CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 30 mars 2023

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .s379BC09C { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:right } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .s40F41F73 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:right } .s5E1364CA { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .s34DFC730 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s339D85E6 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:14pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s54AB6003 { margin-top:66pt; margin-bottom:14pt; text-align:center } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .sE7C30868 { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify } .s7ED160F0 { text-decoration:none } .s3DC36BA9 { font-family:Arial; text-decoration:underline; color:#0069d6 } .s665E407E { margin-top:66pt; margin-bottom:14pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s2D9C6089 { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .s4ACA9207 { page-break-before:always; clear:both; mso-break-type:section-break } .s6DB91820 { text-align:center } .s8BB62139 { margin-right:auto; margin-left:auto; border-collapse:collapse } .s3695F815 { border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .sDF237D91 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; font-size:8pt } .sEECE831 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; color:#474747 } .sE8934522 { border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s6B505E72 { margin:0pt; padding-left:0pt } .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 } .s598389F8 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; font-size:11pt } .sE664BE9E { font-family:Arial; font-size:8pt; color:#000000 } .sB853CD26 { font-family:Arial; font-size:8pt } Published on 24 April 2023   SECOND SECTION Application no.   368/18 Yelena Nikolayevna GAVRILINA against Russia and 20 other applications (see list appended) PROCEDURAL INFORMATION Following a preliminary examination of the admissibility of the applications on 30 March 2023, the Court decided, under Rule 54 § 2 (b) of the Rules of Court, that notice of the applications should be given to the Government of Russia. In the applications marked by an asterisk, other complaints were raised. This part of the applications has been struck out of the Court’s list of cases or declared inadmissible by the Court, sitting in a single-judge formation, assisted by a rapporteur as provided for in Article 24 § 2 of the Convention. In the enclosed list of applications, whenever an applicant is referred to using initials, this indicates that the Court has authorised anonymity for that person, whose identity will not be disclosed to the public (Rule 47 § 4). For further information on the procedure following communication of an application brought against Russia, subject of well-established case law of the Court, please refer to the Court’s website . SUBJECT MATTER The applications concern complaints raised under Article 10 § 1 of the Convention relating to disproportionate measures against solo demonstrators which are the subject of well-established case law of the Court (see Novikova and Others v. Russia, nos. 25501/07 and 4 others, 26 April 2016 and Lashmankin and Others v. Russia, nos. 57818/09 and 14 others, 7 February 2017).   APPENDIX – STATEMENT OF FACTS List of applications raising complaints under Article 10 § 1 of the Convention (disproportionate measures against solo demonstrators) No. Application no. Date of introduction Applicant’s name Year of birth   Representative’s name and location Location Date Purpose of the demonstration Administrative charges Penalty Final domestic decision Date Name of the court Other relevant information Other complaints under well-established case-law     368/18 16/12/2017 Yelena Nikolayevna GAVRILINA 1963   Lawyers of former Memorial Human Rights Centre Moscow Protest against the authorities’ failure to perform their obligations towards the applicant’s disabled son, 23/12/2016, Moscow article 20.2 § 5 of CAO, administrative fine of RUB 10,000 16/06/2017, Moscow City Court     Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty- arrest and detention between 5.30 p.m. and 7 p.m. on 23/12/2016 for the sole purpose of drawing up a record of administrative offence: no evidence/ assessment that it was impracticable, on the spot, to compile the offence record and to achieve the goals set out in the CAO,   Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings,   Art. 6 (1) - and Art. 6 (3) (d) - unfair