CEDH · CASELAW;JUDGMENTS;COMMITTEE;ENG — 7 mars 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 } .s665E407E { margin-top:66pt; margin-bottom:14pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .s34DFC730 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .s82B4DA5F { page-break-before:right; clear:both; mso-break-type:section-break } .s10950C61 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify } .sB9D5CABB { width:28.35pt; display:inline-block } .s3AAE10DF { margin-top:14pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .s3CA22BA { font-family:Arial; text-transform:uppercase } .s6B505E72 { margin:0pt; padding-left:0pt } .sDECD9755 { margin-left:11.67pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; padding-left:6.78pt; font-family:Arial; text-transform:uppercase } .sDA7B489D { margin-top:14pt; margin-left:15pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; padding-left:3.45pt; font-family:Arial; text-transform:uppercase } .s5C5C410E { margin-top:14pt; margin-left:18.34pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; padding-left:0.11pt; font-family:Arial; text-transform:uppercase } .s67CAFE05 { margin-top:14pt; margin-left:18.45pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-family:Arial; text-transform:uppercase } .s7C22C014 { margin-top:14pt; margin-left:16.34pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; padding-left:2.11pt; font-family:Arial; text-transform:uppercase } .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 } .s6C509AAA { width:133.75pt; 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 }     FIRST SECTION CASE OF OLSHANOV AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA (Applications nos. 71114/17 and 29 others – see appended list)             JUDGMENT   STRASBOURG 7 March 2024   This judgment is final but it may be subject to editorial revision. In the case of Olshanov and Others v. Russia, The European Court of Human Rights (First Section), sitting as a Committee composed of:   Lətif Hüseynov , President ,   Ivana Jelić,   Erik Wennerström , judges , and Viktoriya Maradudina, Acting Deputy Section Registrar, Having deliberated in private on 8 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. Some applicants also raised other complaints under the provisions of the Convention or Protocols to it. 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, and having taken into account the issue of compliance with the six-month time-limit under Article 35 § 1 of the Convention (see Saakashvili v.   Georgia (dec.), nos.   6232/20 and 22394/20, §§ 46-59, 1 March 2022, in which the Court addressed the COVID-related extension of the period in question), 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; 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; and 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. REMAINING COMPLAINTS 14.     Some applicants raised further additional complaints under the Convention or Protocols to it. In view of the findings in paragraphs 11 and 13 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 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; Holds that these applications disclose a violation 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 7 March 2024, pursuant to Rule   77   §§   2 and   3 of the Rules of Court.   Viktoriya Maradudina   Lətif Hüseyno   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 / criminal offence 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]     71114/17 18/09/2017 Nikita Yevgenyevich OLSHANOV 1994 Popkov Aleksandr Vasilyevich Sochi Anticorruption rally   Krasnodar 26/03/2017 article 19.3 § 1 of CAO 10 days of detention Krasnodar Regional Court 06/04/2017 Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings. 5,000     8682/18 26/01/2018 Ulyana Nikolayevna TIMOFEYEVA 1989     Anticorruption rally   St Petersburg 12/06/2017 article 20.2 § 5 of CAO fine of RUB 5,000 St   Petersburg City Court 27/07/2017 Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings. 3,500     20978/18 15/04/2018 Ilya Vladislavovich CHUMAKOV 1998 Kulakova Yevgeniya Yuryevna St Petersburg Rally to support A.   Navalnyy   St Petersburg 08/10/2017     article 19.3 § 1 of CAO       article 20.2 § 5 of CAO 10 days of detention       fine of RUB 10,000 St Petersburg City Court 16/10/2017     St Petersburg City Court 26/10/2017   Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - on 08-09/10/2017 escorting to and detention in a police station for and after compiling offence reports,   Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in both sets of administrative-offence proceedings. 