March "Strike of electors"   Volgograd 28/01/2018   Rally in support of Mr   A. Navalnyy   Volgograd 23/01/2021   Rally in support of Mr   A. Navalnyy   Volgograd 31/01/2021 article 20.2 § 5 of CAO         article 20.2 § 5 of CAO         article 20.2 § 5 of CAO fine of RUB   10,000       fine of RUB   10,000       fine of RUB   10,000 Volgograd Regional Court 21/03/2018     Volgograd Regional Court 18/02/2021         Volgograd Regional Court 24/02/2021 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty: escorting to the police station for the purpose of drawing up a record of administrative offence; detention in excess of 3 hours and without “exceptional circumstances”, from 4.30 p.m. on 28/01/2018 to an unspecified time,   Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings - final decisions: Volgograd Regional Court, 21/03/2018, 18/02/2021 and 24/02/2021,   Art. 10 (1) - conviction for making calls to participate in public events - calling on participation in the anti-war rally by posting a call on social network on 02/03/2022 in Volgograd. The applicant was convicted under article 20.2. §   8 of the CAO, to an administrative detention of 15 days, final decision: Volgograd Regional Court,10/03/2022.   5,000     36922/21 16/07/2021 Valentina Aleksandrovna YAKUNINA 1976 Memorial Human Rights Centre Moscow Rally in support of Mr A. Navalnyy   Rostov-on-Don 31/01/2021 article 20.2 §   6.1 of CAO fine of RUB   11,000 Rostov Regional Court 11/03/2021 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 2.00 p.m. on 31/01/2021 to 11.30 a.m. on 01/02/2021;   Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings - final decision: Rostov Regional Court, 11/03/2021.   4,000     40459/21 27/07/2021 Olesya Yuryevna CHERNETSKAYA 1970 Shindyapin Arkadiy Vitalyevich Moscow Rally in support of Mr A. Navalnyy   Moscow 31/01/2021 article 20.2 §   6.1 of CAO administrative detention of 4   days Moscow City Court 16/02/2021 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. on 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, 16/02/2021,     Prot. 7 Art. 2 - delayed review of conviction by a higher tribunal - The sentence of administrative detention imposed on the applicant on 01/02/2021 was executed immediately, on account of the lack of suspensive effect of an appeal under the CAO.   5,000     40494/21 30/07/2021 Yevgeniy Aleksandrovich PEREVEZENTSEV 1984 Shimovolos Sergey Mikhaylovich Nizhniy Novgorod Rally in support of Mr A. Navalnyy   Nizhniy Novgorod 31/01/2021 article 20.2 § 5 of CAO fine of RUB   10,000 Nizhniy Novgorod Regional Court 28/05/2021 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty: escorting to a police station for the purpose of drawing up a record of administrative offence; detention in excess of 3 hours and without “exceptional circumstances”, from 1.05 p.m. to 7.00 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 - final decision: Nizhniy Novgorod Regional Court, 28/05/2021.   4,000     40939/21 24/07/2021 Maksim Mikhaylovich KORNIYENKO 2002 Bochilo Anna Yevgenyevna Barnaul Rally in support of Mr A. Navalnyy   Kursk 31/01/2021 article 20.2 § 5 of CAO fine of RUB   15,000 Kursk Regional 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 1.00 p.m. to 6.00 p.m. on 31/01/2021; the applicant’s deprivation of liberty was not recorded,     Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings - final decision: Kursk Regional Court, 20/04/2021.   4,000     41407/21 04/08/2021 Mikhail Sergeyevich PANKRATOV 1983 Pomazuyev Aleksandr Yevgenyevich Vilnius Rally in support of Mr A. Navalnyy   Volgograd 23/01/2021   Rally in support of Mr A. Navalnyy   Volgograd 31/01/2021 article 20.2 § 5 of CAO         article 20.2 § 5 of CAO fine of RUB   10,000         fine of RUB   10,000 Volgograd Regional Court 18/02/2021     Volgograd Regional Court 03/03/2021 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 3.00 p.m. on 23/01/2021 to 00.30 a.m. on 24/01/2021, - from 12.15 a.m. to 8.30 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 decisions: Volgograd Regional Court, 18/02/2021 and 03/03/2021.   4,000     42744/21 07/08/2021 Yevgeniy Aleksandrovich MILYAKOV 1999     Rally in support of Mr A. Navalnyy   Moscow 31/01/2021 article 20.2 § 6.1 of CAO administrative detention of 8   days Moscow City Court 17/06/2021 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 12.27 a.m. on 31/01/2021 to 11.30   a.m. 