CEDH · CASELAW;JUDGMENTS;COMMITTEE;ENG — 11 juillet 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 } .s2E932ED2 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:11pt } .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 } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .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 } .s58699FB5 { margin-top:14pt; margin-bottom:12pt; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .s6B505E72 { margin:0pt; padding-left:0pt } .s29A3AC47 { margin-left:11.67pt; margin-bottom:12pt; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; padding-left:6.18pt; font-family:Arial; text-transform:uppercase } .s37072F3C { margin-top:14pt; margin-left:15pt; margin-bottom:12pt; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; padding-left:2.85pt; font-family:Arial; text-transform:uppercase } .s9A177BD5 { margin-top:14pt; margin-left:17.85pt; margin-bottom:12pt; 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 } .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 } .sFBC99493 { font-style:italic } .sD11CFAB7 { margin-top:14pt; margin-left:15.01pt; margin-bottom:3pt; text-align:justify; padding-left:1.99pt; font-family:Arial } .s74818F78 { margin-top:14pt; margin-bottom:3pt; text-align:justify; font-family:Arial; list-style-position:inside } .sE7B3A78A { width:1.99pt; font:7pt 'Times New Roman'; display:inline-block } .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 } .s2F3EB0E4 { border:0.75pt solid #838383; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .sDF237D91 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; font-size:8pt } .sE1A7A04C { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; color:#424242 } .s7ED160F0 { text-decoration:none } .sAB95A5CB { font-family:Arial; font-size:5.33pt; font-weight:bold; vertical-align:super; color:#424242 } .sBAADFE8C { border:0.75pt solid #838383; 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 ZAVOROTNYKH AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA (Applications nos. 43224/17 and 23 others – see appended list)             JUDGMENT   STRASBOURG 11 July 2024   This judgment is final but it may be subject to editorial revision. In the case of Zavorotnykh 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 20 June 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 lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of the prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings. 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 6 § 1 of the Convention 7.     The applicants complained of the lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of the prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings. They relied, expressly or in substance, on Article 6 § 1 of the Convention. 8.     In the leading case of Karelin v. Russia, no. 926/08, 20 September 2016, the Court already found a violation in respect of issues similar to those in the present case.   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 on the admissibility and merits of these complaints. 9.     These complaints are therefore admissible and disclose a breach of Article   6 § 1 of the Convention. OTHER ALLEGED VIOLATIONS UNDER WELL-ESTABLISHED CASE-LAW 10.     Some 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. 11.     Having examined all the material before it, the Court concludes that they also disclose violations of the Convention in the light of its findings 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; Kruglov and Others v. Russia , nos.   11264/04   and 15 others, §§   107 ‑ 38, 4   February 2020, regarding unlawful   search; Elvira Dmitriyeva v.   Russia , nos.   60921/17   and   7202/18, §§   77-90, 30 April 2019, as to administrative conviction for making calls to participate in public assemblies; Teslenko and Others v. Russia , nos.   49588/12 and 3 others, §§ 121-45, 5 April 2022, as to other restrictions on the right to freedom of expression, Frumkin v. Russia ,   no.   74568/12, §§   93-142, ECHR 2016 (extracts),   Navalnyy and Yashin v. Russia ,   no.   76204/11, 4   December 2014, Kasparov and Others v.   Russia ,   no.   21613/07, 3   October 2013, and Bodalev v. Russia , no.   67200/12, §§ 96-107, 6 September 2022, as to disproportionate measures in respect of participants and organisers of public events; 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 12.     Some applicants raised further additional complaints under the Convention or Protocols to it. In view of the above findings, the Court considers that there is no need to deal separately with these remaining complaints. APPLICATION OF ARTICLE   41 OF THE CONVENTION 13.     