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 } .s3A357E38 { text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-family:Arial; font-size:8pt; list-style-position:inside } .s1DE04BC { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:8pt } Published on 8 January 2024   THIRD SECTION Application no.   10869/18 Dmitriy Aleksandrovich RYABININ against Russia and 19 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 5 § 1 of the Convention relating to unlawful detention (deprivation of liberty) which are the subject of well-established case law of the Court (see Fortalnov and Others v. Russia, nos. 7077/06 and 12 others, 26 June 2018, Rozhkov v. Russia (no. 2), no. 38898/04, §§ 91-96, 31 January 2017, Butkevich v. Russia, no.   5865/07, § 67, 13 February 2018, Kuptsov and Kuptsova v. Russia, no.   6110/03, § 81, 3 March 2011 and Tsvetkova and Others v. Russia, nos.   54381/08 and 5 others, §§ 121-22, 10 April 2018).   APPENDIX – STATEMENT OF FACTS List of applications raising complaints under Article 5 § 1 of the Convention (unlawful detention (deprivation of liberty)) No. Application no. Date of introduction Applicant’s name Year of birth   Representative’s name and location Start date of unauthorised detention End date of unauthorised detention Specific defects Other complaints under well-established case-law     10869/18* 15/02/2018 Dmitriy Aleksandrovich RYABININ 1987     08/09/2017, 4.10 p.m. 09/09/2017, 11.20 a.m. Detention as an administrative suspect: no evidence/assessment of “exceptional circumstances”         10192/20* 03/02/2020 Nikita Andreyevich KUZMICHEV 1991 Nikolay Sergeyevich Zboroshenko Mytishchi 03/08/2019 03/08/2019 Applicant taken to the police station as an administrative suspect: no evidence/assessment that it was impracticable, on the spot, to compile the offence record and to establish the suspect’s identity; detention as an administrative suspect: beyond the three-hour statutory period; detention as an administrative suspect: no evidence/assessment of “exceptional circumstances”       21162/21* 30/03/2021 Ragnar Odinson REYN 1989 Aleksandr Yevgenyevich Pomazuyev Vilnius 21/01/2021 29/01/2021 21/01/2021 29/01/2021 Applicant taken to the police station as an administrative suspect: no evidence/assessment that it was impracticable, on the spot, to compile the offence record and to establish the suspect’s identity; detention as an administrative suspect: beyond the three-hour statutory period Art. 10 (1) - conviction for making calls to participate in public events – 1) administrative conviction under article 20.2 § 2 of the CAO for calls to participate in an unauthorised manifestation on 23/01/2021 in support of Navalnyy, published in VKontakte; final decision: Kaliningrad Regional Court, on 11/02/2021, detention of 3   days; 2) administrative conviction under art. 20.2 § 2 of the CAO for calls to participate in an unauthorised manifestation on 31/01/2021 in support of Navalnyy, published in Telegram; final decision: Kaliningrad Regional Court, on 16/02/2021, detention of 7 days,   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 officer on whose written statements the applicant’s conviction was based in both proceedings,   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     21366/21* 06/04/2021 Konstantin Sergeyevich KROPACHEV 1982 Aleksandr Yevgenyevich Pomazuyev Vilnius 28/01/2021, 4.00 p.m. 29/01/2021, until court hearing Applicant taken to the police station as an administrative suspect: no evidence/assessment that it was impracticable, on the spot, to compile the offence record and to establish the suspect’s identity; detention as an administrative suspect: beyond the three-hour statutory period; detention as an administrative suspect: no evidence/assessment of “exceptional circumstances” Art. 10 (1) - conviction for making calls to participate in public events - administrative conviction under art. 20.2 § 2 of the CAO for calls to participate in an unauthorised manifestation on 23/01/2021 in support of Navalnyy, published in VKontakte; final decision: Tver Regional Court, 04/02/2021, detention of 7 days,   Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative ‑ offence proceedings - final decision: Tver Regional Court, 04/02/2021     23556/21* 14/04/2021 Artur Nikolayevich BAVRIN 1991 Aleksandr Yevgenyevich Pomazuyev Vilnius 28/01/2021, 8.45 a.m. 29/01/2021, until court hearing Applicant taken to the police station as an administrative suspect: no evidence/assessment that it was impracticable, on the spot, to compile the offence record and to establish the suspect’s identity; detention as an administrative suspect: beyond the three-hour statutory period; detention as an administrative suspect: no evidence/assessment of “exceptional circumstances” Art. 10 (1) - conviction for making calls to participate in public events - administrative conviction under art. 20.2 § 2 of the CAO for calls to participate in an unauthorised manifestation on 23/01/2021 in support of Navalnyy, published in VKontakte; final decision: Tver Regional Court, 04/02/2021, detention of 10 days,   Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative ‑ offence