CEDH · CASELAW;JUDGMENTS;COMMITTEE;ENG — 16 mai 2024

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .sFE10DC93 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .s5E1364CA { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .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 } .s339D85E6 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:14pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .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 } .s51DFF5CF { margin-top:0pt; margin-left:34pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:-17pt; text-align:justify } .sE5BF05B1 { width:2.33pt; font:7pt 'Times New Roman'; display:inline-block } .s2D9C6089 { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s69DCC830 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .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 } .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 MEDVEDEV AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA (Applications nos. 38642/21 and 18 others – see appended list)             JUDGMENT   STRASBOURG 16 May 2024   This judgment is final but it may be subject to editorial revision. In the case of Medvedev 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 18 April 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); and Martynyuk v.   Russia , no.   13764/15, §§ 38-42, 8   October 2019, relating to the lack of suspensive effect of an appeal against the sentence of administrative detention. REMAINING COMPLAINTS 14.     Some applicants raised further additional complaints under Article 6 of the Convention concerning other aspects of fairness of the administrative ‑ offence proceedings. In view of the findings 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 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 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 16 May 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 / 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]     38642/21 15/07/2021 Artem Mikhaylovich MEDVEDEV 1989 Memorial Human Rights Centre Moscow Rally "Free Navalnyy"   Moscow   31/01/2021 article 20.2 §   6.1 of CAO detention for 5 days Moscow City Court 10/02/2021 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - detention in the police van between 12.27   p.m. and 2:25 p.m. on 31/01/2021, escorting to and detention at the police station for compiling an offence record between 2:25 p.m. 31/01/2021 and 3:00 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,   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     44708/21 12/08/2021 Vladimir Olegovich SEREBRYAKOV 1994 Glukhov Aleksey Vladimirovich Novocheboksarsk Rally "Free Navalnyy"   Cheboksary   23/01/2021     article 20.2 § 5 of CAO fine of RUB   10,000 Supreme Court of the Chuvashia Republic 06/05/2021 Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings 3,500     47075/21 07/09/2021 Aleksandr Arkadyevich STURCHAK 1987 Memorial Human Rights Centre Moscow Rally "Free Navalnyy"   Moscow   31/01/2021 article 20.2 §   6.1 of CAO detention for 7 days Moscow City Court 12/03/2021 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - escorting to the police station on 31/01/2021 for compiling administrative offence record and detention at the police station between 12:25 p.m. on 31/01/2021 and 3:00 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,   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     60623/21 06/12/2021 Andrey Vladimirovich PRYTKOV 1979 Memorial Human Rights Centre Moscow Rally "Free Navalnyy"   Tumen   23/01/2021   Rally "Free Navalnyy"   Tumen   31/01/2021       article 20.2 § 5 of CAO           article 20.2 § 5 of CAO fine of RUB   15,000           fine of RUB   17,000 Tyumen Regional Court 14/07/2021       Tyumen Regional Court 07/06/2021 Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings - in both sets of administrative proceedings (concerning the events of 23/01/2021 and 31/01/2021),     3,500     61338/21 03/12/2021 Aleksandr Aleksandrovich ROMANENKO 1991 Memorial Human Rights Centre Moscow Rally "Free Navalnyy"   Moscow   23/01/2021   Rally "Free Navalnyy"   Moscow   21/04/2021 article 20.2 § 5 of CAO           article 20.2 §   6.1 of CAO fine of RUB   10,000           fine of RUB   10,000 Moscow City Court 23/06/2021         Moscow City Court 01/10/2021 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - escorting to and detention at the police station for compiling an offence record between: 3:00 p.m. on 23/01/2021 and 11:10 p.m. on 23/01/2021; 4:30 p.m. on 25/04/2021 (4 days after the participation in the rally) and 11:00   p.m. on 26/04/2021,   Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings - in both sets of administrative proceedings (concerning the events of 23/01/2021 and 21/04/2021) 4,000     61724/21 10/12/2021 Nikita Leonidovich IGONIN 2000 Memorial Human Rights Centre Moscow Rally "Free Navalnyy"   Nizhniy Novgorod   31/01/2021 article 20.2 § 5 of CAO fine of RUB 5,000 Nizhniy Novgorod Regional Court 21/07/2021 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - escorting to and detention at the police station for compiling an offence record between 12:20 p.m. and 9:45 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     8381/22 25/01/2022 Vladislav Igorevich BELYAYEV 2000 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 