CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 23 mars 2021

.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 }   Published on 12 April 2021   FIFTH SECTION Application no. 41825/19 Eduard Vladimirovich KOVALENKO against Ukraine lodged on 26 July 2019 communicated on 23 March 2021 SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE The application concerns the applicant’s conviction under Articles 114-1 and 295 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine for his public statements against military mobilisation made at the demonstration in Genichesk on 27 January 2015. On 26 February 2019 the Supreme Court of Ukraine upheld the decision of the lower courts convicting the applicant to five years’ imprisonment. QUESTIONS TO THE PARTIES 1.     Did the act of which the applicant was convicted constitute a criminal offence under national law at the time when it was committed, as envisaged by Article   7 of the Convention?   2.     Has there been a violation of the applicant’s right to freedom of expression contrary to Article   10 of the Convention? Was the applicant’s conviction based on clear and foreseeable legal provisions and necessary in a democratic society? Was the interference with the applicant’s freedom of expression proportionate to the legitimate aim pursued?