CEDH · CASELAW;JUDGMENTS;COMMITTEE;ENG — 14 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 } .sC986E16F { font-family:Arial; color:#ffffff } .sC646A315 { width:14.54pt; display:inline-block } .sD046859D { width:101.74pt; 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 }       SECOND SECTION CASE OF PANKRATOV AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA (Applications nos. 40486/21 and 27 others – see appended list)             JUDGMENT   STRASBOURG 14 March 2024   This judgment is final but it may be subject to editorial revision. In the case of Pankratov and Others v. Russia, The European Court of Human Rights (Second Section), sitting as a Committee composed of:   Lorraine Schembri Orland , President ,   Frédéric Krenc,   Davor Derenčinović , judges , and Viktoriya Maradudina, Acting Deputy Section Registrar, Having deliberated in private on 15 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.     The applicants submitted other complaints which also raised issues under the Convention, 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 in the light of its findings in Idalov v. Russia   [GC], no.   5826/03, §§ 103-08, 22 May 2012, and   Tomov and Others v.   Russia , nos.   18255/10   and 5 others, §§ 92-142, 9   April 2019, concerning inadequate conditions of transport; 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 Glukhin v.   Russia,   no.   11519/20, §§   64-91, 4 July 2023, concerning unjustified processing of the applicant’s personal biometric data by using highly intrusive   facial recognition   technology in administrative offence proceedings in order to identify, locate and arrest him. 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 10 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 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; Holds that these applications disclose a breach of Article   11 of the Convention; Holds that there has been a violation of the Convention 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 March 2024, pursuant to Rule   77   §§   2 and   3 of the Rules of Court.     Viktoriya Maradudina   Lorraine Schembri Orland   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 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]     40486/21 27/07/2021 Roman Sergeyevich PANKRATOV 1985 Aksenova Darya Dmitriyevna Kolomna Rally "Free Navalnyy"   Moscow   31/01/2021 article 20.2 §   6.1 of CAO detention for 12 days Moscow City Court 12/02/2021 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - escorting to and detention at the police station for compiling an offence report (arrested at 3.00 p.m. on 31/01/2021, brought to the police station at 5.00 p.m., taken before the court directly from the police station 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,   Art. 3 - inadequate conditions of detention during transport - poor conditions of transfer in a police van on 01/02/2021-02/02/2021 (the applicant spent the night in the police van), 23   persons held in the van at the same time, seats were not available to all, no drinking water, no meals 6,000     2052/22 14/12/2021 Sergey Aleksandrovich KHLYABICH 1968 Memorial Human Rights Centre Moscow Rally "Free Navalnyy"   Moscow   31/01/2021 article 20.2 § 5 of CAO fine of RUB 10,000 Moscow City Court 29/06/2021 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - escorting to and detention at the police station for compiling an offence report (arrested at 3.02 p.m., brought to the police station at 4.00 p.m., released at 11.00 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     2060/22 14/12/2021 Anatoliy Dmitriyevich BALAYEV 1999 Memorial Human Rights Centre Moscow Rally "Free Navalnyy"   Moscow   23/01/2021 article 20.2 §   6.1 of CAO fine of RUB 15,000 Moscow City Court 23/06/2021 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - escorting to and detention at the police station for compiling an offence report (arrested at 5.20 p.m. on 23/01/2021, brought to the police station at 10 p.m. on the same day, released at 1.10 a.m. on 24/01/2021),   Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings   4,000     2082/22 14/12/2021 Fedor Mikhaylovich STETSKEVICH 1985 Memorial Human Rights Centre