CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 26 octobre 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 } .s7ED160F0 { text-decoration:none } .s33165EBA { font-family:Arial; font-size:8pt; vertical-align:super; color:#0069d6 } .s3B53EBCA { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify; font-size:7pt } .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 } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .sF6A12959 { width:33%; height:1px; text-align:left } .s85226119 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:justify; font-size:10pt } .s653E6C45 { font-family:Arial; font-size:6.67pt; vertical-align:super; color:#0069d6 } Communicated on 26 October 2020 Published on 16 November 2020   THIRD SECTION Application no. 39855/20 Yuliya Vladimirovna TSVETKOVA against Russia lodged on 22 August 2020 SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE The application concerns administrative offence proceedings against the applicant. She was fined for publishing several posts on VKontakte [1] which had been found to amount to “promotion of homosexuality among minors”.       QUESTIONS TO THE PARTIES 1.     Did the applicant’s conviction of an administrative offence for “promotion of homosexuality among minors” violate her right to freedom of expression, contrary to Article 10 of the Convention (see Bayev and Others v. Russia , nos. 67667/09 and 2 others, 20 June 2017)?   2.     Did the applicant suffer discrimination in the enjoyment of her Convention rights, contrary to Article 14 of the Convention read in conjunction with Article 10 (see Bayev and Others v. Russia , cited above)?   3.     Did the Federal Security Service’s request for user data related to the applicant’s VKontakte account and the VKontakte community administered by her from VKontakte company violate the applicant’s right to respect for her private life? The parties are requested to submit a copy of VKontakte company’s reply of 7 June 2019.   4.     Did the applicant have a fair hearing in the determination of the criminal charges against her, in accordance with Article 6 §§ 1 and 3 of the Convention? In particular, –     Did the lack of a prosecuting party and the allegedly excessively active role of the trial court entail violations of the principles of the equality of arms, adversarial procedure and impartiality under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention (see Karelin v. Russia , no. 926/08, 20   September 2016)? –     Was the applicant able to examine witnesses against her – in particular officers of the Federal Security Service and expert witnesses – , as required by Article 6 § 3 (d) of the Convention?     [1] VKontakte is a Russian online social media and social networking service similar to Facebook.