CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 29 septembre 2020

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .s379BC09C { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:right } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .s10950C61 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify } .s5E1364CA { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .s339D85E6 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:14pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .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 } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .s76CF415B { page-break-before:always; clear:both } .s25D5DE94 { margin-top:66pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:7pt } Communicated on 29 September 2020 Published on 19 October 2020   THIRD SECTION Application no. 227/15 Pavel Yuryevich RASSUDOV against Russia lodged on 25 December 2014 SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE The application concerns the refusal of the Russian authorities to register the Russian Pirate Party. According to the applicant, he applied for the registration of that party on 11   December 2012. The Russian Ministry of Justice dismissed his application on 19 December 2012, finding that the name of the party did not correspond to the aims proclaimed in its Chapter. Furthermore, it held that the name of the party referred to the crime of piracy or counterfeit goods prohibited by criminal law. Lastly, some deficiencies in the registration documents were noted. The applicant challenged the refusal to register the party before the Zamoskvoretsikiy District Court in Moscow. He stated that the name of the party referred to the online index of digital content of entertainment media and software – “The Pirate Bay” and that Pirate Parties had been registered in several European countries. The district court dismissed his claim on 20   June 2013. The applicant appealed against that decision to the Moscow City Court, which dismissed his appeal claim on 10 July 2014. Subsequently, the applicant lodged cassation appeal claim with the Moscow City Court. Its outcome is unknown.   QUESTIONS TO THE PARTIES Has there been an interference with the applicant’s freedom of association, within the meaning of Article 11 § 1 of the Convention? If so, was that interference “prescribed by law”? If so, was it “necessary in a democratic society” within the meaning of Article 11 § 2 of the Convention? In particular, could the political party’s   choice of name   justify the refusal in its registration?   The applicant is invited to provide the Court with a copy of the Russian Pirate Party’s Charter as well as other material related to its creation and information about any new developments in the case (including the outcome of the cassation appeal proceedings) supported by copies of the relevant documents.