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 } .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 } .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 } .s237659C9 { height:246.8pt } .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 UDALOV AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA (Applications nos. 83038/17 and 17 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 Udalov 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 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); 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; 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 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 15.     Regard being had to the documents in its possession and to its case ‑ law (see in particular Navalnyy and Others v. Russia [Committee], nos.   25809/17 and 14 others, §   22, 4   October 2022), the Court finds it reasonable to award the sums indicated in the appended table. FOR THESE REASONS, THE COURT, UNANIMOUSLY, Decides to join the applications; Holds that it has jurisdiction to deal with these applications as they relate to facts that took place before 16   September 2022; Declares the complaints under Article 11 of the Convention and the other complaints under the well-established case-law of the Court, as set out in the appended table, admissible, and finds that there is no need to examine separately the remaining complaints; Holds that these applications disclose a 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 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 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 per applicant (in euros) [1]     83038/17 30/11/2017 Sergey Borisovich UDALOV 1983 Peredruk Aleksandr Dmitriyevich St   Petersburg Anticorruption rally   St   Petersburg 12/06/2017 article 20.2 § 5 of CAO fine of RUB   10,000 St   Petersburg City Court 28/06/2017 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - on 12-13/06/2017 escorting to and detention in a police station for and after compiling offence reports,   Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings. 4,000     3538/18 13/12/2017 Stanislav Andreyevich KORENYUGIN 1995 Sharapov Ilnur Ilgizovich Moscow Anticorruption rally   Moscow 26/03/2017   Rally to support A.   Navalnyy   Moscow 31/01/2021   Indoors political meeting   Moscow, 13/03/2021 article 20.2 § 5 of CAO         article 20.2 §   6.1 of CAO           article 20.33 of CAO fine of RUB   15,000         10 days of detention           fine of RUB   5,000   Moscow City Court 10/07/2017       Moscow City Court 03/02/2021         Lyubertsy Town Court of Moscow Region 14/09/2021 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - (i) on 31/01/2021 until 01/02/2021 escorting to and detention in a police station for and after compiling an offence report; (ii) on 13/03/2021 escorting to a police station for compiling offence reports,   Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in two sets of administrative-offence proceedings under Art. 20.2 of CAO,   Prot. 7 Art. 2 - delayed review of conviction by a higher tribunal - the sentence of 10-day detention in 2021 was executed immediately; an appeal against conviction had no suspensive effect. 5,000     7940/18 19/01/2018 Oksana Rafikovna KHARINOVA 1975 Mezak Ernest Aleksandrovich Saint-Barthélemy-d’Anjou Anticorruption rally   Uhta 26/03/2017   Rally to support A.   Navalnyy   Uhta 23/01/2021 article 20.2 § 1 of CAO         article 20.2 § 5 of CAO fine of RUB   15,000         fine of RUB   10,000 Supreme Court of the Komi Republic 19/07/2017     Supreme Court of the Komi Republic 17/03/2021   3,500     21583/18 23/04/2018 Natalya Aleksandrovna SUBBOTINA 1997 Pershakova Yelena Yuryevna Moscow Rally to support A.   Navalnyy   Perm 22/09/2017   Rally to support A.   Navalnyy   Perm 07/10/2017   Gathering to support arrested protesters (following the above rally)   Perm 07/10/2017 article 20.2 § 5 of CAO           article 20.2 § 2 of CAO           article 20.2 § 5 of CAO             fine of RUB   10,000           20 hours of community work         20 hours of community work           Perm Regional Court 23/10/2017       Perm Regional Court 20/11/2017       Perm Regional Court 18/12/2017         Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - on 22/09/2017 escorting to a police station for compiling an offence report,     Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings under Art. 20.2 § 5 of CAO (final decision on 23/10/2017). 4,000     29958/18 08/06/2018 Irina Aleksandrovna NEVEROVA 1989 Pershakova Yelena Yuryevna Moscow Rally to support A.   Navalnyy   Perm 03/09/2017   Protest rally   Perm 22/09/2017   Rally to support A.   Navalnyy   Perm 07/10/2017 article 20.2 § 5 of CAO           article 20.2 § 5 of CAO         article 20.2 § 5 of CAO fine of RUB   10,000           20 hours of community work       20 hours of community work Perm Regional Court 26/12/2017       Perm Regional Court 22/12/2017     Perm Regional Court 11/12/2017 Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings (final decision on 22/12/2017 by the Perm Regional Court). 3,500     30161/18 09/06/2018 Georgiy Borisovich SHABANOV 1962 Pershakova Yelena Yuryevna Moscow Rally to support A.   Navalnyy   Perm 07/10/2017   Opposition rally   Perm 05/05/2018     Rally to support A.   Navalnyy   Perm 23/01/2021   Protest rally   Perm 21/04/2021 article 20.2 § 5 of CAO           article 20.2 § 8 of CAO           article 20.2 § 5 of CAO           article 20.2 § 5 of CAO fine of RUB   10,000           100 hours of community work         fine of RUB   10,000           fine of RUB   15,000 Perm Regional Court 11/12/2017       Perm Regional Court 09/08/2018       Perm Regional Court 02/06/2021       Perm Regional Court 11/08/2021 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - on 14/05/2018 escorting to a police station for compiling an offence report in relation to the rally on 05/05/2018,   Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings (final decision on 02/06/2021 by the Perm Regional Court). 4,000     33646/18 21/06/2018 Anatoliy Vyacheslavovich SHIRINKIN 1967 Shabanov Georgiy Borisovich Troitsa Rally to support A.   Navalnyy   Perm 07/10/2017 article 20.2 § 5 of CAO fine of RUB   10,000 Perm Regional Court 21/12/2017 Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings. 3,500     54920/18 31/10/2018 Filipp Aleksandrovich SHCHELKANOV 1988 Cherkasov Vitaliy Viktorovich St   Petersburg Opposition rally   St   Petersburg 05/05/2018   article 19.3 § 1 of CAO     article 20.2 § 5 of CAO 15 days of detention     fine of RUB   10,000 St   Petersburg City Court 30/05/2018   St   Petersburg City Court 26/06/2018 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - on 05-06/05/2018 escorting to and detention in a police station for and after compiling offence reports,   Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in both sets of the administrative-offence proceedings,   Prot. 7 Art. 2 - delayed review of conviction by a higher tribunal - immediate execution of the sentence of detention; an appeal against conviction had no suspensive effect. 5,000     504/19 11/12/2018 Firgat Fidaliyevich FAYZRAKHMANOV 1994 Sholokhov Igor Nikolayevich Kazan Rally against the pension reform   Kazan 09/09/2018 article 20.2 § 2 of CAO 4 days of detention Supreme Court of the Tatarstan Republic 12/09/2018 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - on 09-10/09/2018 escorting to and detention in a police station for and after compiling an offence report,   Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings,   Prot. 7 Art. 2 - delayed review of conviction by a higher tribunal - immediate execution of the sentence of detention; an appeal against conviction had no suspensive effect. 5,000   3288/19 19/12/2018 Aleksey Igorevich CHERNOV 1984 Sholokhov Igor Nikolayevich Kazan Rally against the pension reform   Kazan 09/09/2018 article 20.2 § 2 of CAO 4 days of detention Supreme Court of the Tatarstan Republic 21/09/2018 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - on 09-10/09/2018 escorting to and detention in a police station for and after compiling an offence report,   Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings,   Prot. 7 Art. 2 - delayed review of conviction by a higher tribunal - immediate execution of the sentence of detention; an appeal against conviction had no suspensive effect. 5,000   9560/19 05/02/2019 Ilya Sergeyevich VAGIN 1985 Glukhov Aleksey Vladimirovich Novocheboksarsk Opposition rally   Nizhniy Novgorod 05/05/2018 article 20.2 § 2 of CAO fine of RUB   20,000 Nizhniy Novgorod Reginal Court 08/08/2018   3,500   14140/19 05/03/2019 Aleksandr Yevgenyevich KARAVAYEV 1985     Rally to commemorate B. Nemtsov   Nizhniy Novgorod 25/02/2018 article 20.2 § 5 of CAO 30 hours of community work Nizhniy Novgorod Regional Court 06/09/2018 Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings. 3,500   20630/19 04/04/2019 Stanislav Valeryevich ZAKHAROV 1988 Sukachev Roman Vasilyevich Chita Protest rally   Chita 03/11/2018 article 20.2 § 2 of CAO     fine of RUB   20,000     Zabaykalye Regional Court 24/12/2018 Art. 10 (1) - conviction for making calls to participate in public events - the applicant was sentenced to two fines of RUB 10,000 for reposting - on two social networks - one message relating to a forthcoming protest rally (Art. 20.2 § 1 of CAO; final decisions on 24/12/2018 by the Zabaykalye Regional Court) (in the meantime, the rally had been eventually approved and had been held as planned on 03/11/2018). 4,000   33046/19 11/06/2019 Adel Damirovich BADRETDINOV 1999 Sholokhov Igor Nikolayevich Kazan Rally against the pension reform   Kazan 09/09/2018 article 20.2 § 5 of CAO fine of RUB   15,000 Supreme Court of the Tatarstan Republic 17/04/2019 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - on 22-23/03/2019 escorting to and detention in a police station for and after compiling an offence report,   Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings.     4,000   43878/19 06/08/2019 Vyacheslav Aleksandrovich KHLYNOV 1999     Spontaneous meeting against arbitrary detention of protesters   Moscow 06/10/2018 article 20.2 §   6.1 of CAO fine of RUB   10,000 Moscow City Court 06/05/2019 Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings. 3,500   63934/19 30/11/2019 Artem Igorevich KULIKOVSKIY 2000 Zakhvatov Dmitriy Igorevich Moscow Protest action   Moscow 10/03/2019 article 20.2 § 5 of CAO fine of RUB   10,000 Moscow City Court 02/07/2019   3,500   45813/21 25/08/2021 Maksim Valeryevich KUKUSHKIN 1976 Bubon Konstantin Vladimirovich Khabarovsk Rally to support A.   Navalnyy   Khabarovsk 23/01/2021                       article 20.2 § 8 of CAO fine of RUB   150,000 Khabarovsk Regional Court 05/05/2021 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - on 23-24/01/2021 escorting to and detention in a police station for compiling an offence report. 5,500   48307/21 06/09/2021 Dmitriy Sergeyevich TIMOSHENKO 1987 Misakyan Tumas Arsenovich Moscow Rallies to support S.   Furgal in Khabarovsk on:   24/10/2020     26/10/2020     31/10/2020     07/11/2020     26/12/2020             article 20.2 §   6.1 of CAO   article 20.2 § 5 of CAO   article 20.2 § 8 of CAO   article 20.2 § 8 of CAO   article 20.2 § 8 of CAO             fine of RUB   10,000   fine of RUB   10,000   fine of RUB   75,000   fine of RUB   150,000   fine of RUB   150,000 Khabarovsk Regional Court       11/03/2021     18/03/2021     09/03/2021     15/03/2021     16/03/2021 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - on 16/01/2021 escorting to a police station for compiling an offence report in relation to the rally on 24/10/2020.   7,000     [1] Plus any tax that may be chargeable to the applicants.