CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 30 novembre 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 } Published on 8 January 2024   FIRST SECTION Application no.   22474/21 Narek Gagikovich AGABEKYAN against Russia and 17 other applications (see list appended) PROCEDURAL INFORMATION Following a preliminary examination of the admissibility of the applications on 30 November 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 11 of the Convention relating to disproportionate measures against organisers and participants of public assemblies which are the subject of well-established case law of the Court (see Frumkin v. Russia, no. 74568/12, ECHR 2016 (extracts), Navalnyy and Yashin v. Russia, no. 76204/11, 4 December 2014 and Kasparov and Others v. Russia, no. 21613/07, 3 October 2013).   APPENDIX – STATEMENT OF FACTS List of applications raising complaints under Article 11 of the Convention (disproportionate measures against organisers and participants of public assemblies) No. Application no. Date of introduction Applicant’s name Year of birth/registration   Representative’s name and location Name of the public event Location Date Administrative / criminal offence Penalty Final domestic decision Court Name Date Other complaints under well-established case-law     22474/21* 05/04/2021 Narek Gagikovich AGABEKYAN 1995 Aleksandr Yevgenyevich Pomazuyev Vilnius Rally “Free Navalnyy”   Tomsk   31/01/2021 article 20.2 § 5 of CAO fine of RUB   10,000 Tomsk Regional Court 11/03/2021 Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in vie w of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings - Final decision: Tomsk Regional Court, 11/03/2021,   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 the trial the police officers on whose written statements the applicant’s conviction was based     22582/21* 02/04/2021 Pavel Dmitriyevich BAGDALOV 1998 Aleksandr Yevgenyevich Pomazuyev Vilnius Rally “Free Navalnyy”   Tomsk   31/01/2021 article 20.2 § 5 of CAO fine of RUB   15,000 Tomsk Regional Court 05/03/2021 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - detention from 1 p.m. to 2 p.m. on 31/01/2021 for drawing up an administrative offence record; 3 hours later the applicant was convoked to the police station, where he was detained from 6.00 p.m. to 11.30   p.m. waiting for the court hearing, raised on appeal,   Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings - Final decision: Tomsk Regional Court, 05/03/2021,   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 the trial the police officers on whose written statements the applicant’s conviction was based     45286/21* 23/08/2021 Olga Vadimovna VASILYEVA 1950 Andrey Vasilyevich Sabinin Stavropol Rally “Free Navalnyy”   Pyatigorsk   31/01/2021 article 20.2.2. § 1 of CAO detention for 1 day Stavropol Regional Court 24/03/2021 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - arrest and detention from 1 p.m. on 31/01/2021 to 2 p.m. on 01/02/2021 until the court hearing for the sole purpose of drawing up an administrative offence record, raised on appeal,     Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings - Final decision: Stavropol Regional Court, 24/03/2021     46104/21* 10/09/2021 Nikita Aleksandrovich BAZHIN 1993 Ivan Yuryevich Zhdanov Vilnius Rally “Free Navalnyy”   Moscow   23/01/2021 article 20.2 § 5 of CAO fine of RUB   15,000 Moscow City Court 22/03/2021 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - arrest and detention on 23/01/2021 for the sole purpose of drawing up an administrative offence record, raised on appeal,     Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings - Final decision: Moscow City Court, 22/03/2021,     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 the trial the police officers on whose written statements the applicant’s conviction was based     46129/21* 31/08/2021 Andrey Sergeyevich STARIKOV 1998 Anna Yevgenyevna Bochilo Barnaul Rally “Free Navalnyy”   Moscow   31/01/2021 article 20.2 § 6.1 of CAO detention for 10 days Moscow City Court 04/03/2021 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - arrest and detention from 5.20 p.m. on 31/01/2021 to 11.30 a.m. on 01/02/2021 for the sole purpose of drawing up an administrative offence record, raised on appeal,     Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings - Final decision: Moscow City Court, 04/03/2021,     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 the trial the police officers on whose written statements the applicant’s conviction was based,     Prot. 7 Art. 2 - delayed review