5,000     21703/18 24/04/2018 Igor Sergeyevich SHTIN 1997     Rally to support A.   Navalnyy   Yekaterinburg 07/10/2017 article 20.2 § 5 of CAO 20 hours of community work Sverdlovsk Regional Court 17/01/2018   3,500     59651/18 06/12/2018 Yevgeniy Gennadyevich ALEKSANDROV 1995 Glukhov Aleksey Vladimirovich Novocheboksarsk Opposition rally   Cheboksary 05/05/2018     article 20.2 § 5 of CAO         article 20.2 § 5 of CAO fine of RUB 20,000       30 hours of community work Supreme Court of the Chuvashia Republic 07/06/2018   Supreme Court of the Chuvashia Republic 07/06/2018 Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in both sets of administrative-offence proceedings. 3,500     59663/18 06/12/2018 Igor Vladimirovich SHARKOV 1992 Glukhov Aleksey Vladimirovich Novocheboksarsk Opposition rally   Cheboksary 05/05/2018 article 20.2 § 5 of CAO         article 20.2 § 5 of CAO 20 hours of community work       30 hours of community work Supreme Court of the Chuvashia Republic 07/06/2018   Supreme Court of the Chuvashia Republic 07/06/2018 Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in both sets of administrative-offence proceeding. 3,500     484/19 11/12/2018 Maksim Ilyich PYATAKOV 1999 Sholokhov Igor Nikolayevich Kazan Rally against the pension reform   Kazan 09/09/2018 article 20.2 § 2 of CAO 4 days of detention Supreme Court of the Tatarstan Republic 14/09/2018 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - on 09-11/09/2018 escorting to and detention in a police station for compiling an offence report,   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 - immediate execution of the sentence of detention; an appeal against conviction had no suspensive effect. 5,000     493/19 11/12/2018 Nikolay Aleksandrovich POTAPOV 1996 Sholokhov Igor Nikolayevich Kazan Rally against the pension reform   Kazan 09/09/2018 article 20.2 § 2 of CAO 4 days of detention Supreme Court of the Tatarstan Republic 18/09/2018 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - on 09-10/09/2018 escorting to and detention in a police station for and after compiling an offence report,     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 - immediate execution of the sentence of detention; an appeal against conviction had no suspensive effect.       5,000     497/19 11/12/2018 Dmitriy Vyacheslavovich KAMNEV 1991 Sholokhov Igor Nikolayevich Kazan Rally against the pension reform   Kazan 09/09/2018 article 20.2 § 2 of CAO 4 days of detention Supreme Court of the Tatarstan Republic 18/09/2018 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - on 09-10/09/2018 escorting to and detention in a police station for and after compiling an offence report,   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 - immediate execution of the sentence of detention; an appeal against conviction had no suspensive effect. 5,000   501/19 11/12/2018 Igor Vasilyevich BASHKIN 1997 Sholokhov Igor Nikolayevich Kazan Rally against the pension reform   Kazan 09/09/2018 article 20.2 § 2 of CAO 4 days of detention Supreme Court of the Tatarstan Republic 18/09/2018 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - on 09-10/09/2018 escorting to and detention in a police station for and after compiling an offence report,   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 - immediate execution of the sentence of detention; an appeal against conviction had no suspensive effect. 5,000   509/19 11/12/2018 Roman Anatolyevich YAKOVLEV 1995 Sholokhov Igor Nikolayevich Kazan Rally against the pension reform   Kazan 09/09/2018 article 20.2 § 2 of CAO 4 days of detention Supreme Court of the Tatarstan Republic 18/09/2018 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - on 09-10/09/2018 escorting to and detention in a police station for and after compiling an offence report,   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 - immediate execution of the sentence of detention; an appeal against conviction had no suspensive effect. 