Regard being had to the documents in its possession and to its case ‑ law (see, in particular, Kuratov and Others v. Russia [Committee], nos.   24377/15 and 2 others, 22 October 2019), the Court considers 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 complaint under Article 6 § 1 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 complaints disclose a breach of Article   6 § 1 of the Convention concerning the lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of the prosecuting party in the administrative-offence proceedings; 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 11 July 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 6 § 1 of the Convention (lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of the prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings) No. Application no. Date of introduction Applicant’s name Year of birth   Representative’s name and location Penalty Date of final domestic decision Name of court Other complaints under well-established case-law Amount awarded for pecuniary and non-pecuniary damage and costs and expenses per applicant (in euros) [1]     43224/17 03/06/2017 Sergey Viktorovich ZAVOROTNYKH 1985 Zboroshenko Nikolay Sergeyevich Mytishchi 5 days of detention 06/12/2016 Moscow City Court   1,000     70396/17 07/09/2017 Denis Vladimirovich LARTSEV 1989 Terekhov Konstantin Ilyich Moscow 1 day of detention 13/04/2017 Rostov Regional Court Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - on 26 ‑ 27/03/2017 detention in a police station after compiling an offence report. 4,000     75215/17 19/10/2017 Sergey Igorevich GORKAYEV 1990 Terekhov Konstantin Ilyich Moscow 7 days of detention 26/04/2017 Moscow City Court 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. 1,300     79982/17 14/11/2017 Aleksey Valeryevich VLASOV 1977 Sotnikov Dmitriy Valeryevich Balashikha 40 hours of community work 15/05/2017 Tula Regional Court Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - on 26/03/2017 escorting to a police station for compiling an offence report;   Art. 11 (2) - disproportionate measures against organisers and participants of public assemblies - the applicant was arrested and sentenced to community work under Art. 20.2 §   6.1 of CAO for participation in an anticorruption rally on 26/03/2017 in Tula 4,000     5267/18 16/12/2017 Kirill Georgiyevich VOLSKIY 1991 Pyshkin Valentin Valentinovich St Petersburg 10 days of detention     fine of RUB   10,000 20/06/2017 St   Petersburg City Court   04/07/2017 St   Petersburg City Court Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - on 12 ‑ 13/06/2017 escorting to and detention in a police station for and after compiling offence reports. 4,000     7362/18 09/01/2018 Denis Gennadyevich GONCHAROV 1975 Peredruk Aleksandr Dmitriyevich St   Petersburg 5 days of detention     fine of RUB   15,000 11/07/2017 St   Petersburg City Court   11/07/2017 St   Petersburg City Court Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - on 12-14/06/2017 escorting to and detention in a police station for and after compiling offence reports. 4,000     8455/18 18/01/2018 Yana Aleksandrovna BABENKO 1993 Pyshkin Valentin Valentinovich St   Petersburg fine of RUB   10,000 20/07/2017 St   Petersburg City Court   Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - on 12 ‑ 13/06/2017 escorting to and detention in a police station for and after compiling offence reports. 4,000     13493/18 20/02/2018 Aleksey Valeryevich CHERNIKOV 1988 Peredruk Aleksandr Dmitriyevich St   Petersburg fine of RUB   10,000 22/08/2017 St   Petersburg City Court   1,000     18418/18 02/04/2018 Konstantin Borisovich ZYKOV 1990   Tatyana Yevgenyevna ZYKOVA 1995   Popkov Aleksandr Vasilyevich Sochi 10 days of detention (Zykov)     3   days of detention (Zykov)       12/10/2017 Krasnodar Regional Court     13/04/2018 Krasnodar Regional Court     Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - on 17/03/2018 both applicants’ escorting to a police station for compiling offence reports,   Art. 8 (1) - unlawful search – a court refused to authorise a search in the flat where the applicants resided, in the absence of any evidence substantiating the allegation that there were reasons to suspect that there might be firearms in that flat; a search was carried out on 17/03/2018; it was then validated by the courts, with reference to some documents found during the search as to Mr Zykov’s business activities (final decision on 03/05/2018 by the Krasnodar Regional Court),   Art. 10 (1) - conviction for making calls to participate in public events – Mr   Zykov was sentenced to 10-day detention for organising a rally to support A. Navalnyy on 07/10/2017 (Art. 20.2 § 2 of CAO; final decision on 12/10/2017 by the Krasnodar Regional Court). 