proceedings - final decision: Tver Regional Court, 04/02/2021     23791/21* 22/04/2021 Anatoliy Valentinovich BUROV 1977 Aleksandr Yevgenyevich Pomazuyev Vilnius 31/01/2021, 1.00 p.m. 01/02/2021,   4.00 p.m. Applicant taken to the police station as an administrative suspect: no evidence/assessment that it was impracticable, on the spot, to compile the offence record and to establish the suspect’s identity; detention as an administrative suspect: beyond the three-hour statutory period; detention as an administrative suspect: no evidence/assessment of “exceptional circumstances” Art. 10 (1) - conviction for making calls to participate in public events - administrative conviction under art. 20.2 § 2 of the CAO for calls to participate in an unauthorised manifestation on 31/01/2021 in support of Navalnyy, published in VKontakte; final decision: Vologda Regional Court, 11/03/2021, fine of RUB   20,000,   Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative ‑ offence proceedings - final decision: Vologda 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 open court police officer on whose written statements the applicant’s conviction was based     35126/21 25/06/2021 Maksim Anatolyevich BATYKOV 1991   Memorial Human Rights Centre Moscow 27/01/2021, 5.20 p.m. 28/01/2021, 11 a.m., raised on appeal Detention as an administrative suspect: beyond the three-hour statutory period; detention as an administrative suspect: no evidence/assessment of “exceptional circumstances” Art. 10 (1) - conviction for making calls to participate in public events - administrative conviction under art. 20.2 § 2 of the CAO for calls to participate in an unauthorised manifestation on 23/01/2021 in support of Navalnyy, published in VKontakte; final decision: Stavropol Regional Court, 17/03/2021, fine of RUB   20,000,   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, 17/03/2021,   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 open court police officer on whose written statements the applicant’s conviction was based     45005/21* 10/08/2021 Ilya Andreyevich LOGVIN 1997 Oleg Aleksandrovich Yelanchik Moscow 31/01/2021 01/02/2021, raised on appeal Applicant taken to the police station as an administrative suspect: no evidence/assessment that it was impracticable, on the spot, to compile the offence record and to establish the suspect’s identity; detention as an administrative suspect: beyond the three-hour statutory period; detention as an administrative suspect: no evidence/assessment of “exceptional circumstances” Art. 10 (1) - conviction for making calls to participate in public events - administrative conviction under article 20.2 § 3 of the CAO for calls to participate in an unauthorised manifestation on 31/01/2021 in support of Navalnyy, published on VKontakte; final decision: Moscow City Court, 10/02/2021, detention of 14 days,   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, 10/02/2021,     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 open court police officer on whose written statements the applicant’s conviction was based     45839/21* 01/09/2021 Mikhail Stanislavovich ZAYCHIKOV 1992 Ivan Yuryevich Zhdanov Vilnius 29/01/2021, 2.00 p.m. 29/01/2021, 7.45 p.m., until court hearing, raised on appeal Applicant taken to the police station as an administrative suspect: no evidence/assessment that it was impracticable, on the spot, to compile the offence record and to establish the suspect’s identity; detention as an administrative suspect: beyond the three-hour statutory period; detention as an administrative suspect: no evidence/assessment of “exceptional circumstances” Art. 10 (1) - conviction for making calls to participate in public events - administrative conviction under art. 20.2 § 2 of the CAO for calls to participate in an unauthorised manifestation on 23/01/2021 in support of Navalnyy, published in VKontakte; final decision: Krasnoyarsk Regional Court, 18/03/2021, detention of 7 days,   Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative ‑ offence proceedings - final decision: Krasnoyarsk Regional Court, 18/03/2021,   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 open court police officer on whose written statements the applicant’s conviction was based   46684/21 02/09/2021 Mariya Vladimirovna MAKAROVA 1983 Andrey Gennadyevich Lepekhin Chelyabinsk 30/01/2021 30/01/2021, until court hearing, raised on appeal Applicant taken to the police station as an administrative suspect: no evidence/assessment that it was impracticable, on the spot, to compile the offence record and to establish the suspect’s identity; detention as an administrative suspect: beyond the three-hour statutory period; detention as an administrative suspect: no evidence/assessment of “exceptional circumstances” Art. 10 (1) - conviction for making calls to participate in public events - administrative conviction under articles 19.3 § 1 and 20.2 § 2 of the CAO for calls to participate in an unauthorised manifestation on 31/01/2021 in support of Navalnyy, published on Telegram, and resistance when arrested; final decisions: Chelyabinsk Regional Court, 03/03/2021, detention of 3   days, and 18/03/2021, detention