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 } .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 } .sA622E089 { height:71.75pt } .sADC94CD6 { height:15pt } .s2D9C6089 { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } Published on 8 January 2024   THIRD SECTION Application no.   20291/17 Viktor Viktorovich VOROBYEV against Russia and 25 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 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 8 § 1 of the Convention relating to secret surveillance in the context of criminal proceedings which are the subject of well-established case law of the Court (see Bykov v. Russia [GC], no. 4378/02, 10 March 2009, Akhlyustin v. Russia, no. 21200/05, 7 November 2017, Zubkov and Others v. Russia, nos. 29431/05 and 2 others, 7 November 2017, Dudchenko v. Russia, no. 37717/05, 7   November 2017, Moskalev v. Russia, no. 44045/05, 7 November 2017 and Konstantin Moskalev v. Russia, no. 59589/10, 7 November 2017).   APPENDIX – STATEMENT OF FACTS List of applications raising complaints under Article 8 § 1 of the Convention (secret surveillance) No. Application no. Date of introduction Applicant’s name Year of birth Representative’s name and location Type of secret surveillance Domestic proceedings Other relevant information Other complaints under well ‑ established case-law     20291/17 27/02/2017 Viktor Viktorovich VOROBYEV 1989     The statutory requirement for Internet communication providers to store the content of all Internet communications and related communications data, and to submit those data to law-enforcement authorities or security services at their request together with information necessary to decrypt electronic messages if they were encrypted The applicant challenged the FSB’s disclosure order requiring Telegram Messenger company to disclose technical information which would facilitate “the decryption of communications”. Final judgment of 16/01/2019 by the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation. The applicant is a politician and human rights activist. He is a user of Telegram messaging application which uses encryption. and of mail.yandex.ru service. He also has accounts on social networking services VKontakte and Odnoklassniki. Art. 13 - lack of any effective remedy in domestic law     22802/17 01/03/2017 Aleksey Anatolyevich NAVALNYY 1976 Konstantin Ilyich Terekhov Moscow The statutory requirement for Internet communication providers to store the content of all Internet communications and related communications data, and to submit those data to law-enforcement authorities or security services at their request together with information necessary to decrypt electronic messages if they were encrypted   The applicant is an opposition politician and anti-corruption activist. He is a user of mail.yandex.ru service. He also has accounts on social networking services VKontakte and Odnoklassniki. Art. 13 - lack of any effective remedy in domestic law     30027/18 13/06/2018 Aleksandr Vladimirovich PLYUSHCHEV 1972 Damir Ravilevich Gaynutdinov Sofia, Bulgaria The statutory requirement for Internet communication providers to store the content of all Internet communications and related communications data, and to submit those data to law-enforcement authorities or security services at their request together with information necessary to decrypt electronic messages if they were encrypted The applicant challenged the FSB’s disclosure order requiring Telegram Messenger company to disclose technical information which would facilitate “the decryption of communications”. Final judgment of 20/12/2017 by the Moscow City Court. The applicant is an opposition journalist. He is a user of Telegram messaging application which uses encryption. Art. 10 (1) - various restrictions on the right to freedom of expression - The applicant complained that the contested legislation did not contain sufficient safeguards for the protection of journalistic sources   Art. 13 - lack of any effective remedy in domestic law for Article 8 complaint     32920/19 17/06/2019 Yevgeniy Aleksandrovich PROKOPENKO 1988 Sarkis Simonovich Darbinyan Moscow The statutory requirement for Internet communication providers to store the content of all Internet communications and related communications data, and to submit those data to law-enforcement authorities or security services at their request together with information necessary to decrypt electronic messages if they were encrypted The applicant challenged the FSB’s disclosure order requiring Telegram Messenger company to disclose technical information which would facilitate “the decryption of communications”. Final judgment of 16/01/2019 by the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation. The applicant is a political activist. He is a user of Telegram messaging application which uses encryption. Art. 13 - lack of any effective remedy in domestic law     33098/19 17/06/2019 Yaroslav Aleksandrovich KARGIN 1983 Sarkis Simonovich Darbinyan Moscow The statutory requirement for Internet communication providers to store the content of all Internet communications and related communications data, and to submit those data to law-enforcement authorities or security services at their request together with information necessary to decrypt electronic messages if they were encrypted. The applicant challenged the FSB’s disclosure order requiring Telegram Messenger company to disclose technical information which would facilitate “the decryption of communications”. Final judgment of 16/01/2019 by the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation. The applicant is a lawyer. He is a user of Telegram messaging application which uses encryption. Art. 13 - lack of any effective remedy in domestic law     33700/19 18/06/2019 Roman Denisovich KISELEV 1994 Sarkis Simonovich Darbinyan Moscow The statutory requirement for Internet communication providers to store the content of all Internet communications and related communications data, and to submit those data to law-enforcement authorities or security services at