CEDH · CASELAW;JUDGMENTS;COMMITTEE;ENG — 13 juin 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 } .s4EFA53D { 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; 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 } .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 } .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 } .s3A357E38 { text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-family:Arial; font-size:8pt; list-style-position:inside } .s1DE04BC { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:8pt } .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 }       SECOND SECTION CASE OF MALETIN AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA (Applications nos. 1027/19 and 25 others – see appended list)             JUDGMENT   STRASBOURG 13 June 2024   This judgment is final but it may be subject to editorial revision. In the case of Maletin 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 23 May 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. 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 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 paragraph 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 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 13 June 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 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]     1027/19 14/12/2018 Ivan Yuryevich MALETIN 2001 Glukhov Aleksey Vladimirovich Novocheboksarsk Opposition rally/gathering   Cheboksary   05/05/2018 article 20.2 § 5 of CAO and article 20.2 § 5 of CAO fine of RUB 10,000 and fine of RUB 10,000 Supreme Court of the Chuvash Republic 06/09/2018 (two separate decisions) Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in both sets of the administrative ‑ offence proceedings,   Prot. 7 Art. 4 - right not to be tried or punished twice in criminal proceedings - the applicant was convicted in two separate sets of administrative proceedings (Art. 20.2 § 5 of CAO) for participation in a rally which was qualified by the domestic authorities as two separate events (a rally and a gathering).   3,500     1032/19 14/12/2018 Aleksandr Sergeyevich MIKHANKOV 1997 Glukhov Aleksey Vladimirovich Novocheboksarsk Opposition rally/gathering   Cheboksary   05/05/2018   article 20.2 § 5 of CAO     article 20.2 § 5 of CAO     article 19.3 § 1 of CAO 20 hours of community work and 20 hours of community work and fine of RUB 1,000 Supreme Court of the Chuvash Republic 05/07/2018 (three separate decisions)     Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in all sets of the administrative ‑ offence proceedings,   Prot. 7 Art. 4 - right not to be tried or punished twice in criminal proceedings - the applicant was convicted in two separate sets of administrative proceedings (Art. 20.2 § 5 of CAO) for participation in a rally which was qualified by the domestic authorities as two separate events (a rally and a gathering). He was also convicted in the third set of administrative proceeding (Art.19.3 §1 of CAO) for the facts which constituted the basis of the first two convictions. 4,000     45059/21 09/08/2021 Lev Vsevolodovich LUKHOVITSKIY 1984 Karavayev Aleksandr Yevgenyevich Nizhniy Novgorod Rally “Free Navalnyy”   Moscow   02/02/2021 article 20.2   §   6.1 of CAO detention for 10 days Moscow City Court 10/02/2021 Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings.   5,000     45062/21 09/08/2021 Pavel Grigoryevich DOLGOV 1993 Karavayev Aleksandr Yevgenyevich Nizhniy Novgorod Rally “Free Navalnyy”   Moscow   02/02/2021 article 20.2   §   6.1 of CAO detention for 10 days Moscow City Court 10/02/2021 Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings.   5,000     45064/21 09/08/2021 Ilya Mikhaylovich GOLOVLEV 1998 Karavayev Aleksandr Yevgenyevich Nizhniy Novgorod Rally “Free Navalnyy”   Moscow   02/02/2021   article 20.2   §   6.1 of CAO detention for 10 days Moscow City Court 10/02/2021 Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings. 5,000     45067/21 09/08/2021 Grigoriy Denisovich MIKHAYLOV 2001 Karavayev Aleksandr Yevgenyevich Nizhniy Novgorod Rally “Free Navalnyy”   Moscow   02/02/2021 article 20.2 § 6.1 of CAO detention for 10 days