of 8 days,   Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative ‑ offence proceedings - final decisions: Chelyabinsk Regional Court, 03/03/2021 and 18/03/2021   47002/21* 15/09/2021 Igor Vladimirovich KONOTOPOV 1972 Aleksandr Yevgenyevich Pomazuyev Vilnius 04/02/2021, 4.00 p.m. 05/02/2021, until court hearing, raised on appeal Detention as an administrative suspect: beyond the three-hour statutory period, Detention as an administrative suspect: no evidence/assessment of “exceptional circumstances” Art. 10 (1) - conviction for making calls to participate in public events - administrative conviction under article 20.2 § 2 of the CAO for calls to participate in an unauthorised manifestation on 31/01/2021 in support of Navalnyy, published on Facebook; final decision: Volgograd Regional Court, 24/03/2021, fine of RUB   20,000,     Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative ‑ offence proceedings - final decision: Volgograd Regional Court, 24/03/2021,   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 open court police officer on whose written statements the applicant’s conviction was based in both proceedings   47519/21* 03/09/2021 Roman Denisovich TREGUBOV 1992 Aleksandr Yevgenyevich Karavayev Nizhniy Novgorod 28/01/2021,   1.00 p.m. 29/01/2021, until court hearing, raised on appeal Applicant taken to the police station as an administrative suspect: no evidence/assessment that it was impracticable, on the spot, to compile the offence record and to establish the suspect’s identity; detention as an administrative suspect: beyond the three-hour statutory period; detention as an administrative suspect: no evidence/assessment of “exceptional circumstances” Art. 10 (1) - conviction for making calls to participate in public events - administrative conviction under article 20.2 § 2 of the CAO for calls to participate in an unauthorised manifestation on 31/01/2021 in support of Navalnyy, published on VKontakte; final decision: Nizhniy Novgorod Regional Court, 04/03/2021, detention of 5 days,   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, 04/03/2021   54093/21 05/10/2021 Sergey Viktorovich RYBAKOV 1986 Aleksey Viktorovich Tsvetkov Vladimir 14/04/2021 15/04/2021 Applicant taken to the police station as an administrative suspect: no evidence/assessment that it was impracticable, on the spot, to compile the offence record and to establish the suspect’s identity; detention as an administrative suspect: beyond the three-hour statutory period; detention as an administrative suspect: no evidence/assessment of “exceptional circumstances” Art. 10 (1) - conviction for making calls to participate in public events - administrative conviction under art. 20.2.2 § 3 of the CAO for calls to participate in an unauthorised manifestation on 06/04/2021 in support of Navalnyy, published on YouTube; final decision: Vladimir Regional Court, 22/04/2021, detention of 8 days,   Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative ‑ offence proceedings - final decision: Vladimir Regional Court, 22/04/2021,   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 open court police officer 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   54481/21* 18/10/2021 Igor Lazarevich BARYSHNIKOV 1959   Memorial Human Rights Centre Moscow 21/04/2021, 6.40 p.m. 22/04/2021, 2.00 p.m., until court hearing Applicant taken to the police station as an administrative suspect: no evidence/assessment that it was impracticable, on the spot, to compile the offence record and to establish the suspect’s identity; detention as an administrative suspect: beyond the three-hour statutory period; detention as an administrative suspect: no evidence/assessment of “exceptional circumstances” Art. 10 (1) - conviction for making calls to participate in public events - administrative conviction under art. 20.2 § 2 of the CAO for calls to participate in an unauthorised manifestation on 21/04/2021 in support of Navalnyy, published in Facebook; final decision: Kaliningrad Regional Court, 29/04/2021, detention of 22 days,   Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative ‑ offence proceedings - final decision: Kaliningrad Regional Court, 29/04/2021,     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 open court police officer 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   2075/22* 14/12/2021 Viktor Viktorovich KORCHAGIN 2003   Memorial Human Rights Centre Moscow 22/04/2021 22/04/2021, raised on appeal Applicant taken to the police station as an administrative suspect: no evidence/assessment that it was impracticable, on the spot, to compile the offence record and to establish the suspect’s identity; detention as an administrative suspect: beyond the three-hour statutory period; detention as an administrative suspect: no evidence/assessment of “exceptional circumstances” Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative ‑ offence proceedings - final decision: Ryazan Regional Court, 17/06/2021, fine of RUB   10,000,   Art. 10 (1) - conviction for making calls to participate in public events - administrative conviction under article 20.2 § 2 of the CAO for calls to participate in an