their request together with information necessary to decrypt electronic messages if they were encrypted. The applicant challenged the FSB’s disclosure order requiring Telegram Messenger company to disclose technical information which would facilitate “the decryption of communications”. Final judgment of 16/01/2019 by the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation. The applicant is a human rights lawyer. He is a user of Telegram messaging application which uses encryption. Art. 13 - lack of any effective remedy in domestic law     34263/19 18/06/2019 Oleg Anatolyevich KRAYEV 1981 Sarkis Simonovich Darbinyan Moscow The statutory requirement for Internet communication providers to store the content of all Internet communications and related communications data, and to submit those data to law-enforcement authorities or security services at their request together with information necessary to decrypt electronic messages if they were encrypted. The applicant challenged the FSB’s disclosure order requiring Telegram Messenger company to disclose technical information which would facilitate “the decryption of communications”. Final judgment of 16/01/2019 by the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation. The applicant is a political activist. He is a user of Telegram messaging application which uses encryption. Art. 13 - lack of any effective remedy in domestic law     34546/19 20/06/2019 Ramil Akhatovich USMANOV 1992 Sarkis Simonovich Darbinyan Moscow The statutory requirement for Internet communication providers to store the content of all Internet communications and related communications data, and to submit those data to law-enforcement authorities or security services at their request together with information necessary to decrypt electronic messages if they were encrypted. The applicant challenged the FSB’s disclosure order requiring Telegram Messenger company to disclose technical information which would facilitate “the decryption of communications”. Final judgment of 16/01/2019 by the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation. The applicant is a political activist. He is a user of Telegram messaging application which uses encryption. Art. 13 - lack of any effective remedy in domestic law     34547/19 20/06/2019 Natalya Viktorovna MARINKEVICH 1977 Sarkis Simonovich Darbinyan Moscow The statutory requirement for Internet communication providers to store the content of all Internet communications and related communications data, and to submit those data to law-enforcement authorities or security services at their request together with information necessary to decrypt electronic messages if they were encrypted. The applicant challenged the FSB’s disclosure order requiring Telegram Messenger company to disclose technical information which would facilitate “the decryption of communications”. Final judgment of 16/01/2019 by the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation. The applicant is a user of Telegram messaging application which uses encryption. Art. 13 - lack of any effective remedy in domestic law   34677/19 11/06/2019 Roman Aleksandrovich KOROTAYEV 1978 Sarkis Simonovich Darbinyan Moscow The statutory requirement for Internet communication providers to store the content of all Internet communications and related communications data, and to submit those data to law-enforcement authorities or security services at their request together with information necessary to decrypt electronic messages if they were encrypted. The applicant challenged the FSB’s disclosure order requiring Telegram Messenger company to disclose technical information which would facilitate “the decryption of communications”. Final judgment of 16/01/2019 by the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation. The applicant is the head of an NGO. He is a user of Telegram messaging application which uses encryption. Art. 13 - lack of any effective remedy in domestic law   34796/19 21/06/2019 Maksim Valeryevich NAUMOV 1989 Sarkis Simonovich Darbinyan Moscow The statutory requirement for Internet communication providers to store the content of all Internet communications and related communications data, and to submit those data to law-enforcement authorities or security services at their request together with information necessary to decrypt electronic messages if they were encrypted. The applicant challenged the FSB’s disclosure order requiring Telegram Messenger company to disclose technical information which would facilitate “the decryption of communications”. Final judgment of 16/01/2019 by the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation. The applicant is a user of Telegram messaging application which uses encryption. Art. 13 - lack of any effective remedy in domestic law   34807/19 18/06/2019 Diana Aleksandrovna LEGRAND 1988 Sarkis Simonovich Darbinyan Moscow The statutory requirement for Internet communication providers to store the content of all Internet communications and related communications data, and to submit those data to law-enforcement authorities or security services at their request together with information necessary to decrypt electronic messages if they were encrypted. The applicant challenged the FSB’s disclosure order requiring Telegram Messenger company to disclose technical information which would facilitate “the decryption of communications”. Final judgment of 16/01/2019 by the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation. The applicant is a lawyer. She is a user of Telegram messaging application which uses encryption. Art. 13 - lack of any effective remedy in domestic law   34911/19 20/06/2019 Georgiy Vladimirovich KOLOTOV 1986 Sarkis Simonovich Darbinyan Moscow The statutory requirement for Internet communication providers to store the content of all Internet communications and related communications data, and to submit those data to law-enforcement authorities or security services at their request together with information necessary to decrypt electronic messages if they were encrypted. The applicant challenged