CEDH · CASELAW;JUDGMENTS;COMMITTEE;ENG — 16 octobre 2025

.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 } .s51DFF5CF { margin-top:0pt; margin-left:34pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:-17pt; text-align:justify } .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 } .s6EC6BA2A { width:121.74pt; 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 }       THIRD SECTION CASE OF MALYKHINA AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA (Applications nos. 42001/21 and 32 others – see appended list)             JUDGMENT   STRASBOURG 16 October 2025   This judgment is final but it may be subject to editorial revision. In the case of Malykhina and Others v. Russia, The European Court of Human Rights (Third Section), sitting as a Committee composed of:   Diana Kovatcheva , President ,   Canòlic Mingorance Cairat,   Vasilka Sancin , judges , and Viktoriya Maradudina, Acting Deputy Section Registrar, Having deliberated in private on 25 September 2025, 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 about the disproportionate measures taken against them as organisers or participants of public assemblies, in connection with their participation in various public events in breach of COVID ‑ 19 ‑ related restrictions. 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 in connection with their participation in various public events in breach of COVID-19-related restrictions, 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). It further refers to Nemytov and Others v. Russia, no.   1257/21 and 2   others, 27 May 2025, in so far as the application by the authorities of the COVID-19-related restrictions to the assemblies is concerned. 9.     In the leading cases of Nemytov and Others (cited above, §§   136-51) the Court found a violation in respect of issues similar to those in the present case (see further 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). 10 .     Having examined all the material submitted to it, the Court has not found any fact or argument capable of persuading it to reach a different conclusion as to the admissibility and merits of these complaints. Having regard to its case-law on the subject, the Court considers that in the instant case the interferences with the applicants’ freedom of assembly were not “necessary in a democratic society”. 11.     These complaints are therefore admissible and disclose a breach of Article 11 of the Convention. OTHER ALLEGED VIOLATIONS UNDER WELL-ESTABLISHED CASE-LAW 12.     The applicants submitted other complaints which also raised issues under the Convention 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 in paragraphs 10-13 above, the Court considers that there is no need to deal separately with these remaining complaints. APPLICATION OF ARTICLE 41 OF THE CONVENTION 15.     Regard being had to the documents in its possession and to its case ‑ law (see, in particular, Navalnyy and Others v. Russia [Committee], nos.   25809/17 and 14 others, §   22, 4   October 2022), the Court finds it reasonable to award the sums indicated in the appended table. FOR THESE REASONS, THE COURT, UNANIMOUSLY, Decides to join the applications; Holds that it has jurisdiction to deal with these applications as they relate to the facts that took place before 16   September 2022; Declares the complaints under Article 11 of the Convention and the other complaints under the well-established case-law of the Court, as set out in the appended table, admissible, and finds that there is no need to examine separately the remaining complaints under Article 6 of the Convention; Holds that these applications disclose a breach of Article   11 of the Convention; Holds that there has been a violation of the Convention 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 October 2025, pursuant to Rule   77   §§   2 and   3 of the Rules of Court.     