Moscow City Court 10/02/2021 Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings. 5,000     47070/21 12/09/2021 Yevgeniy Viktorovich STUPIN 1983     Rally “Free Navalnyy”   Moscow   23/01/2021 article 20.2 § 5 of CAO fine of RUB 20,000 Moscow City Court 27/05/2021 Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings. 3,500     47523/21 05/09/2021 Petr Sersheyevich GRIGORYEV 1977 Bubon Konstantin Vladimirovich Khabarovsk Rally to support Furgal and Navalny   Khabarovsk   31/01/2021 article 20.2 § 5 of CAO fine of RUB 10,000 Khabarovsk Regional Court 05/03/2021 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - escorting to and detention at the police station for compiling an offence report from 1.30 p.m. until 3.15 p.m. on 31/01/2021. 4,000     47817/21 10/09/2021 Ilya Genrikhovich SHKVARIN 1979 Chernova Nataliya Nikolayevna Petrozavodsk Rally “Free Navalnyy”   Petrozavodsk   23/01/2021 article 20.2 § 2 of CAO detention for 2 days Supreme Court of the Republic of Karelia 10/03/2021 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - escorting to and detention at the police station for compiling an offence report from 1.40 p.m. on 23/01/2021 until the hearing in the first-instance court 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.   5,000   48222/21 19/08/2021 Gleb Vladimirovich ZVONOVSKIY 2002 Krasikov Vladimir Vladimirovich Samara Rally “Free Navalnyy”   Samara   31/01/2021 article 20.2 § 5 of CAO fine of RUB 15,000 Samara Regional Court 13/05/2021 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - escorting to the police station on 31/01/2021 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   49373/21 16/09/2021 Agata Aleksandrovna MARAMBEY 1987 Lepekhin Andrey Gennadyevich Chelyabinsk Rally “Free Navalnyy”   Chelyabinsk   23/01/2021 article 20.2 § 5 of CAO fine of RUB 15,000 Chelyabinsk Regional Court 18/03/2021 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - escorting to the police station for compiling an offence report 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   50514/21 27/09/2021 Ilya Vladimirovich KRYUCHKOV 2002 Gilmanov Mansur Idrisovich Podolsk Opposition rally   Moscow   04/11/2020 article 20.2   §   6.1 of CAO fine of RUB 20,000 Moscow City Court 20/04/2021 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - escorting to and detention at the police station for compiling an offence report from 2.25 p.m. until 9.00 p.m. on 04/11/2020,     Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings.   4,000   51061/21 30/09/2021 Lidiya Borisovna OLSHANSKAYA 1936 Gak Irina Vladimirovna Rostov-on-Don Rally “Free Navalnyy”   Rostov-on-Don   31/01/2021 article 20.2   §   6.1 of CAO fine of RUB 11,000 Rostov Regional Court 01/04/2021 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - escorting to and detention at the police station for compiling an offence report from 12.30 p.m. until 9.00 p.m. on 31/01/2021,   Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings.   4,000   53901/21 18/10/2021 Zhirayr Karoyevich KAROYAN 1991 Gilmanov Mansur Idrisovich Podolsk Opposition rally   Moscow   22/06/2020 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 from 6.00 p.m. until 10.10 p.m. on 22/06/2020,   Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings.   4,000   54242/21 20/10/2021 Mikael Valeryevich VARDANYAN 1995     Rally “Free Navalnyy”   St Petersburg   23/01/2021 article 20.2.2   §   1 of CAO fine of RUB 10,000 St   Petersburg City Court 20/04/2021 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - escorting to and detention at the police station for compiling an offence report from 7.30 p.m. on 23/01/2021 until 2.00 p.