5,000, to Mr Zykov   and   4,000, to Ms Zykova   21764/18 25/04/2018 Aleksey Valeryevich BOCHENKOV 1998 Sergeyeva Irina Vadimovna Moscow 15 days of detention 10/11/2017 Moscow City Court   1,000   25889/18 25/05/2018 Aleksandra Vladimirovna SEMENOVA 1979 Pershakova Yelena Yuryevna Moscow fine of RUB   20,000 12/03/2018 Perm Regional Court   Art. 10 (1) - conviction for making calls to participate in public events – the applicant was sentenced to two fines of RUB   20,000 in relation to a rally on 07/10/2017 to support A. Navalnyy’s presidential campaign and a political meeting on 24/11/2017 (Art. 20.2 § 2 of CAO; final decisions on 30/11/2017 and 12/03/2018 by the Perm Regional Court respectively). 3,500   26576/18 17/05/2018 Nikolay Nikolayevich VITKEVICH 1965     3 days of detention 08/12/2017 Bryansk Regional Court Prot. 7 Art. 2 - delayed review of conviction by a higher tribunal - immediate execution of the sentence of 3-day detention; an appeal against conviction had no suspensive effect. 1,300   26751/18 08/05/2018 Yan Igorevich PAVLOVSKIY 1998 Pyshkin Valentin Valentinovich St   Petersburg fine of RUB   15,000     7 days of detention 09/11/2017 St   Petersburg City Court   09/11/2017 St   Petersburg City Court Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - on 08-09/10/2017 escorting to and detention in a police station for and after compiling offence reports. 4,000   40130/18 08/08/2018 Anna Nikolayevna PETKOGLO 1985 Zhdanov Ivan Yuryevich Vilnius fine of RUB   20,000 08/02/2018, Nizhniy Novgorod Regional Court Art. 10 (1) - conviction for making calls to participate in public events - the applicant was sentenced to a fine of RUB 20,000 for making comments during an online interview to Navalnyy.Live on a protest rally on 29/09/2017 (Art. 20.2 § 1 of CAO, final decision on 08/02/2018 by the Nizhniy Novgorod Regional Court).         3,500   41271/18 30/07/2018 Natalya Anatolyevna VAVILOVA 1976 Pershakova Yelena Yuryevna Moscow fine of RUB   20,000 02/02/2018 Perm Regional Court Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - on 08/10/2017 escorting to a police station for compiling an offence report in relation to a protest rally on 07/10/2017,   Art. 10 (1) - conviction for making calls to participate in public events - the applicant was arrested and sentenced to a fine of RUB 20,000 in relation to the rally on 07/10/2017 (Art. 20.2 § 5 CAO, final decision on 02/02/2018 by the Perm Regional Court). 4,000   44535/18 06/09/2018 Valeriy Yuryevich NADEZHDIN 1968     7 days of detention     fine of RUB   20,000 22/03/2018 Moscow City Court   08/08/2018 Moscow City Court Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - on 12/03/2018 escorting to and detention in a police station for compiling an offence report,   Art. 11 (2) - disproportionate measures against organisers and participants of public assemblies – the applicant was arrested and sentenced to a fine and detention in relation to his participation in a protest rally on 12/03/2018 (Arts. 20.1 and 20.2 of CAO, final decisions on 22/03/2018 and 08/08/2018 by the Moscow City Court). 5,000   50659/18 10/10/2018 Ilya Viktorovich FEDIN 1996 Zhdanov Ivan Yuryevich Vilnius fine of RUB   10,000 07/06/2018 St   Petersburg City Court Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - on 05/05/2018 escorting to a police station for compiling an offence report. 4,000   52116/18 31/10/2018 Boris Mikhaylovich ZOLOTAREVSKIY 1997 Lepekhin Andrey Gennadyevich Chelyabinsk 25 days of detention       9 days of detention       30 days of detention 09/05/2018 Chelyabinsk Regional Court     12/09/2018 Chelyabinsk Regional Court     13/08/2019 Moscow City Court Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - (i) on 05/05/2018 and 08/09/2018 escorting to a police station for compiling an offence report; (ii) on 10-12/08/2019 escorting to and detention in a police station for compiling an offence report,   Art. 10 (1) - conviction for making calls to participate in public events –   (i) the applicant was arrested and sentenced to 25-day and 9-day detention in relation to an opposition rally on 05/05/2018 and a rally against the pension reform on 09/09/2018 in Chelyabinsk respectively (Art. 20.2 of CAO, final decisions on 09/05/2018 and 12/09/2018 by the Chelyabinsk Regional Court);   (ii) the applicant’s call to the participants of an approved rally on 10/08/2019 in Moscow to continue the protest with a "promenade" toward the Presidential Administration; he was arrested and sentenced to 30-day detention with reference to the lack of official approval for such promenade (Art. 20.2 § 8 of CAO, final decision on 13/08/2019 by the Moscow City Court),   Prot. 7 Art. 2 - delayed review of conviction by a higher tribunal - immediate execution of three sentences of detention; an appeal against conviction had no suspensive effect. 