of conviction by a higher tribunal - The sentence of administrative detention imposed on the applicant was executed immediately, on account of the lack of suspensive effect of an appeal under the CAO     1276/22* 24/12/2021 Roman Sergeyevich PROKHOROV 1993 Mansur Idrisovich Gilmanov Podolsk Rally “Freedom to the political prisoners” Moscow   04/11/2020 article 20.2 § 6.1 of CAO fine of RUB   20,000 Moscow City Court 27/09/2021 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - arrest and detention from 2.10 p.m. to 8.45 p.m. on 04/11/2020 for the sole purpose of drawing up an administrative offence record, raised on appeal,     Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings - Final decision: Moscow City Court, 27/09/2021,     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 the trial the police officers on whose written statements the applicant’s conviction was based     3042/22* 14/12/2021 Fedor Anatolyevich KOMAROV 1999 Darya Dmitriyevna Aksenova Kolomna Rally “Free Navalnyy”   Moscow   23/01/2021 article 20.2 § 5 of CAO fine of RUB   10,000 Moscow City Court 21/06/2021 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - arrest and detention on 23/01/2021 for the sole purpose of drawing up an administrative offence record, raised on appeal,   Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings - Final decision: Moscow City Court, 21/06/2021,   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 the trial the police officers on whose written statements the applicant’s conviction was based     11599/22* 17/02/2022 Olga Anatolyevna NAZARENKO 1975   Memorial Human Rights Centre Moscow Rally “Free Navalnyy”   Ivanovo   21/04/2021 article 20.2 § 8 of CAO 100 hours of community work Ivanovo Regional Court 18/08/2021 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - arrest and detention from 7.05 p.m. on 21/04/2021 to 1.10 a.m. on 22/04/2022 for the sole purpose of drawing up an administrative offence record, raised on appeal,     Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings - Final decision: Ivanovo Regional Court, 18/08/2021,   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 the trial the police officers on whose written statements the applicant’s conviction was based     12079/22 09/02/2022 Vitaliy Dmitriyevich PETRUKHIN 1989 Mikhail Mikhaylovich Benyash Sochi Rally “Free Navalnyy”   Krasnodar   21/04/2021 article 20.2 § 5 of CAO fine of RUB   10,000 Krasnodar Regional Court 09/12/2021     13220/22* 18/02/2022 Tatyana Vasilyevna KUDRYASHOVA 1992 Olimpiada Valentinovna Usanova Nizhniy Novgorod Rally “Free Navalnyy”   Nizhniy Novgorod   23/01/2021 article 20.2 § 5 of CAO fine of RUB   10,000 Nizhniy Novgorod Regional Court 18/08/2021 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - arrest and detention from 4 p.m. to 11 p.m. on 23/01/2022 for the sole purpose of drawing up an administrative offence record, raised on appeal,     Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings - Final decision: Nizhniy Novgorod Regional Court, 18/08/2021   24067/22 09/02/2022 Andrey Pavlovich PETRUKHIN 2002   Memorial Human Rights Centre Moscow Rally “Free Navalnyy”   Moscow   21/04/2021 article 20.2 § 6.1 of CAO fine of RUB   10,000 Moscow City Court 17/08/2021 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - detention at the police station on 30/04/2021 for 5   hours for the sole purpose of drawing up an administrative offence record, raised on appeal,   Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings - Final decision: Moscow City Court, 17/08/2021,     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 the trial the police officers on whose written statements the applicant’s conviction was based,   Art. 8 (2) - restrictions on the right to private life of participants in public assemblies - Use of facial recognition technology for the identification of the applicant as a participant of a rally and his subsequent conviction, raised on appeal   24713/22* 06/08/2021 Andrey Viktorovich KOROVYANSKIY 1988   Memorial Human Rights Centre Moscow Rally “Free Navalnyy”   Moscow   31/01/2021 article 20.2 § 6.1 of CAO detention for 7 days Moscow City Court 08/02/2021 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - arrest and detention from 12.10 p.m. on 31/01/2021 to 1.40 p.m. on 01/02/2021 until the court hearing, raised on appeal,   Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings - Final decision: Moscow City Court, 08/02/2021,     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 the trial the police officers on whose written statements