5,000   3311/19 19/12/2018 Denis Valeryevich MOLEYKIN 1989 Sholokhov Igor Nikolayevich Kazan Rally against the pension reform   Kazan 09/09/2018 article 20.2 § 2 of CAO fine of RUB 20,000 Supreme Court of the Tatarstan Republic 21/11/2018 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - on 09-10/09/2018 escorting to and detention in a police station for and after compiling an offence report,   Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings. 4,000   3322/19 19/12/2018 Pavel Nikolayevich PROSKURYAKOV 1999 Sholokhov Igor Nikolayevich Kazan Rally against the pension reform   Kazan 09/09/2018 article 20.2 § 2 of CAO 4 days of detention Supreme Court of the Tatarstan Republic 19/09/2018 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - on 09-10/09/2018 escorting to and detention in a police station for and after compiling an offence report,     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 - immediate execution of the sentence of detention; an appeal against conviction had no suspensive effect. 5,000   3325/19 19/12/2018 Oleg Fedorovich ANKUDINOV 1979 Sholokhov Igor Nikolayevich Kazan Rally against the pension reform   Kazan 09/09/2018 article 20.2 § 2 of CAO 4 days of detention Supreme Court of the Tatarstan Republic 18/09/2018 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - on 09-10/09/2018 escorting to and detention in a police station for and after compiling an offence report,   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 - immediate execution of the sentence of detention; an appeal against conviction had no suspensive effect. 5,000   3327/19 19/12/2018 Ruslan Damirovich ISKHAKOV 1985 Sholokhov Igor Nikolayevich Kazan Rally against the pension reform   Kazan 09/09/2018 article 20.2 § 2 of CAO 4 days of detention Supreme Court of the Tatarstan Republic 27/09/2018 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 - immediate execution of the sentence of detention; an appeal against conviction had no suspensive effect. 5,000   3328/19 19/12/2018 Renat Fatykhovich SALIMOV 1980 Sholokhov Igor Nikolayevich Kazan Rally against the pension reform   Kazan 09/09/2018 article 20.2 § 2 of CAO 4 days of detention Supreme Court of the Tatarstan Republic 12/09/2018 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - on 09-10/09/2018 escorting to and detention in a police station for and after compiling an offence report,   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 - immediate execution of the sentence of administrative detention; an appeal against conviction had no suspensive effect. 5,000   3331/19 19/12/2018 Ilnaz Ilyasovich ZIGANSHIN 1996 Sholokhov Igor Nikolayevich Kazan Rally against the pension reform   Kazan 09/09/2018     Rally to support A.   Navalnyy   Kazan 23/01/2021 article 20.2 § 2 of CAO             article 20.2 § 5 of CAO 4 days of detention             fine of RUB 10,000 Supreme Court of the Tatarstan Republic 14/09/2018       Supreme Court of the Tatarstan Republic 31/03/2021 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - on 09-10/09/2018 and 23-24/01/2021 escorting to and detention in a police station for and after compiling offence reports,   Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings in 2018,     Prot. 7 Art. 2 - delayed review of conviction by a higher tribunal - immediate execution of the sentence of detention in 2018; an appeal against conviction had no suspensive effect. 5,000   3836/19 08/01/2019 Yuliya Vladimirovna USPENSKAYA 1981 Zboroshenko Nikolay Sergeyevich Mytishchi Anticorruption rally   Moscow 12/06/2017 article 20.2 § 5 of CAO fine of RUB 10,000 Moscow City Court 20/08/2018 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - on 12/06/2017 escorting to a police station for compiling an offence report,     Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings.     4,000   6176/19 17/01/2019 Anastasiya Alekseyevna ORLOVA 1991 Peredruk Aleksandr Dmitriyevich St Petersburg Rally against the pension reform   St Petersburg 09/09/2018 article 20.2 §   6.1 of CAO 5 days of detention St Petersburg City Court 12/09/2018 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - on 09/09/2018 escorting to a police station for compiling an offence report.     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 - immediate execution of the sentence of administrative detention; an appeal against conviction had no suspensive effect. 