8,000   57314/18 13/11/2018 Aleksandr Andreyevich TROFIMOV 1999 Memorial Human Rights Centre Moscow fine of RUB   1,000 14/05/2018 Presnenskiy District Court of Moscow Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - on 22/02/2018 escorting to a police station for compiling an offence report,     Art. 10 (1) - various restrictions on the right to freedom of expression - on 22/02/2018 the applicant distributed political leaflets; he was arrested and fined (Art. 5.12 of CAO, final decision on 14/05/2018 by the Presnenskiy District Court of Moscow) ( Teslenko and Others v. Russia , nos. 49588/12 and 3 others, 5 April 2022). 4,000   4441/19 08/01/2019 Ilgam Ilgizarovich SHAKIROV 1989     fine of RUB   2,000 09/07/2018 Sovetskiy District Court of Kazan   1,000   17257/19 21/03/2019 Vladislav Valeriyevich KHODAKOVSKIY 1992         fine of RUB   10,000 21/09/2018 Voronezh Regional Court Art. 11 (2) - disproportionate measures against organisers and participants of public assemblies - the applicant was sentenced to a fine of RUB   10,000 for his participation in an opposition rally on 05/05/2018. 3,500   20949/19 08/04/2019 Roman Alekseyevich PAVLOV 1998 Zboroshenko Nikolay Sergeyevich Mytishchi fine of RUB   10,000 22/03/2019 Moscow City Court Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - on 05/05/2018 escorting to a police station for compiling an offence report,   Art. 11 (2) - disproportionate measures against organisers and participants of public assemblies - the applicant was arrested and fined for participation in an opposition rally on 05/05/2018 (Art. 20.2 of CAO, final decision on 22/03/2019 by the Moscow City Court). 4,000   32059/19 05/06/2019 Aleksandr Aleksandrovich GOLOVACH 1991     fine of RUB   20,000       4 days of detention 06/12/2018 Moscow City Court   24/03/2021 Moscow City Court Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention – (i) on 17-18/10/2018 escorting to and detention in a police station for and after compiling an offence report in relation to a rally against the pension reform on 09/09/2018; (ii) on 31/01/2021-02/02/2021 detention in a police station after compiling an offence report in relation to a rally to support A. Navalnyy on 31/01/2021,   Art. 10 (1) - conviction for making calls to participate in public events - the applicant was arrested and sentenced to a fine of RUB 20,000 for making calls to participate at the rally on 09/09/2018 (Art. 20.2 § 2 of CAO, final decision on 06/12/2018 by the Moscow City Court),   Art. 11 (2) - disproportionate measures against organisers and participants of public assemblies - the applicant was arrested and sentenced to 4-day detention in relation to the rally on 31/01/2021 (Art. 20.2 § 6.1 of CAO, final decision on 24/03/2021 by the Moscow City Court). 5,000   47354/20 02/10/2020 Irina Anatolyevna NIKIFOROVA 1985 Popkov Aleksandr Vasilyevich Sochi fine of RUB   10,000         30 hours of community work 22/01/2020 Supreme Court of Tatarstan Republic     27/05/2020 Supreme Court of the Tatarstan Republic Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - on 16/12/2019 escorting to a police station for compiling an offence report,   Art. 10 (1) - various restrictions on the right to freedom of expression - the applicant was making a video recording during a rally against construction of a waste incineration plant on 16/12/2019; she was arrested and sentenced to a fine of RUB 10,000 (Art. 20.2.2 of CAO, final decision on 22/01/2020 by the Supreme Court of the Tatarstan Republic),   Art. 11 (2) - disproportionate measures against organisers and participants of public assemblies - on 03-26/02/2020 the applicant organised a number of solo demonstrations against the above construction project; she provided information about them on her social-networking page; the courts sentenced her to community work, considering that those demonstrations by different people on different days had been conducted with the same purpose and thus were one "rally" requiring prior notification (Art. 20.2 § 2 of CAO, final decision on 27/05/2020 by the Supreme Court of the Tatarstan Republic). 4,000     [1] Plus any tax that may be chargeable to the applicants.