27/07/2021 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - escorting to the police station for compiling an offence record and detention there between 5:40 p.m. and 8:55   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     8420/22 25/01/2022 Dmitriy Andreyevich ILYIN 1998 Memorial Human Rights Centre Moscow Rally "Free Navalnyy"   Moscow   02/02/2021 article 20.2 §   6.1 of CAO detention for 6 days Moscow City Court 29/07/2021 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - escorting to and detention at the police station for compiling an offence record between 11:30 p.m. on 02/02/2021 and 5:00 p.m. on 04/02/2021,   Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings,   Prot. 7 Art. 2 - 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     8441/22 12/01/2022 Miroslav Vladlenovich BUYNOV 1996 Polyakov Daniil Alekseyevich Voronezh Rally "Free Navalnyy"   Voronezh   31/01/2021 article 20.2 § 5 of CAO fine of RUB   10,000 Voronezh Regional Court 12/07/2021 Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings 3,500   8472/22 25/01/2022 Ivan Ilyich DOROFEYEV 1999 Memorial Human Rights Centre Moscow Meeting with a candidate running for parliamentary elections   Moscow   26/07/2021 article 19.3 § 1 of CAO detention for 5 days Moscow City Court 30/07/2021 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - escorting to and detention at the police station for compiling an offence record between 7:34 p.m. on 26/07/2021 and 3:30 p.m. on 27/07/2021,   Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings,   Prot. 7 Art. 2 - 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   8475/22 25/01/2022 Viktor Petrovich KOCHKIN 1995 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 11/08/2021 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - escorting to and detention at the police station for compiling an offence record between 12:25 p.m. on 31/01/2021 and 0:30 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   8499/22 14/01/2022 Pavel Andreyevich SAUTKIN 2000 Usanova Olimpiada Valentinovna Nizhniy Novgorod Rally "Free Navalnyy"   Nizhniy Novgorod   31/01/2021 article 20.2 § 5 of CAO fine of RUB   5,000 Nizhniy Novgorod Regional Court 15/07/2021 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - escorting to and detention at the police station for compiling an offence record between 12:25 p.m. and 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   8805/22 22/01/2022 Roman Rinatovich MIFTAKHUTDINOV 2003 Pershakova Yelena Yuryevna Moscow Rally "Free Navalnyy"   Krasnoyarsk   23/01/2021 article 20.2 § 5 of CAO fine of RUB   10,000 Krasnoyarsk Regional Court 22/07/2021 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - escorting to and detention at the police station for compiling an offence record between 6:10 p.m. and 10:30 p.m. on 23/01/2021,   Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings 4,000   9460/22 31/01/2022 Mikhail Dmitriyevich MOROZOV 2001 Pershakova Yelena Yuryevna Moscow Rally "Free Navalnyy"   Krasnoyarsk   23/01/2021     article 20.2 § 5 of CAO fine of RUB   12,000 Krasnoyarsk Regional Court 27/10/2021 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - escorting to the police station for compiling an offence record on 23/01/2021,   Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings 4,000   11442/22 01/02/2022 Ilya Daniilovich STEPANOV 1998 Memorial Human Rights Centre Moscow Rally "Free Navalnyy"   Moscow`   02/02/2021 article 20.2 § 5 of CAO fine of RUB   20,000 Moscow City Court 03/08/2021 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - escorting to and detention at the police station for compiling an offence record between 11:10 a.m. and 5:30   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 4,000   11567/22 28/01/2022 Renat Maratovich KHAKIMOV 1999 Dubrovina Marina Alekseyevna Novorossiysk Rally "Free Navalnyy"   Krasnodar   21/04/2021 article 20.2 § 5 of CAO fine of RUB   15,000 Krasnodar Regional Court 04/10/2021 Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings - 3,500   12287/22 24/02/2022 Shukrullo Nurulloyevich ALIMOV 1988 Prosvirkina Kseniya Dmitriyevna Moscow   Rally to support Izzat Amon   Moscow   02/04/2021 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 record between 11:15 a.m. and 8:50   p.m. on 02/04/2021,   Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings,     4,000   13893/22 28/02/2022 Roman Sergeyevich KURLYKIN 1988 Prosvirkina Kseniya Dmitriyevna Moscow Rally "Free Navalnyy"   Voronezh   21/04/2021   article 20.2 § 5 of CAO fine of RUB   10,000 Voronezh Regional Court 31/08/2021 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - escorting to and detention at the police station for compiling an offence record between 7:35 p.m. on 21/04/2021 and 0:30 a.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   30525/22 22/02/2022 David Vladimirovich SHESTAKOV 1989 Prosvirkina Kseniya Dmitriyevna Moscow Rally "Free Navalnyy"   Voronezh   21/04/2021 article 20.2 § 5 of CAO fine of RUB   10,000 Voronezh Regional Court 24/08/2021 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - escorting to the police station for compiling an offence record on 21/04/2021,   Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings 4,000     [1] Plus any tax that may be chargeable to the applicants.