CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 6 avril 2022

.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 } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } Published on 25 April 2022   SECOND SECTION Application no. 23907/15 ASOCIAŢIA OBŞTEASCĂ CENTRUL DE INFORMAŢII GENDERDOC-M against the Republic of Moldova lodged on 5 May 2015 communicated on 6 April 2022 SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE The application concerns the attempted disruption of a peaceful demonstration organised by the applicant association in support of LGBTI rights and the State’s failure to protect the association’s right to freedom of assembly. In particular, on 17 May 2014 the applicant association organised a gay pride march, during which two private individuals intervened unhindered by the police and managed to forcefully take away a banner and a rainbow flag from the participants. The criminal proceedings against those individuals were discontinued on the ground that their acts could not be classified as a criminal offence and that administrative proceedings were time-barred. In 2015 the applicant organisation’s appeal was upheld and the case was reopened. The applicant association complains of a violation of its rights under Articles 10, 11, 13 and 14 of the Convention.   QUESTION TO THE PARTIES Has there been a violation of the applicant’s right to freedom of peaceful assembly, contrary to Article   11 of the Convention taken in conjunction with Article 14 of the Convention? In particular, did the Moldovan authorities discharge their positive obligation to enable lawful demonstrations to proceed peacefully and to protect demonstrators from homophobic violence ( Identoba and Others v. Georgia , no. 73235/12, 12 May 2015)?