the FSB’s disclosure order requiring Telegram Messenger company to disclose technical information which would facilitate “the decryption of communications”. Final judgment of 16/01/2019 by the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation. The applicant is a political activist. He is a user of Telegram messaging application which uses encryption. Art. 13 - lack of any effective remedy in domestic law   34931/19 20/06/2019 Andrey Eduardovich VELDER 1978 Sarkis Simonovich Darbinyan Moscow The statutory requirement for Internet communication providers to store the content of all Internet communications and related communications data, and to submit those data to law-enforcement authorities or security services at their request together with information necessary to decrypt electronic messages if they were encrypted. The applicant challenged the FSB’s disclosure order requiring Telegram Messenger company to disclose technical information which would facilitate “the decryption of communications”. Final judgment of 16/01/2019 by the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation. The applicant is a political activist. He is a user of Telegram messaging application which uses encryption. Art. 13 - lack of any effective remedy in domestic law   34951/19 11/06/2019 Maksim Aleksandrovich YAKUNOV 1981 Sarkis Simonovich Darbinyan Moscow The statutory requirement for Internet communication providers to store the content of all Internet communications and related communications data, and to submit those data to law-enforcement authorities or security services at their request together with information necessary to decrypt electronic messages if they were encrypted. The applicant challenged the FSB’s disclosure order requiring Telegram Messenger company to disclose technical information which would facilitate “the decryption of communications”. Final judgment of 16/01/2019 by the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation. The applicant is a user of Telegram messaging application which uses encryption. Art. 13 - lack of any effective remedy in domestic law   34952/19 11/06/2019 Aleksandr Sergeyevich ALEKSEYEV 1986 Sarkis Simonovich Darbinyan Moscow The statutory requirement for Internet communication providers to store the content of all Internet communications and related communications data, and to submit those data to law-enforcement authorities or security services at their request together with information necessary to decrypt electronic messages if they were encrypted. The applicant challenged the FSB’s disclosure order requiring Telegram Messenger company to disclose technical information which would facilitate “the decryption of communications”. Final judgment of 16/01/2019 by the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation. The applicant is a user of Telegram messaging application which uses encryption. Art. 13 - lack of any effective remedy in domestic law   35118/19 20/06/2019 Ilya Andreyevich RUSINOV 1998 Sarkis Simonovich Darbinyan Moscow The statutory requirement for Internet communication providers to store the content of all Internet communications and related communications data, and to submit those data to law-enforcement authorities or security services at their request together with information necessary to decrypt electronic messages if they were encrypted. The applicant challenged the FSB’s disclosure order requiring Telegram Messenger company to disclose technical information which would facilitate “the decryption of communications”. Final judgment of 16/01/2019 by the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation. The applicant is a political activist. He is a user of Telegram messaging application which uses encryption. Art. 13 - lack of any effective remedy in domestic law   35404/19 21/06/2019 Vladimir Fedorovich GARNACHUK 1970 Sarkis Simonovich Darbinyan Moscow The statutory requirement for Internet communication providers to store the content of all Internet communications and related communications data, and to submit those data to law-enforcement authorities or security services at their request together with information necessary to decrypt electronic messages if they were encrypted. The applicant challenged the FSB’s disclosure order requiring Telegram Messenger company to disclose technical information which would facilitate “the decryption of communications”. Final judgment of 12/02/2019 by the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation. The applicant is a political activist. He is a user of Telegram messaging application which uses encryption. Art. 13 - lack of any effective remedy in domestic law   35538/19 22/06/2019 Aleksey Vladimirovich SHIRINYA 1987 Sarkis Simonovich Darbinyan Moscow The statutory requirement for Internet communication providers to store the content of all Internet communications and related communications data, and to submit those data to law-enforcement authorities or security services at their request together with information necessary to decrypt electronic messages if they were encrypted. The applicant challenged the FSB’s disclosure order requiring Telegram Messenger company to disclose technical information which would facilitate “the decryption of communications”. Final judgment of 16/01/2019 by the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation. The applicant is a user of Telegram messaging application which uses encryption. Art. 13 - lack of any effective remedy in domestic law   35879/19 24/06/2019 Dmitriy Aleksandrovich VASILENKO 1983 Sarkis Simonovich Darbinyan Moscow The statutory requirement for Internet communication providers to store the content of all Internet communications and related communications data, and to submit those data to law-enforcement authorities or security services at their request together with information necessary to decrypt electronic messages if they were encrypted. The applicant challenged the FSB’s disclosure order requiring Telegram Messenger company to disclose technical information which would facilitate “the decryption of communications”. Final judgment of 16/01/2019 by the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation. The applicant is a user of Telegram messaging application which uses encryption. Art. 13 - lack of any effective remedy in domestic law   36370/19 24/06/2019 Vasiliy Aleksandrovich AGAPKIN 1970 Sarkis Simonovich Darbinyan Moscow The statutory requirement for Internet communication providers to store the content of all Internet communications and related communications data, and to submit those data to law-enforcement authorities or security services at their request together with information necessary to decrypt electronic messages if they were encrypted. The applicant challenged the FSB’s disclosure order requiring Telegram Messenger company to disclose technical information which would facilitate “the decryption of communications”. Final judgment of 16/01/2019 by the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation. The applicant is a user of Telegram messaging application which uses encryption. Art. 13 - lack of any effective remedy in domestic law   36437/19 28/06/2019 Yelena Nikolayevna KARAVAYEVA 1956 Sarkis Simonovich Darbinyan Moscow The statutory requirement for Internet communication providers to store the content of all Internet communications and related communications data, and to submit those data to law-enforcement authorities or security services at their request together with information necessary to decrypt electronic messages if they were encrypted. The applicant challenged the FSB’s disclosure order requiring Telegram Messenger company to disclose technical information which would facilitate “the decryption of communications”. Final judgment of 16/01/2019 by the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation. The applicant is a political activist. She is a user of Telegram messaging application which uses encryption. Art. 13 - lack of any effective remedy in domestic law for Article 8 complaint,   Art. 10 (1) - various restrictions on the right to freedom of expression - The applicant was fined (RUB 2,000) in administrative offence proceedings for publishing on social networks a stylised image of the "Smart voting" campaign associated with two associations previously recognised as extremist: "A.   Navalnyy’s Election Campaign Team" and "Anti ‑ corruption Foundation". The image was accompanied by a text calling for unity of all opposition forces necessary to win the elections against the ruling pro-Putin party. Final judgment of 26/07/2022 by the Moscow City Court.   Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative ‑ offence proceedings - final judgment of 26/07/2022 by the Moscow City Court   36530/19 28/06/2019 Yevgeniy Nikolayevich SHCHERBAKOV 1972 Sarkis Simonovich Darbinyan Moscow The statutory requirement for Internet communication providers to store the content of all Internet communications and related communications data, and to submit those data to law-enforcement authorities or security services at their request together with information necessary to decrypt electronic messages if they were encrypted. The applicant challenged the FSB’s disclosure order requiring Telegram Messenger company to disclose technical information which would facilitate “the decryption of communications”. Final judgment of 16/01/2019 by the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation. The applicant is a user of Telegram messaging application which uses encryption. Art. 13 - lack of any effective remedy in domestic law   36618/19 21/06/2019 Yuriy Vladimirovich BESSONOV 1988 Sarkis Simonovich Darbinyan Moscow The statutory requirement for Internet communication providers to store the content of all Internet communications and related communications data, and to submit those data to law-enforcement authorities or security services at their request together with information necessary to decrypt electronic messages if they were encrypted. The applicant challenged the FSB’s disclosure order requiring Telegram Messenger company to disclose technical information which would facilitate “the decryption of communications”. Final judgment of 16/01/2019 by the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation. The applicant is a political activist. He is a user of Telegram messaging application which uses encryption. Art. 13 - lack of any effective remedy in domestic law   36845/19 21/06/2019 Yegor Aleksandrovich SEMIN 1994 Sarkis Simonovich Darbinyan Moscow The statutory requirement for Internet communication providers to store the content of all Internet communications and related communications data, and to submit those data to law-enforcement authorities or security services at their request together with information necessary to decrypt electronic messages if they were encrypted. The applicant challenged the FSB’s disclosure order requiring Telegram Messenger company to disclose technical information which would facilitate “the decryption of communications”. Final judgment of 16/01/2019 by the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation. The applicant is a user of Telegram messaging application which uses encryption. Art. 13 - lack of any effective remedy in domestic law   37434/19 24/06/2019 Sergey Vladimirovich YEVSEYEV 1977 Sarkis Simonovich Darbinyan Moscow The statutory requirement for Internet communication providers to store the content of all Internet communications and related communications data, and to submit those data to law-enforcement authorities or security services at their request together with information necessary to decrypt electronic messages if they were encrypted. The applicant challenged the FSB’s disclosure order requiring Telegram Messenger company to disclose technical information which would facilitate “the decryption of communications”. Final judgment of 16/01/2019 by the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation. The applicant is a political activist. He is a user of Telegram messaging application which uses encryption. Art. 13 - lack of any effective remedy in domestic law