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, 17/06/2021,     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     43251/21 18/08/2021 Kirill Alfredovich IMASHEV 1998     Commemorating the anniversary of the revolution   Perm 07/11/2020   Environmental rally (for a forest protection)   Perm 14/02/2021   Opposition rally   Perm 31/07/2021 article 20.2 § 5 of CAO           article 20.2 § 2 of CAO           article 20.2 § 8 of CAO fine of RUB   10,000           fine of RUB   20,000           administrative detention of 15 days Perm Regional Court 02/03/2021       Perm Regional Court 30/04/2021       Perm Regional Court 05/08/2021 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 4.05 p.m. to 7.20 p.m. on 07/11/2020, - from 11.15 a.m. on 26/09/2021 to 27/09/2021, hearing in the applicant’s administrative-offence case, - from 10.00 a.m. to 2.00 p.m. on 18/02/2021, - from 2.20 p.m. to 6.00 p.m. on 31/07/2021,   Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings - final decisions: Perm Regional Court, 02/03/2021, 30/04/2021 and 05/08/2021, Perm Regional Court,   Art. 10 (1) - conviction for making calls to participate in public events - calls on the internet on 10/02/2021 to participate in an unauthorised public rally for protection of a forest in the Perm Region; conviction under article 20.2 § 2 of the CAO to a fine of RUB 20,000; final decision: Perm Regional Court, 30/04/2021,     Prot. 7 Art. 2 - delayed review of conviction by a higher tribunal - the sentence of administrative detention (15 days) imposed on the applicant by the trial court for an administrative offence was executed immediately; on account of the lack of suspensive effect of an appeal under the CAO.   5,000     43835/21 10/08/2021 Ilya Konstantinovich YEFIMOV 2001 Yelanchik Oleg Aleksandrovich Moscow Rally in support of Mr A. Navalnyy   Moscow 02/02/2021 article 20.2 §   6.1 of CAO administrative detention of 15 days Moscow City Court 10/02/2021 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 11.00 p.m. on 02/02/2021 to 6.00 p.m. on 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, 10/02/2021.   5,000   44181/21 25/08/2021 Vsevolod Sergeyevich POPOV 1996 Pomazuyev Aleksandr Yevgenyevich Vilnius Rally in support of Mr A. Navalnyy   Tyumen 31/01/2021 article 20.2 § 5 of CAO fine of RUB   15,000 Tyumen Regional Court 15/03/2021 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 3.00 p.m. and 6.30 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: Tyumen Regional Court, 15/03/2021.   4,000   45002/21 24/08/2021 Pavel Vladimirovich KOSULNIKOV 1981 Memorial Human Rights Centre Moscow Rally in support of Mr A. Navalnyy   Kazan 23/01/2021 article 20.2 § 5 of CAO fine of RUB   10,000 Supreme Court of Tatarstan 24/02/2021 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty: escorting to the 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 23/01/2021 to 3.00 p.m. on 25/01/2021.         4,000   46947/21 14/09/2021 Alena Igorevna PERTSEVA 1999 Eysmont Mariya Olegovna Moscow Rally in support of Mr A. Navalnyy   Moscow 02/02/2021 article 20.2 §   6.1 of CAO administrative detention of 10 days Moscow City Court 22/03/2021 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty: escorting to the police station for the purpose of drawing up a record of administrative offence; detention in excess of 3 hours and without “exceptional circumstances”, from 11.30 p.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, 22/03/2021.   5,000   48161/21 15/09/2021 Aleksandr Yevgenyevich CHERNYKH 1985 Gamazov Alan Olegovich Moscow Rally support of journalist Ivan Safronov   Moscow 13/07/2020 article 20.2 § 5 of CAO fine of RUB   10,000 Moscow City Court 16/03/2021 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty: escorting to the police station for the purpose of drawing up a record of administrative offence; detention in excess of 3 hours and without “exceptional circumstances” from on 2.50 p.m. to 06.10   p.m. on 13/07/2020,   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, 16/03/2021.   4,000   50257/21 23/09/2021 Yevgeniy Vyacheslavovich BELYAKOV 1993 Shindyapin Arkadiy Vitalyevich Moscow Rally in support of Mr A. Navalnyy   Moscow 31/01/2021 article 20.2 § 5 of CAO fine of RUB   15,000 Moscow City Court 17/05/2021 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty: escorting to the 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 31/01/2021 to an unspecified time on 01/02/2021,     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, 17/05/2021.   