the applicant’s conviction was based,     Prot. 7 Art. 2 - delayed review of conviction by a higher tribunal - The sentence of administrative detention imposed on the applicant was executed immediately, on account of the lack of suspensive effect of an appeal under the CAO   31689/22 13/06/2022 Yekaterina Aleksandrovna SHAKUN 1996 Anna Yevgenyevna Bochilo Barnaul Anti-war protest   Rostov-on-Don   06/03/2022 article 19.3 § 1 of CAO detention for 15 days Rostov Regional Court 19/03/2022 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - arrest and detention from 6 p.m. on 06/03/2022 to 11 a.m. on 07/03/2022 until the court hearing for the sole purpose of drawing up an administrative offence record, raised on appeal,   Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings - Final decision: Rostov Regional Court, 19/03/2022,     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 the trial the police officers on whose written statements the applicant’s conviction was based,     Prot. 7 Art. 2 - delayed review of conviction by a higher tribunal - The sentence of administrative detention imposed on the applicant was executed immediately, on account of the lack of suspensive effect of an appeal under the CAO   33769/22 22/06/2022 Roman Igorevich ZHUKOV 1985 Anna Yevgenyevna Bochilo Barnaul Anti-war protest   Ufa   06/03/2022 article 19.3 § 1 of CAO detention for 24 hours Supreme Court of the Bashkortostan Republic 11/04/2022 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - arrest and detention from 4.10 p.m. on 06/03/2022 to 2 p.m. on 07/03/2022 until the court hearing for the sole purpose of drawing up an administrative offence record, raised on appeal,   Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings - Final decision: Supreme Court of the Bashkortostan Republic, 11/04/2022,     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 the trial the police officers on whose written statements the applicant’s conviction was based   40255/22 30/07/2022 Marat Kadirovich KHUSAINOV 1978 Olimpiada Valentinovna Usanova Nizhniy Novgorod Anti-war protest   Nizhniy Novgorod   24/02/2022 article 20.2 § 6.1 of CAO fine of RUB   15,000 Nizhniy Novgorod Regional Court 13/05/2022 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - arrest and detention from 7.40 p.m. on 24/02/2022 to 7.20 p.m. on 25/02/2022 for the sole purpose of drawing up an administrative offence record, raised on appeal,   Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings - Final decision: Nizhniy Novgorod Regional Court, 13/05/2022   41557/22* 12/08/2022 Valentina Aleksandrovna SAFONOVA 1994 Natalya Andreyevna Baranova Moscow Anti-war protest   St Petersburg   25/02/2022 article 20.2 § 6.1 of CAO fine of RUB   10,000 St Petersburg City Court 12/04/2022 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - arrest and detention from 9.30 p.m. on 25/02/2022 to 3.45 p.m. on 26/02/2022 for the sole purpose of drawing up an administrative offence record, raised on appeal,     Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings - Final decision: St Petersburg Regional Court, 12/04/2022,   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 the trial the police officers on whose written statements the applicant’s conviction was based   47578/22* 06/09/2022 Larisa Timofeyevna SHVYNDINA 1959   Anti-war protest   Moscow   24/02/2022 article 20.2 § 5 of CAO fine of RUB   15,000 Moscow City Court 15/06/2022 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - arrest and detention from 7.30 p.m. on 24/02/2022 to 1.30 a.m. on 25/02/2022 for the sole purpose of drawing up an administrative offence record, raised on appeal,   Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings - Final decision: Moscow City Court, 15/06/2022,   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 the trial the police officers on whose written statements the applicant’s conviction was based   52091/22 07/10/2022 Mikhail NAYDEN 1982 Nataliya Andreyevna Baranova Moscow Anti-war protest   Moscow   06/03/2022 article 20.2 § 5 of CAO fine of RUB   20,000 Moscow City Court 09/06/2022 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - arrest and detention from 2.11 p.m. on 06/03/2022 to 1 a.m. on 07/03/2022 for the sole purpose of drawing up an administrative offence record, raised on appeal,   Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings - Final decision: Moscow City Court, 09/06/2022,   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 the trial the police officers on whose written statements the applicant’s conviction was based