Moscow Rally "Free Navalnyy"   Moscow   31/01/2021 article 20.2 § 5 of CAO fine of RUB 15,000 Moscow City Court 17/06/2021 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - escorting to and detention at the police station for compiling an offence report (arrested at 3.15 p.m. on 31/01/2021, brought to the police station at 6.40 p.m., released at 00.30 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   4,000     2085/22 14/12/2021 Ilya Olegovich KOPANEV 1993 Memorial Human Rights Centre Moscow Rally "Free Navalnyy"   Moscow   31/01/2021 article 20.2 § 5 of CAO fine of RUB 20,000 Moscow City Court 17/06/2021 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - escorting to and detention at the police station for compiling an offence report (arrested at 4.15 p.m. on 31/01/2021, brought to the police station at 7 p.m., released on 1.00 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   4,000     2090/22 14/12/2021 Igor Vadimovich LEPILIN 1993 Memorial Human Rights Centre Moscow Rally " Free Navalnyy"   Yekaterinburg   31/01/2021 article 20.2 § 5 of CAO community work of 20 hours Sverdlovsk Regional Court 15/06/2021 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - escorting to and detention at the police station for compiling an offence report (arrested at 3.40 p.m., brought to the police station at 4.05 p.m., released at 5.40 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     2103/22 15/12/2021 Mikhail Alekseyevich BASOV 2002 Memorial Human Rights Centre Moscow Rally "Free Navalnyy"   Krasnoyarsk   31/01/2021 article 20.2 § 5 of CAO fine of RUB 10,000 Krasnoyarsk Regional Court 24/06/2021 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - escorting to and detention at the police station for compiling an offence report (arrested at 1:.0 p.m. on 31/01/2021, brought to the police station at 3.50 p.m., released at 9.10 p.m. on the same day without the report in question, which was issued on 12/02/2021),   Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings   4,000     2114/22 15/12/2021 Yevgeniy Sergeyevich ZAKHRYAPIN 1994 Memorial Human Rights Centre Moscow Rally "Free Navalnyy"   Moscow   31/01/2021 article 20.2 § 5 of CAO fine of RUB 10,000 Moscow City Court 25/06/2021 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - escorting to and detention at the police station for compiling an offence report (arrested at 5 p.m. on 31/01/2021, brought to the police station at 7.30 p.m., released at 11 p.m. on the same day),   Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings     4,000     2164/22 15/12/2021 Aleksey Mikhaylovich OCHAN 1974 Memorial Human Rights Centre Moscow Rally "Free Navalnyy"   Moscow   31/01/2021 article 20.2 § 5 of CAO fine of RUB 10,000 Moscow City Court 29/06/2021 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - escorting to and detention at the police station for compiling an offence record (arrested at 3.45 p.m. on 31/01/2021, brought to the police station at 4.05 p.m., released at 10:30 p.m.),   Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings   4,000   2166/22 15/12/2021 Kirill Olegovich SHEVYAKIN 2000 Memorial Human Rights Centre Moscow Rally "Free Navalnyy"   Ryazan   21/04/2021 article 20.2.2 §   1 of CAO fine of RUB 5,000 Ryazan Regional Court 15/06/2021 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - escorting to and detention at the police station for compiling an offence report (arrested at 7.40 p.m. on 21/04/2021, brought to the police station at 8.10 p.m., brought before the court directly from the police station at 12.30 p.m. on 22/04/2021),   Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings 4,000   2170/22 15/12/2021 Irina Petrovna KONEVSKAYA 1987 Memorial Human Rights Centre Moscow Rally "Free Navalnyy"   Moscow   31/01/2021 article 20.2 §   6.1 of CAO fine of RUB 10,000 Moscow City Court 05/07/2021 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - escorting to and detention at the police station after compiling an offence report (arrested at 2 p.m. on 31/01/2021, brought to the police station at 4 p.m. on the same day, taken before the court directly from the police station at 9 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   4,000   