4,000   50278/21 24/09/2021 Yuliya Andreyevna SAVELYEVA 1999 Mezak Ernest Aleksandrovich Saint-Barthélemy-d’Anjou Rally in support of Mr A. Navalnyy   Petrozavodsk 21/04/2021 article 20.2 § 8 of CAO administrative detention of 10 days Supreme Court of the Karelia Republic 01/05/2021 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty: escorting to the police station for the purpose of drawing up a record of administrative offence; detention in excess of 3 hours and without “exceptional circumstances” from 10.00 a.m. to 2.15   p.m. on 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 decisions: Supreme Court of the Karelia Republic, 24/03/2021 and 01/05/2021,   Art. 10 (1) - conviction for making calls to participate in public events - Conviction under article 20.2 § 2 of the CAO for calls to participate in unauthorised manifestation in support of Navalnyy on 31/01/2021 in Petrozavodsk to 5 days of administrative detention. Final decision: Supreme Court of the Karelia Republic, 24/03/2021,   Prot. 7 Art. 2 - delayed review of conviction by a higher tribunal - the sentences of administrative detention imposed on the applicant were executed immediately, on account of the lack of suspensive effect of an appeal under the CAO.   5,000   50293/21 29/09/2021 Bogdan Aleksandrovich BUBNOV 1999 Valenkov Andrey Olegovich Nizhniy Novgorod Rally in support of Mr A. Navalnyy   Nizhniy Novgorod 23/01/2021     Rally against war in Ukraine   Nizhniy Novgorod 24/02/2022 article 20.2 § 2 of CAO             article 20.2 §   6.1 of CAO administrative detention of 2   days           administrative detention of 5   days Nizhniy Novgorod Regional Court 31/03/2021     Nizhniy Novgorod Regional Court 02/03/2022 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty: escorting to the police station for the purpose of drawing up a record of administrative offence; detention in excess of 3 hours and without “exceptional circumstances”: - from 11.30 a.m. on 31/01/2021 to 1.00 p.m. on 02/02/2021; - from 7.45 p.m. on 24/02/2022 to 6.00 p.m. on 25/02/2022;   Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings - final decisions: Nizhniy Novgorod Regional Court, 31/03/2021 and 02/03/2022.   5,000   51896/21 24/09/2021 Dmitriy Aleksandrovich LYUTOYEV 1984 Mezak Ernest Aleksandrovich Saint-Barthélemy-d’Anjou Rally in support of Mr A. Navalnyy   Syktyvkar 23/01/2021     Rally in support of Mr A. Navalnyy   Syktyvkar 31/01/2021 article 20.2 § 5 of CAO   article 19.3 § 1 of CAO,     article 20.2 § 5 of CAO fine of RUB   10,000           administrative detention of 4   days and fine of RUB   10,000 Supreme Court of the Komi Republic 23/06/2021     Supreme Court of the Komi Republic, 24/03/2021 and 16/06/2021 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty: escorting to the police station for the purpose of drawing up a record of administrative offence; detention in excess of 3 hours and without “exceptional circumstances” from 12.05 a.m. on 31/01/2021 to 11.00   a.m. on 01/02/2021,   Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings - final decision: Supreme Court of the Komi Republic, 24/03/2021, 16/06/2021 and 23/06/2021,   Prot. 7 Art. 2 - delayed review of conviction by a higher tribunal - The sentence of administrative detention imposed on the applicant on 01/02/2021 was executed immediately, on account of the lack of suspensive effect of an appeal under the CAO,   Prot. 7 Art. 4 - right not to be tried or punished twice in criminal proceedings - the applicant was convicted twice for participation in the same public event on 31/01/2021: under article 19.3 § 1 (administrative detention), and under article 20.2 § 5 of the CAO (fine).   5,000   51994/21 08/10/2021 Aleksandr Borisovich POCHINSKIY 1987 Memorial Human Rights Centre Moscow Rally in support of Mr A. Navalnyy   Moscow 02/02/2021 article 20.2 § 5 of CAO fine of RUB   20,000 Moscow City Court 11/05/2021 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, 11/05/2021. 3,500   51995/21 08/10/2021 Dmitriy Nikolayevich SEMIN 1996 Memorial Human Rights Centre Moscow Rally in support of Mr A. Navalnyy   Moscow 02/02/2021 article 20.2 § 5 of CAO fine of RUB   15,000 Moscow City Court 11/05/2021 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty: escorting to the police station for the purpose of drawing up a record of administrative offence; detention in excess of 3 hours and without “exceptional circumstances” from 9.30 a.m. to 2.20 p.m. on 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 - final decision: Moscow City Court, 11/05/2021 4,000   52824/21 22/10/2021 Alla Vladimirovna KUZNETSOVA 1967 Zhdanov Ivan Yuryevich Vilnius Rally in support of Mr A. Navalnyy   Ulan-Ude, Buryatia Republic 31/01/2021 article 20.2 § 5 of CAO fine of RUB   15,000 Supreme Court of the Buryatia Republic 29/04/2021 Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings - final decision: Supreme Court of the Buryatia Republic, 29/04/2021. 3,500   53232/21 05/10/2021 Zhanna Vladimirovna GALEYEVA 1996 Tseytlina Olga Pavlovna St Petersburg Rally in support of Belarus citizens   St Petersburg 27/01/2021   Rally in support of Belarus citizens   St Petersburg 24/01/2021 article 20.2 § 2 of CAO         article 20.2 § 2 of CAO administrative detention of 1   day       administrative detention of 5   days St Petersburg City Court 27/05/2021       St Petersburg City Court 06/04/2021 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty: escorting to the police station for the purpose of drawing up a record of administrative offence; detention in excess of 3 hours and without “exceptional circumstances”: - from 9.40 a.m. on 23/03/2021 to 25/03/2021, hearing in the applicant’s administrative-offence case, - from 9.40 a.m. on 28/03/2021 to 11.00 a.m. on 29/03/2021;     Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings - final decisions: St   Petersburg City Court, 06/04/2021 and 27/05/2021;     Prot. 7 Art. 2 - delayed review of conviction by a higher tribunal - the sentences of administrative detention imposed on the applicant were executed immediately, on account of the lack of suspensive effect of an appeal under the CAO. 5,000   53293/21 07/10/2021 Anton Sergeyevich REUTOV 1990 Usanova Olimpiada Valentinovna Nizhniy Novgorod Rally in support of Mr A. Navalnyy   Nizhniy Novgorod 31/01/2021 article 20.2 §   6.1 of CAO   fine of RUB   10,000 Nizhniy Novgorod Regional Court 07/04/2021 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty: escorting to the police station for the purpose of drawing up a record of administrative offence; detention in excess of 3 hours and without “exceptional circumstances”: from 1.00 p.m. on 31/01/2021 (the applicant spent two hours in the police van) to 4.15 p.m. on 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: Nizhniy Novgorod Regional Court, 07/04/2021.   4,000   53485/21 07/10/2021 Aleksey Igorevich BORISOV 2002 Usanova Olimpiada Valentinovna Nizhniy Novgorod Rally in support of Mr A. Navalnyy   Nizhniy Novgorod 31/01/2021 article 20.2 § 5 of CAO fine of RUB   10,000 Nizhniy Novgorod Regional Court 07/04/2021 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty: escorting to the police station for the purpose of drawing up a record of administrative offence; detention in excess of 3 hours and without “exceptional circumstances”, from 1.15 p.m. on 31/01/2021 to 5.00 p.m. on 01/02/2021     Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings - final decision: Nizhniy Novgorod Regional Court, 07/04/2021 4,000   53491/21 07/10/2021 Ivan Vasilyevich SOKOLOVSKIY 1997 Usanova Olimpiada Valentinovna Nizhniy Novgorod Rally in support of Mr A. Navalnyy   Nizhniy Novgorod 31/01/2021 article 20.2 §   6.1 of CAO fine of RUB   10,000 Nizhniy Novgorod Regional Court 07/04/2021 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty: escorting to the police station for the purpose of drawing up a record of administrative offence; detention in excess of 3 hours and without “exceptional circumstances”, from 12.50 a.m. on 31/01/2021 (the applicant spent more than 3 hours in the police van) to 3.00 p.m. on 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: Nizhniy Novgorod Regional Court, 07/04/2021 4,000   61701/21 10/12/2021 Sergey Petrovich KUKHTIN 1971 Memorial Human Rights Centre Moscow Rally in support of Mr A. Navalnyy   Moscow 31/01/2021     Rally against the war in Ukraine   Moscow 06/03/2022 article 20.2 § 5 of CAO           article 20.2 § 8 of CAO fine of RUB   10,000           administrative detention of 15 days Moscow City Court 25/08/2021         Moscow City Court 19/08/2022 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty: escorting to the police station for the purpose of drawing up a record of administrative offence; detention in excess of 3 hours and without “exceptional circumstances” from 1.15 p.m. to 11.58   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 decisions: Moscow City Court, 25/08/2021 and 19/08/2022;     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     [1] Plus any tax that may be chargeable to the applicants.