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   55561/21 15/11/2021 Aleksandra Aleksandrovna SMIRNOVA 1998     Rally “Free Navalnyy”   Moscow   02/02/2021 article 20.2 § 5 of CAO fine of RUB 10,000 Moscow City Court 17/05/2021 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - escorting to and detention at the police station for compiling an offence report from 11.50 p.m. on 02/02/2021 until 6.59 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   57852/21 03/11/2021 Aleksandr Valeryevich POYARKOV 1963 Gilmanov Mansur Idrisovich Podolsk Opposition rally   Moscow   22/06/2020 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 from 6.10 p.m. until 10.30 p.m. on 22/06/2020,     Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings.   4,000   58960/21 12/11/2021 Ilya Antonovich STARIKOV 1994 Glukhov Aleksey Vladimirovich Novocheboksarsk Rally “Free Navalnyy”   Samara   23/01/2021 article 20.2 § 5 of CAO fine of RUB 10,000 Samara Regional Court 20/05/2021 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - escorting to and detention at the police station for compiling an offence report from 3.50 p.m. until 8.00 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   59092/21 21/10/2021 Murat Rubinovich MUKASHEV 2002 Gilmanov Mansur Idrisovich Podolsk Opposition rally   Moscow   22/06/2020 article 20.2 § 5 of CAO fine of RUB 20,000 Moscow City Court 29/07/2021 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - escorting to and detention at the police station for compiling an offence report from 6.20 p.m. on 22/06/2020 until 2.00 a.m. on 23/06/2020;   Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings.   4,000   59268/21 12/11/2021 Timofey Igorevich OREKHOV 1991 Gilmanov Mansur Idrisovich Podolsk Opposition rally   Moscow   22/06/2020 article 20.2 § 5 of CAO fine of RUB 20,000 Moscow City Court 29/06/2021 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - Escorting to and detention at the police station for compiling an offence report from 6.00 p.m. on 22/06/2020 until 12.30 a.m. on 23/06/2020;     Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings.   4,000   57/22 03/12/2021 Sergey Aleksandrovich YEREMIN 2000 Krasikov Vladimir Vladimirovich Samara Rally “Free Navalnyy”   Samara   23/01/2021 article 20.2 § 5 of CAO fine of RUB 10,000 Samara Regional Court 16/09/2021 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - escorting to and detention at the police station for compiling an offence report from 3.30 p.m. until 4.26 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   3982/22 03/01/2022 Darya Anatolyevna ARSENEVA 1989 Antokhin Yevgeniy Vyacheslavovich Moscow Rally “Free Navalnyy”   Moscow   31/01/2021 article 20.2   §   6.1 of CAO fine of RUB 10,000 Moscow City Court 13/08/2021 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - escorting to the police station on 31/01/2021 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   35287/22 02/07/2022 Valeriya Andreyevna ALEKSEYEVA 2000 Zyryanova Mariya Sergeyevna St Petersburg Protest against war in Ukraine   St Petersburg   24/02/2022 article 20.2 § 6.1 of CAO detention for 10 days St Petersburg City Court 03/03/2022 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - escorting to and detention at the police station for compiling an offence report from 7.00 p.m. on 24/02/2022 until 26/02/2022. 5,000   37335/22 16/07/2022 Andrey Aleksandrovich DUZHIK 2000 Markin Konstantin Aleksandrovich Velikiy Novgorod Protest against war in Ukraine   Novgorod   06/03/2022 article 20.2 § 5 of CAO 20 hours of community work Novgorod Regional Court 04/04/2022 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - escorting to and detention at the police station for compiling an offence report from 2.20 p.m. until 8.30 p.m. on 06/03/2022,     Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings.   4,000   39969/22 04/08/2022 Yekaterina Stanislavovna VASILYEVA 1976 Podolskiy Sergey Viktorovich St Petersburg Protest against war in Ukraine   St Petersburg   26/03/2022 article 20.3.3   §   1 of CAO fine of RUB 30,000 St Petersburg City Court 26/05/2022 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - escorting to and detention at the police station for compiling an offence report from 2.50 p.m. until 7.30 p.m. on 26/03/2022,     Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings.   4,000   43086/22 20/08/2022 Yekaterina Andreyevna USOLKINA 1992 Pershakova Yelena Yuryevna Moscow Protest against war in Ukraine   Perm   24/02/2022 article 20.2 § 5 of CAO fine of RUB 10,000 Perm Regional Court 21/04/2022 Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings. 3,500   [1] Plus any tax that may be chargeable to the applicants.