Viktoriya Maradudina   Diana Kovatcheva   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]     42001/21 05/08/2021 Regina Yakovlevna MALYKHINA 2000   Loktev Sergey Aleksandrovich St Petersburg Rally "Free Navalnyy"   St Petersburg   02/02/2021 article 20.2.2 § 1 of CAO fine of RUB   10,000 St Petersburg City Court 09/03/2021 Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings. 3,500     42042/21 14/08/2021 Diana Aleksandrovna CHURDALEVA 1996   Pershakova Yelena Yuryevna Moscow Rally " Free Navalnyy"   St Petersburg   31/01/2021 article 20.2.2 § 1 of CAO detention for 7 days St Petersburg City Court 11/03/2021 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - escorting to and detention at the police station after compiling an offence report from 4.45 p.m. on 31/01/2021 until 01/02/2021, when the applicant was taken to the court;   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     42174/21 05/08/2021 Nikita Sergeyevich US 1998   Peredruk Aleksandr Dmitriyevich St Petersburg Rally "Free Navalnyy"   St Petersburg   31/01/2021 article 20.2.2 § 1 of CAO detention for 11 days St Petersburg City Court 11/02/2021 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - escorting to and detention at the police station after compiling an offence report from 4.30 p.m. on 31/01/2021 until 11.10 a.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;   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     42339/21 08/08/2021 Viktoriya Viktorovna ZHUCHENKO 1994   Belozerov Aleksey Sergeyevich St PEtersburg Rally "Free Navalnyy"   St Petersburg   31/01/2021 article 20.2.2 § 1 of CAO detention for 10 days St Petersburg City Court 09/02/2021 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     42378/21 18/08/2021 Mikhail Mikhaylovich PUSHKAREV 1991   Pershakova Yelena Yuryevna Moscow Rally "Free Navalnyy"   St Petersburg   31/01/2021 article 20.2.2 § 1 of CAO detention for 10 days St Petersburg City Court 11/03/2021 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - escorting to and detention at the police station after compiling an offence report from 4.45 p.m. on 31/01/2021 until 01/02/2021, when the applicant was taken to the court;   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     42539/21 10/08/2021 Sergey Viktorovich GALAYBO 1971   Cherkasov Vitaliy Viktorovich St Petersburg Rally "Free Navalnyy"   St Petersburg   31/01/2021 article 20.2.2 § 1 of CAO detention for 7 days St Petersburg City Court 11/03/2021 Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings. 5,000     46212/21 02/09/2021 Vitaliy Konstantinovich FILATOV 1988   Peredruk Aleksandr Dmitriyevich St Petersburg Rally “Free Navalnyy”   St Petersburg   31/01/2021 article 20.2.2 § 1 of CAO detention for 5 days St Petersburg City Court 02/03/2021 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - escorting to and detention at the police station for compiling an offence report from 1 p.m. until 9 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;   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     46232/21 01/09/2021 Olga Vasilyevna BAKHAREVA 1989   Peredruk Aleksandr Dmitriyevich St Petersburg Rally “Free Navalnyy”   St Petersburg   31/01/2021 article 20.2.2 § 1 of CAO detention for 10 days St Petersburg City Court 16/03/2021 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - escorting to and detention at the police station after compiling an offence report from 6.30 p.m. on 31/01/2021 until 4.45 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     51393/21 30/09/2021 Aleksey Aleksandrovich GUSHCHIN 1993   Memorial Human Rights Centre Moscow Rally “Free Navalnyy”   St Petersburg   31/01/2021 article 20.2.2 § 1 of CAO fine of RUB   15,000 St Petersburg City Court 08/04/2021 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - escorting to and detention at the police station after compiling an offence report from 5 p.m. on 31/01/2021 until 9 p.m. on 01/02/2021;   Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings. 4,000   52705/21 22/10/2021 Nil Vadimovich PETSKO 1989   Zhdanov Ivan Yuryevich Vilnius Rally "Free Navalnyy"   St Petersburg   31/01/2021 article 20.2.2 § 1 of CAO fine of RUB   10,000 St Petersburg City Court 29/04/2021 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - escorting to and detention at the police station after compiling an offence report from 1.30 p.m. on 31/01/2021 until 01/02/2021 (released after the court hearing);   Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings. 4,000   52741/21 15/10/2021 Mikhail Viktorovich SHEVCHENKO 1984   Memorial Human Rights Centre Moscow Rally “Free Navalnyy”   St Petersburg   21/04/2021 article 20.2.2 § 1 of CAO detention for 5 days St Petersburg City Court 29/06/2021 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - escorting to and detention at the police station after compiling an offence report from 8 p.m. on 21/04/2021 until 7.15 p.m. on 22/04/2021;   Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings;   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   53502/21 13/10/2021 Georgiy Alekseyevich MEDVINSKIY 1987   Mikhaylova Kseniya Andreyevna St Petersburg Rally "Free