2203/22 28/12/2021 Dariya Sergeyevna KOKAREVA 1991 Memorial Human Rights Centre Moscow Rally "Free Navalnyy"   Moscow   23/01/2021 article 20.2 § 5 of CAO fine of RUB 10,000 Moscow City Court 29/06/2021 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - escorting to and detention at the police station for compiling an offence report (arrested at 8.15 p.m. on 23/01/2021, taken to the police station at 11.00 p.m., released at 3.15 a.m. on 24/01/2021),   Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings   4,000   2876/22 09/12/2021 Yuriy Alekseyevich OGORELTSEV 1999 Memorial Human Rights Centre Moscow Rally "Free Navalnyy"   Moscow   23/01/2021 article 20.2 § 5 of CAO fine of RUB 15,000 Moscow City Court 11/06/2021 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - escorting to and detention at the police station for compiling an offence report from 5.50 p.m. to 11.55 p.m. on 23/01/2021     4,000   3536/22 17/12/2021 Nikita Anatolyevich VAULIN 1985 Memorial Human Rights Centre Moscow Rally "Free Navalnyy"   Yekaterinburg   31/01/2021 article 20.2 § 5 of CAO community work of   30 hours Sverdlovsk Regional Court 22/09/2021 Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings   3,500   4328/22 30/12/2021 Gleb Vladimirovich MIKHNOVETS 1993 Memorial Human Rights Centre Moscow Rally "Free Navalnyy"   Moscow   31/01/2021 article 20.2 § 5 of CAO fine of RUB 10,000 Moscow City Court 05/07/2021 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - escorting to and detention at the police station for compiling an offence report (arrested at 3.30 p.m., brought to the police station at 5 p.m., released at 11.30 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   4,000   4335/22 30/12/2021 Yelena Vladimirovna SHAGURINA 1992 Memorial Human Rights Centre Moscow Rally "Free Navalnyy"   Vladimir   31/01/2021 article 20.2 § 5 of CAO fine of RUB 10,000 Vladimir Regional Court 12/07/2021 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - escorting to and detention at the police station for compiling an offence report (arrested at 1.35 p.m., brought to the police station at 2 p.m., released at 5 p.m. on 31/01/2021 without offence report, which was drawn up later, on 12/05/2021 in the applicant’s absence),   Art. 8 (2) - restrictions on the right to private life of participants in public assemblies - use of facial recognition technology for the identification of the applicant as a participant of a rally and her subsequent conviction (raised on appeal) 5,000   4341/22 30/12/2021 Boris Borisovich BODENKO 1974 Memorial Human Rights Centre Moscow Rally "Free Navalnyy"   Moscow   02/02/2021 article 20.2 § 5 of CAO fine of RUB 10,000 Moscow City Court 05/07/2021 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - escorting to and detention at the police station for compiling an offence report (arrested at 11.35 p.m. on 02/02/2021, brought to the police station at 00.50 a.m. on 03/02/2021, released at 04.55 a.m. on 03/02/2021),   Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings   4,000   4345/22 30/12/2021 Dmitriy Yaroslavovich GULEY 1978 Memorial Human Rights Centre Moscow Rally "Free Navalnyy"   Moscow   23/01/2021     article 20.2 §   6.1 of CAO fine of RUB 20,000 Moscow City Court 09/07/2021 Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings 3,500   4349/22 30/12/2021 Denis Bolotbekovich TABALDYYEV 1979 Memorial Human Rights Centre Moscow Rally "Free Navalnyy"   Moscow   31/01/2021 article 20.2 §   6.1 of CAO fine of RUB 10,000 Moscow City Court 01/07/2021 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - escorting to and detention at the police station for compiling an offence report (arrested at 2.30 p.m., brought to the police station at 4.30 p.m. on the same day, released at 2 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 4,000   4563/22 17/12/2021 Yevgeniy Vladimirovich ABRAMENKOV 1988 Memorial Human Rights Centre Moscow Rally "Free Navalnyy"   Moscow   02/02/2021 article 20.2 § 5 of CAO fine of RUB 15,000 Moscow City Court 29/06/2021 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - escorting to and detention at the police station for compiling an offence report (arrested at 11.20 p.m. on 02/02/2021, brought