trial in view of restrictions on the right to examine witnesses - inability to cross-examine in open court police officers on whose written statements the applicant’s conviction was based, as well as a defence witness (an eyewitness of the demonstration)     22834/18* 08/05/2018 Aleksey Vyacheslavovich VARNAVIN 1981   Lawyers of former Memorial Human Rights Centre Moscow Protest of a defrauded owner of a flat in an unfinished building, 24/10/2017, Moscow article 20.2 § 5 of CAO, administrative fine of RUB 10,000 30/03/2018, Moscow City Court   Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty- arrest and detention on 24/10/2017 for the sole purpose of drawing up a record of administrative offence: no evidence/assessment that it was impracticable, on the spot, to compile the offence record and achieve the objectives set out in the CAO,   Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings     29938/18* 15/06/2018 Yelena Pavlovna APOKINA 1970   Ivan Yuryevich Zhdanov Vilnius Picket in support of A. Navalnyy, 07/10/2017, Bryansk article 20.2 § 5 of CAO, administrative fine of RUB 15,000 15/12/2017, Bryansk Regional Court distance requirement - event classified as assembly post facto       29984/18* 05/06/2018 Igor Anatolyevich ABDURAKHMANOV 1956   Ivan Yuryevich Zhdanov Vilnius Picket in support of A. Navalnyy, 07/10/2017, Bryansk article 20.2 § 5 of CAO, administrative fine of RUB 15,000 15/12/2017, Bryansk Regional Court distance requirement - event classified as assembly post facto       12176/19* 30/01/2019 Anastasiya Mikhaylovna GLUSHKOVA 1999   Aleksey Nikolayevich Laptev Moscow Protest against actions of L.   Slutskiy - a member of the Parliament accused by journalists of sexual harassment, 03/04/2018, Moscow article 20.2 § 5 of CAO, administrative fine of RUB 10,000 30/07/2018, Moscow City Court distance requirement - event classified as assembly post facto Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty - arrest and detention at 6 p.m. on 03/04/2018 (release time not specified) for the sole purpose of drawing up a record of administrative offence: no evidence / assessment that it was impracticable, on the spot, to compile the offence record and to achieve the objectives set out in the CAO,   Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings     43813/20* 10/09/2020 Yuliya Yevgenyevna PAVLIKOVA 1974   Oleg Aleksandrovich Yelanchik Moscow Support of political prisoners ("Novoye Velichiye" case), 07/12/2019, Moscow article 20.2 § 5 of CAO, administrative fine of RUB 10,000 10/03/2020, Moscow City Court ban on public events at certain locations: in the vicinity of the Moscow Kremlin, (Kremlevskaya Embankment) Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty - arrest and detention between 3.30 p.m. and 6.30 p.m. (according to the administrative arrest record), or 7.20 p.m. according to the applicant on 07/12/2019 for the sole purpose of drawing up a record of an administrative offence: no evidence / assessment that it was impracticable, on the spot, to compile the offence record and to achieve the objectives set out in the CAO,   Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings     2680/21* 11/12/2020 Yevgeniy Igorevich SVAROVSKIY 1971       Picket against constitutional amendments, 29/05/2020, Moscow article 20.2 § 8 of CAO, administrative fine of RUB 200,000 28/08/2020, Moscow City Court rotation - event classified as assembly post facto, distance requirement - event classified as assembly post facto Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings,   Art. 11 (2) - disproportionate measures against organisers and participants of public assemblies - alternatively to Article 10 issue (see Tsukanov and Torchinskiy v. Russia [Committee], nos.35000/13 and 35010/13, §§ 48-50, 17   April 2018) - arrest, conviction for participation in a series of solo demonstrations held on a rotation basis on 29/05/2020 by no less than 25 participants, characterised as assembly post facto     13638/21 12/02/2021 Yuliya Leontyevna KREBS 1988   Aleksey Vladimirovich Bushmakov Yekaterinburg Support of S.   