Navalnyy"   St Petersburg   31/01/2021 article 20.2.2 § 1 of CAO fine of RUB   15,000 St Petersburg City Court 13/04/2021 Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings. 3,500   53801/21 26/10/2021 Ruslan Ildarovich GALIYEV 1998   Loktev Sergey Aleksandrovich St Petersburg Rally “Free Navalnyy”   St Petersburg   21/04/2021 article 20.2.2 § 1 of CAO fine of RUB   10,000 St Petersburg City Court 17/06/2021 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - escorting to and detention at the police station after compiling an offence report from 9.30 p.m. on 21/04/2021 until 22/04/2021, when the applicant was taken to the court;   Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings. 4,000   54429/21 27/10/2021 Aleksandr Anatolyevich BASHKIROV 1984   Bayeva Aleksandra Nikolayevna Moscow Rally "Free Navalnyy"   St Petersburg   21/04/2021 article 20.2.2 § 1 of CAO fine of RUB   12,000 St Petersburg City Court 20/05/2021 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - escorting to and detention at the police station after compiling an offence report from 7.44 p.m. on 21/04/2021 until 9 p.m. on 22/04/2021;   Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings. 4,000   55653/21 22/10/2021 Rafael Radikovich ABDRAFIKOV 2002   MOO MEMORIAL Human Rights Centre St Petersburg Rally "Free Navalnyy"   St Petersburg   21/04/2021 article 20.2.2 § 1 of CAO detention for 5 days St Petersburg City Court 28/04/2021 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - escorting to and detention at the police station after compiling an offence report from 8.20 p.m. on 21/04/2021 until 22/04/2021, when the applicant was taken to the court;   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   55851/21 05/11/2021 Kirill Andreyevich BOGATYRENKO 1992   Zhdanov Ivan Yuryevich Vilnius Rally "Free Navalnyy"   St Petersburg   23/01/2021 article 8-6-1 § 2 of the Law of St Petersburg on Administrative Offences in St Petersburg fine RUB   4,000 Oktyabrskiy District Court of St Petersburg 18/05/2021 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - escorting to and detention at 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   56493/21 27/10/2021 Alisa Olegovna DELOVA 1994   MOO MEMORIAL Human Rights Centre St Petersburg Rally "Free Navalnyy"   St Petersburg   31/01/2021 article 20.2.2 § 1 of CAO fine of RUB   10,000 St Petersburg City Court 27/04/2021 Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings. 3,500   56815/21 22/10/2021 Vladislav Sergeyevich ZIMIREV 1996   Cherkasov Vitaliy Viktorovich St Petersburg Rally “Free Navalnyy”   St Petersburg   02/02/2021 article 20.2.2 § 1 of CAO detention for 10 days St Petersburg City Court 11/05/2021 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - escorting to and detention at the police station after compiling an offence report from 11 p.m. on 02/02/2021 until 6 p.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;   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   56842/21 22/10/2021 Georgiy Konstantinovich SIZYKH 1996   Cherkasov Vitaliy Viktorovich St Petersburg Rally “Free Navalnyy”   St Petersburg   02/02/2021 article 20.2.2 § 1 of CAO detention for 10 days St Petersburg City Court 11/05/2021 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - escorting to and detention at the police station after compiling an offence report from 11 p.m. on 02/02/2021 until 5 p.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;   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   56896/21 10/11/2021 Anastasiya Igorevna BESKHMELNAYA 1993   Memorial Human Rights Centre Moscow Rally "Free Navalnyy"   St Petersburg   31/01/2021 article 20.2.2 § 1 of CAO fine of RUB   10,000 St Petersburg City Court 24/06/2021 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - escorting to and detention at the police station for compiling an offence report from 3.58 p.m. until 10 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   57144/21 29/10/2021 Anton Vladimirovich VITSKIY 1990   Memorial Human Rights Centre Moscow Rally "Free Navalnyy"   St Petersburg   21/04/2021 article 20.2.2 § 1 of CAO detention for 12 days St Petersburg City Court 29/04/2021 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - escorting to and detention at the police station after compiling an offence report from 9 p.m. on 21/04/2021 until 7.45 p.m. on 22/04/2021;   Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings;   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. 6,000   57711/21 26/10/2021 Svetlana Gennadyevna BEZUGLOVA 1989   Memorial Human Rights Centre Moscow Rally "Free Navalnyy"   St Petersburg   21/04/2021 article 20.2.2 § 1 of CAO detention for 12 days St Petersburg City Court 27/04/2021 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - escorting to and detention at the police station for compiling an offence report from 7.20 p.m. on 21/04/2021 until 2 a.m. on 22/04/2022;   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. 6,000   57861/21 11/11/2021 Dmitriy Sergeyevich PAPORT 1985   Memorial Human Rights Centre Moscow Rally "Free Navalnyy"   St Petersburg   31/01/2021 article 20.2.2 § 1 of CAO fine of RUB   10,000 St Petersburg City Court 13/05/2021 Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings. 3,500   59389/21 25/11/2021 Aleksandr Sergeyevich ZAKAMALDIN 1979   Memorial Human Rights Centre Moscow Rally "Free Navalnyy"   St Petersburg   31/01/2021 article 20.2.2 § 1 of CAO fine of RUB   10,000 St Petersburg City Court 17/06/2021 Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings. 3,500   59447/21 25/11/2021 Yelena Yuryevna PLAKSINA 1970   Memorial Human Rights Centre Moscow Rally "Free Navalnyy"   St Petersburg   31/01/2021 article 20.2.2 § 1 of CAO fine of RUB   10,000 St Petersburg City Court 10/06/2021 Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings.   3,500   59451/21 25/11/2021 Rustam Kayratovich SULEYMENOV 1995   Memorial Human Rights Centre Moscow Rally "Free Navalnyy"   St Petersburg   21/04/2021 article 20.2.2 § 1 of CAO fine of RUB   10,000 St Petersburg City Court 15/06/2021 Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings. 3,500   60029/21 03/12/2021 Maksim Aleksandrovich ZEMSKIY 1993   Zhdanov Ivan Yuryevich Vilnius Rally "Free Navalnyy"   St Petersburg   23/01/2021 article 8-6-1 § 2 of St Petersburg Decree No 273-70 fine of RUB   4,000 Oktyabrskiy District Court of St Petersburg 06/07/2021 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - escorting to and detention at 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   61110/21 06/12/2021 Dmitriy Mikhaylovich ZOBNIN 2002   Memorial Human Rights Centre Moscow Rally “Free Navalnyy”   St Petersburg   31/01/2021 article 20.2.2 § 1 of CAO fine of RUB   10,000 St Petersburg City Court 08/06/2021 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - escorting to and detention at the police station for compiling an offence report from 3 p.m. until 11.40 p.m. on 31/01/2021;   Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings. 4,000   61320/21 27/11/2021 Daroslav Aleksandrovich SKIBA 2003   Memorial Human Rights Centre Moscow Rally “Free Navalnyy”   St Petersburg   31/01/2021 article 20.2.2 § 1 of CAO fine of RUB   10,000 St Petersburg City Court 27/05/2021 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - escorting to and detention at the police station for compiling an offence report from 4.45 p.m. on 31/01/2021 until 3.20 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   2046/22 22/12/2021 Anna Igorevna MICHURINA 1986   Memorial Human Rights Centre Moscow Rally "Medical care to Navalnyy"   St Petersburg   21/04/2021 article 20.2.2 § 1 of CAO fine of RUB   10,000 St Petersburg City Court 15/07/2021 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - escorting to and detention at the police station for compiling an offence report from 9 p.m. on 21/04/2021 until noon 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   3824/22 22/12/2021 Sergey Aleksandrovich BULTYKOV 1984   Semenov Daniil Aleksandrovich St Petersburg Rally "Free Navalnyy’   St Petersburg   21/04/2021 article 20.2.2 § 1 of CAO detention for 10 days St Petersburg City Court 22/06/2021 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   6351/22 11/01/2022 Aleksandra Sergeyevna ABDUGAPAROVA 1990   Memorial Human Rights Centre Moscow Rally "Free Navalnyy"   St Petersburg   31/01/2021 article 20.2.2 § 1 of CAO fine of RUB   15,000 St Petersburg City Court 13/07/2021 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - escorting to and detention at the police station for compiling an offence report from 3 p.m. on 31/01/2021 until 9 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   7345/22 20/01/2022 Dmitriy Vitalyevich GLOBOV 1996   Memorial Human Rights Centre Moscow Rally "Free Navalnyy"   St Petersburg   31/01/2021 article 20.2.2 § 1 of CAO fine of RUB   10,000 St Petersburg City Court 20/07/2021 Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings. 3,500     [1] Plus any tax that may be chargeable to the applicants.