unauthorised manifestation on 21/04/2021 in support of Navalnyy, published in VKontakte; final decision: Ryazan Regional Court, 17/06/2021, fine of RUB   10,000   2960/22* 02/12/2021 Aleksandr Sergeyevich GRIGORYEV 1995 Vladimir Valeryevich Vasin Krasnoyarsk 23/01/2021 23/01/2021, raised on appeal Applicant taken to the police station as an administrative suspect: no evidence/assessment that it was impracticable, on the spot, to compile the offence record and to establish the suspect’s identity; detention as an administrative suspect: beyond the three-hour statutory period; detention as an administrative suspect: no evidence/assessment of “exceptional circumstances” Art. 10 (1) - conviction for making calls to participate in public events - administrative conviction under article 20.2 § 2 of the CAO for calls to participate in an unauthorised manifestation on 23/01/2021 in support of Navalnyy, published in VKontakte; final decision: Krasnoyarsk Regional Court, 03/06/2021, detention of 9   days,   Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative ‑ offence proceedings - final decision: Krasnoyarsk Regional Court, 03/06/2021,   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     23399/22 15/04/2022 Sergey Viktorovich ZASTOIN 1970     22/07/2021 22/07/2021, raised on appeal Detention as an administrative suspect: beyond the three-hour statutory period, Detention as an administrative suspect: no evidence/assessment of “exceptional circumstances” Art. 10 (1) - conviction for making calls to participate in public events - administrative conviction under art. 20.2 § 2 of the CAO for calls to participate in an unauthorised manifestation on 21/04/2021 in support of Navalnyy, published in VKontakte; final decision: Murmansk Regional Court, 18/10/2021, fine of RUB   20,000,   Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative ‑ offence proceedings - final decision: Murmansk Regional Court, 18/10/2021   33689/22 21/06/2022 Ilya Ivanovich KURSOV 1997 Anna Yevgenyevna Bochilo Barnaul 06/03/2022 06/03/2022 Applicant taken to the police station as an administrative suspect: no evidence/assessment that it was impracticable, on the spot, to compile the offence record and to establish the suspect’s identity Art. 10 (1) - various restrictions on the right to freedom of expression – 1) posting an anti-war message on social network, 23/02/2022, Barnaul, Article 20.3.3. § 1 of CAO (discrediting Russian armed forces); final decision: Altay Regional Court, 13/03/2022, fine of RUB   30,000;   2) call to take part in an anti-war protest posted online, 26/02/2022, Barnaul, Article 20.2. § 2 of CAO; final decision: Altay Regional Court, 30/03/2022, fine of RUB   20,000,   Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative ‑ offence proceedings - in both sets of administrative proceedings (in connection with events of 23/02/2022 and 06/03/2022); final decisions: Altay Regional Court, 13/03/2022 and 30/03/2022,   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 - in both sets of administrative proceedings (in connection with events of 23/02/2022 and 06/03/2022)   34888/22 07/07/2022 Yelena Andreyevna BELOUSOVA 2001 Anna Yevgenyevna Bochilo Barnaul 27/02/2022 27/02/2022, raised on appeal Applicant taken to the police station as an administrative suspect: no evidence/assessment that it was impracticable, on the spot, to compile the offence record and to establish the suspect’s identity; detention as an administrative suspect: beyond the three-hour statutory period; detention as an administrative suspect: no evidence/assessment of “exceptional circumstances” Art. 10 (1) - conviction for making calls to participate in public events - administrative conviction under article 20.2 § 2 of the CAO for distributing posters with calls to participate in an unauthorised manifestation against war on 27/02/2022; final decision: Altay Regional Court, 23/03/2022, fine of RUB   20,000,   Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative ‑ offence proceedings - final decision: Altay Regional Court, 23/03/2022,   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 open court police officer on whose written statements the applicant’s conviction was based   41315/22 13/08/2022 Yevdokiya Olegovna FEDOTOVA 2003 Nataliya Nikolayevna Chernova Petrozavodsk 01/03/2022, 2.40 a.m. 02/03/2022, 10.45 a.m., raised on appeal Applicant taken to the police station as an administrative suspect: no evidence/assessment that it was impracticable, on the spot, to compile the offence record and to establish the suspect’s identity; detention as an administrative suspect: beyond the three-hour statutory period; detention as an administrative suspect: no evidence/assessment of “exceptional circumstances” Art. 10 (1) - conviction for making calls to participate in public events - administrative conviction under article 20.2 § 2 of the CAO for calls to participate in an unauthorised manifestation on 28/02/2022 against war in Ukraine, published in Telegram; final decision: Supreme Court of the Karelia Republic, 14/04/2022, fine of RUB   10,0000,   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 Karelia Republic, 14/04/2022