to the police station at 1 a.m. on 03/02/2021, released at 6   a.m. on the same day),   Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings   4,000   4574/22 17/12/2021 Arina Yuryevna ONISHCHENKO 2001 Memorial Human Rights Centre Moscow Rally "Free Navalnyy"   Moscow   02/02/2021 article 20.2 §   6.1 of CAO fine of RUB 15,000 Moscow City Court 17/06/2021 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - escorting to and detention at the police station for compiling an offence report (arrested at 23.59 on 02/02/2021, brought to the police station at 00.50 a.m. on 03/02/2021, released at 8.30 a.m. on the same day),   Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings     4,000   4576/22 17/12/2021 Artem Aleksandrovich YELIZAROV 2000 Memorial Human Rights Centre Moscow Rally "Free Navalnyy"   Moscow   23/01/2021 article 20.2 § 5 of CAO fine of RUB 10,000 Moscow City Court 21/06/2021 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - escorting to and detention at the police station for compiling an offence report (arrested at 6.20 p.m. on 23/01/2021, brought to the police station at 7.40 p.m., released at 00.30 a.m. on 24/01/2021),   Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings   4,000   7715/22 13/01/2022 Vladimir Aleksandrovich DEVICHENKO 2002 Memorial Human Rights Centre Moscow Rally "Free Navalnyy"   Orel   31/01/2021 article 20.2 § 5 of CAO fine of RUB 10,000 Orel Regional Court 30/07/2021 Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings,   Art. 8 (2) - restrictions on the right to private life of participants in public assemblies - use of facial recognition technology for the identification of the applicant as a participant of a rally and his subsequent conviction (raised on appeal) 5,000   7720/22 13/01/2022 Tatyana Petrovna ZHURAVSKAYA 1976 Memorial Human Rights Centre Moscow Rally "Free Navalnyy"   Moscow   21/04/2021           article 20.2 § 5 of CAO fine of RUB 10,000 Moscow City Court 27/09/2021 Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings   3,500   7723/22 13/01/2022 Zhambal Balzhinimayevich GOMBOYEV 1975 Memorial Human Rights Centre Moscow Rally "Free Navalnyy"   Moscow   02/02/2021 article 20.2 § 5 of CAO fine of RUB 10,000 Moscow City Court 27/08/2021 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - escorting to and detention at the police station for compiling an offence report (arrested at 11.15 a.m. on 02/02/2021, brought to the police station at 00.30 a.m. on 03/02/2021, released at 5 a.m. on 03/02/2021),   Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings 4,000   7774/22 13/01/2022 Irina Yuryevna ZUBAREVA 1990 Memorial Human Rights Centre Moscow Rally "Free Navalnyy"   Kaliningrad   21/04/2021 article 20.2 § 5 of CAO fine of RUB 10,000 Kaliningrad Regional Court 13/07/2021 Art. 8 (2) - restrictions on the right to private life of participants in public assemblies - use of facial recognition technology for the identification of the applicant as a participant of a rally and her subsequent conviction (raised on appeal) 5,000   7777/22 13/01/2022 Nataliya Sergeyevna PIROZHKOVA 1999 Memorial Human Rights Centre Moscow Rally "Free Navalnyy"   Ryazan   31/01/2021 article 20.2 § 5 of CAO fine of RUB 10,000 Ryazan Regional Court 14/07/2021 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - escorting to and detention at the police station for compiling an offence report (arrested at 1.20 p.m. on 31/01/2021, brought to the police station at 1.50 p.m., brought before the court directly from the police station at midnight 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           4,000   23619/22 28/03/2022 Nataliya Mikhaylovna KAPRANOVA 1959 Memorial Human Rights Centre Moscow Rally "Free Navalnyy"   Moscow   21/04/2021 article 20.2 § 5 of CAO fine of RUB 10,000 Moscow City Court 11/11/2021 Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings,   Art. 8 (2) - restrictions on the right to private life of participants in public assemblies - use of facial recognition technology for the identification of the applicant as a participant of a rally and her subsequent conviction (raised on appeal) 5,000     [1] Plus any tax that may be chargeable to the applicants.