5,000   6635/19 21/01/2019 Viktor Anatolyevich SHALAYEV 1983 Zhdanov Ivan Yuryevich Vilnius Anticorruption rally   Vladimir 05/05/2018 article 20.2 § 5 of CAO fine of RUB 10,000 Vladimir Regional Court 04/09/2018   3,500   6733/19 21/01/2019 Aleksey Vladimirovich VOLKOV-DUBROVIN 1967 Zhdanov Ivan Yuryevich Vilnius Opposition rally   Moscow 05/05/2018 article 20.2 § 5 of CAO fine of RUB 15,000 Moscow City Court 16/08/2018 Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings. 3,500   6780/19 21/01/2019 Olga Vyacheslavovna OSIKINA 1992 Zhdanov Ivan Yuryevich Vilnius Opposition rally   St Petersburg 05/05/2018 article 20.2 § 5 of CAO fine of RUB 10,000 St Petersburg City Court 24/07/2018   3,500   7593/19 24/01/2019 Boris Andreyevich YUDIN 1993 Sholokhov Igor Nikolayevich Kazan Rally against the pension reform   Kazan 09/09/2018 article 20.2 § 2 of CAO 4 days of detention Supreme Court of the Tatarstan Republic 18/09/2018 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - on 09-10/09/2018 escorting to and detention in a police station for and after compiling an offence report,   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 - immediate execution of the sentence of administrative detention; an appeal against conviction had no suspensive effect. 5,000   7595/19 14/01/2019 Bulat Rustemovich KHAYRULLIN 1997 Sholokhov Igor Nikolayevich Kazan Rally against the pension reform   Kazan 09/09/2018 article 20.2 § 2 of CAO 4 days of detention Supreme Court of the Tatarstan Republic 18/09/2018 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - on 09-10/09/2018 escorting to and detention in a police station for and after compiling an offence report,     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 - immediate execution of sentence of administrative detention; an appeal against conviction had no suspensive effect.       5,000   33052/19 11/06/2019 Vasil Andreyevich TARASOV 1998 Sholokhov Igor Nikolayevich Kazan Rally against the pension reform   Kazan 18/11/2018 article 20.2 § 2 of CAO fine of RUB 20,000 Supreme Court of the Tatarstan Republic 30/01/2019 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention – (i) on 30/12/2018-01/01/2019 escorting to and detention in a police station for and after compiling and then recompiling an offence report in relation to the rally on 18/11/2018; (ii) on 29/01/2019 escorting to a police station for compiling an offence report in relation to posting on 12/12/2018 a banner “Putin is a thief” on a tram bridge in Naberezhnye Chelny,   Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings. 4,000   59567/19 13/11/2019 Nikolay Alekseyevich KASYAN 1998 Morozova Natalya Yuryevna Moscow Rally against the pension reform   Moscow 09/09/2018     article 20.2 § 2 of CAO             fine of RUB 20,000           Moscow City Court 14/05/2019           Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention – (i) on 08/09/2018 escorting to a police station for compiling an offence report in relation to the rally on 09/09/2018; (ii) on 31/01/2021-01/02/2021 escorting to and detention in a police station for and after compiling an offence report in relation to a rally on 23/01/2021 (see below),   Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings in 2021 (final decision on 18/02/2021 by Moscow City Court),   Art. 10 (1) - conviction for making calls to participate in public events – the applicant was arrested and sentenced to 5-days’ detention in relation to the rally to support A.   Navalnyy on 23/01/2021 (Art. 20.2 § 2 of CAO, final decision on 18/02/2021 by Moscow City Court). 5,000   11367/20 18/02/2020 Pavel Vladimirovich CHERNYKH 1986   Markin Konstantin Aleksandrovich Velikiy Novgorod   Rally for fair elections to Mosgorduma   Moscow 27/07/2019   Rally to support A.   Navalnyy   Moscow 31/01/2021 article 20.2 §   6.1 of CAO           article 20.2 §   6.1 of CAO fine of RUB 20,000         10 days of detention Moscow City Court 22/08/2019         Moscow City Court 23/06/2021 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - on 28-29/07/2019 detention in a police station after compiling an offence report,   Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the 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 - immediate execution of the sentence of detention in 2021; an appeal against conviction had no suspensive effect. 5,000   1792/22 22/11/2021   31149/20 15/06/2020 Sergey Yuryevich SHOKAREV 1972 Mezak Ernest Aleksandrovich Saint-Barthélemy-d’Anjou Rally for fair elections to Mosgorduma   Moscow 27/07/2019         article 20.2 §   6.1 of CAO fine of RUB 10,000 Moscow City Court 10/10/2019 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - on 27-29/07/2019 escorting to and detention in a police station for and after compiling an offence report. 4,000   3891/22 27/12/2021 Valeriy Antonovich BADMAYEV       Rally of Chuulhn (Congress of Oirat-Kalmyk people)   Elista 29/05/2021 article 20.2 § 8 of CAO 40 hours of community work Supreme Court of the Kalmykia Republic 02/07/2021   3,500     [1] Plus any tax that may be chargeable to the applicants.