Furgal, 08/08/2020, Yekaterinburg article 20.2 § 5 of CAO, administrative fine of RUB 10,000 02/12/2020, Sverdlovsk Regional Court   Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings     19464/21* 28/03/2021 Kirill Andreyevich SHISHKANOV 1984   Yelena Yuryevna Pershakova Moscow Protest against constitutional amendments, 18/06/2020, Moscow article 20.6.1 § 1 of CAO, administrative fine of RUB 10,000 28/09/2020, Moscow City Court conviction for a breach of the COVID-19 restrictions Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty - arrest, escorting to a police station, detention between 5.30 p.m. and 9 p.m. (according to the applicant), or 8.25 p.m. (according to the administrative offence record) on 18/06/2020 for the sole purpose of drawing up a record of administrative offence: no evidence / assessment that it was impracticable, on the spot, to compile the offence record and to achieve the objectives set out in the CAO,   Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings   22650/21 * 02/04/2021 Aleksandr Emmanuilovich NAKHIMSON 1953   Nikolay Vladimirovich Vasilyev Moscow Support of arrested journalist I. Azar, 29/05/2020, Moscow article 20.6.1 §   1 of CAO, administrative fine of RUB 10,000 02/10/2020, Moscow City Court   COVID-19 restrictions on holding of public events Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings   29077/21 * 17/05/2021 Bazhena Dmitriyevna ZHAVORONKOVA 1989   Aleksey Vladimirovich Bushmakov Yekaterinburg Support of S.   Furgal, 08/08/2020, Yekaterinburg article 20.2 § 5 of CAO, administrative fine of RUB 10,000 01/12/2020, Sverdlovsk Regional Court   Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings   39362/21 20/07/2021 Ivan Aleksandrovich OSTAPCHUK 1993   Varvara Dmitriyevna Mikhaylova St Petersburg Support of arrested journalists I.   Azar and V.   Vorontsov, 01/06/2020, St Petersburg article 8.6.1 of the Administrative Offences Act of St Peterburg, administrative fine of RUB 4,000 21/01/2021, St Petersburg City Court   conviction for a breach of the COVID-19 restrictions Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty - arrest and detention between 7   p.m. and at least 10.37   p.m. (as per the administrative offence record) on 01/06/2020, in excess of three hours, for the sole purpose of drawing up a record of administrative offence: no evidence / assessment that it was impracticable, on the spot, to compile the offence record and to achieve the objectives set out in the CAO,   Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings   40136/21* 23/07/2021 Daniil Sergeyevich CHEBYKIN 1991   Vitaliy Viktorovich Cherkasov St Petersburg Support of A. Navalnyy, 08/11/2020, Omsk article 20.2 § 5 of CAO, administrative fine of RUB 10,000 09/02/2021, Omsk Regional Court rotation - event classified as assembly post facto     40679/21* 25/07/2021 Valeriy Sergeyevich SEMENISHCHEV 1974   Varvara Dmitriyevna Mikhaylova St Petersburg Picket to draw attention to environmental problems in Kirov, 17/11/2020, Kirov article 20.2 § 2 of CAO, administrative fine of RUB 10,000 03/02/2021, Kirov Regional Court rotation - event classified as assembly post facto Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings   43482/21* 08/08/2021 Vladimir Vladimirovich SHULENIN 1997   Mansur Idrisovich Gilmanov Podolsk Protest against politics of President Putin, 07/10/2020, Moscow (the applicant left several objects - swimming fins, two bottles of glue and a certificate of honour - at the entrance of the President Administration building, as a "birthday present" to Mr Putin, took pictures and left the venue) article 20.2 § 5 of CAO, administrative fine of RUB 15,000 08/02/2021, Moscow City Court   Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty - arrest, escorting to the police station between noon and 3.40 p.m. on 13/10/2020 for the sole purpose of compiling the administrative offence record: no evidence/ assessment that it was impracticable, on the spot, to compile the offence record and to achieve the objectives set out in the CAO,   Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings,   Art. 6 (1) - and Art. 6 (3) (d) - unfair trial in view of restrictions on the right to examine witnesses - inability to question the police officers on whose reports the conviction was based   43486/21* 08/08/2021 Nadezhda Valeryevna YEVGRAFOVA 1988   Mansur Idrisovich Gilmanov Podolsk Manifestation for transgender rights, protest against amendments into the Family Code of Russia, 18/07/2020, Moscow article 20.2 § 5 of CAO, administrative fine of RUB 17,000 08/02/2021, Moscow City Court rotation - event classified as assembly post facto Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty - Arrest, detention between 2.15 p.m. and 5.10 p.m. on 18/07/2020 as an administrative suspect "for a timely and correct examination of the case": no evidence/assessment that it was impossible to draw up an offence record on the spot and to achieve the goals set out in the CAO; the administrative offence record was compiled on 22/07/2020 only,   Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings,   Art. 6 (1) - and Art. 6 (3) (d) - unfair trial in view of restrictions on the right to examine witnesses - inability to question the police officers on whose reports the conviction was based;   Art. 11 (2) - disproportionate measures against organisers and participants of public assemblies - alternatively to Article 10 issue (see, mutatis mutandis, Tsukanov and Torchinskiy v. Russia [Committee], nos.35000/13 and 35010/13, §§ 48-51, 17 April 2018)- arrest, conviction for participation in a series of solo pickets on 18/07/2020 in a group of no less than 25 participants   18014/22* 11/03/2022 Galina Fedorovna TIKHENKO 1947       Protest against construction of a highway, 07/07/2021, Frunzenskoye settlement of the Volgograd Region article 20.2 § 8 of CAO, administrative fine of RUB 150,000 16/09/2021, Volgograd Regional Court distance requirement - event classified as assembly post facto     43410/22* 18/08/2022 Arina Vladimirovna POPOVA 1982   Ruslan Yuryevich Bannikov Voronezh Protest against the war in Ukraine, 06/03/2022, Voronezh article 20.3.3 §   1 of CAO, administrative fine of RUB 30,000 07/06/2022, Voronezh Regional Court conviction for discreditation of the Russian armed forces Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty- arrest, taking to a police station as an administrative suspect on (1) 24/02/2022 and (2) 06/03/2022: in either case, no evidence/assessment that it was impracticable, on the spot, to compile the offence record and achieve the objectives set out in the CAO,   Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in both sets of the administrative-offence proceedings, leading to the judgments of 24/05/2022 and 07/06/2022,   Art. 6 (1) - unfair trial in administrative offence proceedings - inability to submit evidence in defence of the applicant’s version of events on an equal footing with the prosecution (see, mutatis mutandis , Navalnyy v. Russia [GC], nos. 29580/12 and 4 others, §§ 83‑84, 15   November 2018)- the courts’ refusal to admit as irrelevant the "specialist" report by an expert in linguistics, commissioned by the defence, on the issue whether the texts of the two placards held by the applicant on 06/03/2022 contained information discrediting the Russian armed forces (final judgment: 07/06/2022),   Art. 11 (2) - disproportionate measures against organisers and participants of public assemblies - anti-war manifestation, 24/02/2020, Voronezh, arrest and conviction under article 20.2 § 5 of CAO, administrative fine of RUB   5,000, final judgment: Voronezh Regional Court, 24/05/2022   48314/22 23/09/2022 Nikita Alekseyevich MAMAYEV 2000   Aleksey Sergeyevich Lapuzin Samara Protest against the war in Ukraine, 06/03/2022, Samara article 20.3.3. §   1 of CAO, administrative fine of RUB 40,000 26/05/2022, Samara Regional Court conviction for discreditation of the Russian armed forces Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty – arrest, detention between 2   p.m. and 8 p.m. on 06/03/2020 as an administrative suspect: no evidence/assessment that it was impracticable, on the spot, to compile the offence record and achieve the objectives set out in the CAO; detention beyond the three-hour statutory period,   Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings   54433/22* 10/11/2022 Aleksey Petrovich NIKITIN 1991       Protest against patriotic propaganda, 24/03/2022, Moscow article 20.6.1 §   1 of CAO, administrative fine of RUB 15,000 11/07/2022, Moscow City Court COVID-19 restrictions on public events Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty- arrest, taking to a police station on 24/03/2022 as an administrative suspect: no evidence/assessment that it was impracticable, on the spot, to compile the offence record and achieve the objectives set out in the CAO,   Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings   2650/23* 29/12/2022 Anastasiya Aleksandrovna TIKHONOVA 1988   Darya Dmitriyevna Aksenova Kolomna Protest against the war in Ukraine, 08/05/2022, Moscow article 20.3.3 §   1 of CAO, administrative fine of RUB 50,000 08/09/2022, Moscow City Court conviction of discreditation of the Russian army Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty - arrest, transfer to the police station, detention on 08/05/2022 for the sole purpose of compiling of an administrative arrest record: no evidence / assessment that it was impracticable, on the spot, to compile the offence record and to achieve the objectives set out in the CAO,   Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings