CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 11 janvier 2024

.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 } .s85E2A1C4 { margin-right:auto; margin-left:auto; border:0.75pt solid #949494; border-collapse:collapse } .sD271F6F6 { border-right:0.75pt solid #949494; border-bottom: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 } .s3E08F9CA { border-right:0.75pt solid #949494; border-left:0.75pt solid #949494; border-bottom:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .sC54D2024 { border-left:0.75pt solid #949494; border-bottom:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .sDF42CB81 { border-top:0.75pt solid #949494; border-right:0.75pt solid #949494; border-bottom: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 } .sE8934522 { border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s85D71A24 { border-top:0.75pt solid #949494; border-left:0.75pt solid #949494; border-bottom:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s3DE46EBF { border-top:0.75pt solid #949494; border-right:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .sD3B88E32 { border-top:0.75pt solid #949494; border-right:0.75pt solid #949494; border-left:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .sA30831E3 { border-top:0.75pt solid #949494; border-left:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } Published on 5 February 2024   FIRST SECTION Application no.   49839/17 Sergey Leonidovich AYNBINDER against Russia and 19 other applications (see list appended) PROCEDURAL INFORMATION Following a preliminary examination of the admissibility of the applications on 11 January 2024, 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     49839/17* 03/07/2017 Sergey Leonidovich AYNBINDER 1973 Nikolay Sergeyevich Zboroshenko Mytishchi Moscow, parking lot of the MEGA Khimki Mall, 11/11/2016, Protest against the toll collection system ‘PLATON’ article 19.3 § 1 of CAO, fine of RUB   1,000 13/01/2017, Moscow City Court   Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - arrest, escorting to a police station, detention between 11/11/2016 and 13/11/2016 as an administrative suspect, pending trial and after the offence record had been compiled,   Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings     1600/18 26/12/2017 Olga Arkadyevna KARAMYSHEVA 1958   Memorial Human Rights Centre Moscow Moscow, 26/03/2017, Taking pictures of the applicant’s son’s solo demonstration against construction fraud article 20.2 § 5 of CAO, fine of RUB   10,000 28/07/2017, Moscow City Court   Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - arrest, escorting to a police station, detention on 26/03/2017 for the sole purpose of drawing up an offence record,   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 conviction was based,   Art. 6 (1) - unfair trial in administrative offence proceedings - refusal to adduce photo evidence submitted by the defence     1605/18 26/12/2017 Ivan Sergeyevich KARAMYSHEV 1986   Memorial Human Rights Centre Moscow Moscow, 26/03/2017, Protest of a defrauded shareholder against housing construction fraud article 20.2 § 5 of CAO, fine of RUB   10,000 26/06/2017, Moscow City Court   Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - arrest, escorting to a police station, detention on 26/03/2017 for the sole purpose of drawing up a record of administrative offence,   Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceeding,     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 conviction was based,   Art. 6 (1) - unfair trial in the administrative offence proceedings - refusal to admit photo evidence submitted by the defence     5629/18* 20/11/2017 Yan Nikolayevich KATELEVSKIY 1981 Yevgeniy Nikolayevich Kurakin Reutov Moscow, 09/08/2016,   Protest against unlawful actions of a local judge and the police article 20.2 § 5 of CAO,   fine of RUB   15,000 22/05/2017, 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     25651/19* 30/04/2019 Dmitriy Aleksandrovich YEGOROV 1995 Elza Rinatovna Nisanbekova Kazan (i) Kazan, 25/10/2018, Picket against attack on political and economic liberties in Russia,     (ii) Kazan, 12/12/2018, Protest against the authorities’ failure to respect the Constitution (i), article 20.2 § 2 of CAO, administrative detention of 7   days,         (ii), article 20.2 § 8 of CAO, administrative detention of 12   days (i) 31/10/2018, Supreme Court of the Tatarstan Republic     (ii) 29/12/2018, Supreme Court of the Tatarstan Republic                   (ii) conviction on account of using quicky (de)assembled objects during a solo demonstration Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - arrest, escorting to a police station, detention (i) between 29/10/2018 and 30/10/2018 as administrative suspect, pending trial and after the offence record in respect of the events of 25/10/2018 was compiled, and (ii) between 27/12/2018 and 28/12/2018 as administrative suspect, pending trial and after the offence record in respect of the events of 12/12/2018 was compiled,   Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings - both sets of proceedings     31831/21* 16/06/2021 Tatyana Nikolayevna PISAREVICH 1991 Aleksandra Nikolayevna Bayeva Moscow Balashikha, 23/01/2021, Support of A. Navalnyy article 22.2 § 1 of CAO, administrative fine of RUB   10,000 Moscow Regional Court, 23/03/2021 conviction for a breach of the regional COVID-related ban on public events Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - escorting to and detention in the police station on 23/01/2021 for the sole purpose of compiling an offence report,     Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings     41315/21* 02/08/2021 Darya Sergeyevna BOLSHAKOVA 1989 Anna Yevgenyevna Bochilo Barnaul Kaliningrad, 10/10/2020, Political protest article 20.2 § 8 of CAO,   fine of RUB   150,000 23/03/2021, Kaliningrad Regional Court         52256/21 01/10/2021 Nina Lvovna VOLOKHONSKAYA 1994   Memorial Human Rights Centre Moscow Moscow, in the vicinity of Headquarters of the FSB, 16/07/2020,   Protest against the arbitrariness of the police in relation to the case of ‘Novoye Velichiye’ article 20.2 § 5 of CAO, fine of RUB   10,000 06/04/2021, Moscow City Court rotation - event classified as assembly post facto Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - arrest, escorting to and detention at the police station on 16/07/2020 for the sole purpose of compiling an offence report,   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 the trial the police officers on whose written statements the applicant’s conviction was based, refusal to admit video and photo evidence submitted by the defence,   Art. 11 (2) - disproportionate measures against organisers and participants of public assemblies - 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, §§ 48-50, 17 April 2018; and Muchnik and Mordovin v. Russia [Committee], nos. 23814/15 and 2707/16, §§ 47-52, 12 February 2019)- arrest, conviction under article 20.2   §   5 of CAO for participation in solo demonstrations held on 16/07/2020 by way of rotation by a group of no less than 30 participants, fine of RUB   10,000, final judgment of 06/04/2021, Moscow City Court     52725/21 15/10/2021 Daniil Enverovich ROZOVSKIY 1997   Memorial Human Rights Centre Moscow Moscow, 23/01/2021, Support of A. Navalnyy article 20.2 § 5 of CAO, administrative fine of RUB   20,000 Moscow City Court, 16/04/2021   Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - arrest, escorting to and detention at the police station on 23/01/2021 for the sole purpose of compiling an offence report,   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 the trial the police officers on whose written statements the applicant’s conviction was based,   Art. 11 (2) - disproportionate measures against organisers and participants of public assemblies - alternatively to Article 10 issue (see (see, mutatis mutandis, above-cited Tsukanov and Torchinskiy and Muchnik and Mordovin - arrest, conviction under article 20.2   §   5 of the CAO, fine of RUB   20,000 for participation in a rally in support of A. Navalnyy on 23/01/2021, final judgment of 16/04/2021 by the Moscow City Court   56861/21* 31/10/2021 Aleksey Andreyevich USOLKIN 1961 Nikolay Sergeyevich Zboroshenko Mytishchi Moscow, 20/01/2021, Support of A. Navalnyy article 20.6.1 §   1 of CAO, fine of RUB   10,000   23/08/2021, Moscow City Court COVID-related ban on public events Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - escorting to and detention at the police station for compiling an offence report on 20/01/2021,   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 the police officers on whose written statements the conviction was based   17991/22* 13/03/2022 Anna Valeryevna KRECHETOVA 1970 Darya Dmitriyevna Aksenova Kolomna Moscow, 06/09/2021, Manifestation in support of Crimean Tatars article 20.2 § 8 of CAO, administrative detention of 16   days 13/09/2021, Moscow City Court   Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - arrest, escorting to and detention in the police station between 06/09/2021 and 08/09/2021 as administrative suspect, pending trial, and after the offence record had been compiled,   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 the police officers on whose written statements her conviction was based   22067/22* 15/04/2022 Igor Gennadyevich TATAROV 1990     Moscow, 28/06/2021, Protest against President Putin article 20.2 § 5 of CAO, administrative fine of RUB   15,000 15/10/2021, Moscow City Court ban on public events at certain locations - Red Square Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - escorting to the police station on 28/06/2021 for the sole purpose of compiling an offence report,   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 the trial the police officers on whose written statements the applicant’s conviction was based   32849/22* 26/06/2022 Yaroslav Olegovich REVENKO 1996 Andrey Vasilyevich Sabinin Stavropol Taganrog, 05/03/2022, Anti-war protest article 20.2 § 2 of CAO, fine of RUB   25,000 11/04/2022 Rostov Regional Court   Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - arrest, escorting to and detention at the police station on 06/03/2022 for the sole purpose of compiling an offence report in respect of the solo demonstration of 05/03/2022,   Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings - both sets of 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 the police officers on whose written statements the conviction was based (proceedings under article 20.2   §   2 of the CAO, final judgment of 11/04/2022, Rostov Regional Court)   Art. 10 (1) - various restrictions on the right to freedom of expression - arrest, conviction under Art. 20.3.3 § 1 CAO for discrediting the Russian military forces on account of his anti-war solo demonstration of 05/03/2022, penalty of RUB   35,000, final judgment of 07/04/2022, Rostov Regional Court,   Prot. 7 Art. 4 - right not to be tried or punished twice in criminal proceedings - the applicant was convicted twice for his solo picket against the war in Ukraine: (i) under Art. 20.3.3 § 1 CAO for discrediting of the Russian military forces, fine of RUB   35,000, final judgment of the Rostov Regional Court of 07/04/2022, and (ii) under article 20.2   §   2 of the CAO, fine of RUB   25,000, final judgment of the Rostov Regional Court of 11/04/2022   34712/22 11/07/2022 Darya Sergeyevna TSYBINA 1999 Anna Yevgenyevna Bochilo Barnaul Volgogda, 24/02/2022, Anti-war protest article 20.2 § 2 of CAO, fine of RUB   20,000 31/03/2022, Volgograd Regional Court distance requirement - event classified as assembly post facto Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - escorting to and detention at the police station between 24/02/2022 and 25/02/2022 as administrative suspect, pending trial and after the offence record had been compiled,   Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings   35080/22* 04/07/2022 Anton Sergeyevich NEKHAYEV 1998 Sergey Sergeyevich Kulikov Nizhniy Novgorod Nizhnyy Novgorod, 24/02/2022,   Anti-war protest article 20.2. §   6.1 of CAO, administrative detention for   6 days 05/03/2022, Nizhniy Novgorod Regional Court   Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention – arrest, escorting to a police station, detention between 24/02/2022 and 25/02/2022 as administrative suspect, pending trial and after the offence record had been compiled,   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 the trial the police officers on whose written statements the applicant’s conviction was based,   Art. 6 (1) - lack of fair hearing - refusal to allow evidence in support of the applicant’s account of events (video footage of the events)   47923/22 25/09/2022 Aleksandr Aleksandrovich KOLIBERDA 1975 Nikolay Vladimirovich Munskiy Krasnoyarsk Krasnoyarsk, 13/03/2022, Anti-war protest article 20.6.1 §   1 of CAO, warning 25/05/2022, Krasnoyarsk Regional Court COVID restrictions Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - arrest and escorting to the police station on 13/03/2022 for the sole purpose of drawing up an offence record,   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 the trial the police officers on whose written statements the applicant’s conviction was based.   48088/22 15/09/2022 Anastasiya Vyacheslavovna ZHDANOVA 1994 Vladimir Sergeyevich Nemanov Moscow Moscow, 08/03/2022, Anti-war protest article 20.2 § 5 of CAO, fine of RUB   20,000 01/07/2022, Moscow City Court   Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - escorting to the police station on 08/03/2022 for compiling an offence report,   Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings   52475/22* 20/10/2022 Yelizaveta Andreyevna NEMZER 1996     Moscow, 24/02/2022, Anti-war picket article 20.2 § 5 of CAO, fine of RUB, 20,000 27/07/2022 Moscow City Court (complaint lodged on 24/11/2022)   Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - arrest, escorting to a police station, detention (i) on 24/02/2022 and (ii) on 02/03/2022, each time for the sole purpose of drawing up the offence record,     Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings - both sets of 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 officer on whose written statements the applicant’s conviction was based - both sets of proceedings,   Art. 11 (2) - disproportionate measures against organisers and participants of public assemblies - Rally against the war in Ukraine, 02/03/2022, Moscow – arrest, conviction under article 20.2 § 5 of CAO, fine of RUB   15,000, final judgment of 23/06/2022 by the Moscow City Court (complaint lodged on 20/10/2022)   1697/23* 26/11/2022 Alena Igorevna PAVLOVA 1992     Moscow, 26/02/2022, Anti-war protest article 20.2 § 5 of CAO, fine of RUB   15,000 25/08/2022, Moscow City Court   Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - arrest, escorting to a police station, detention on 26/02/2022 for the sole purpose of drawing up an offence record,   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 and to call defence witnesses to challenge the police version of events   2250/23 29/12/2022 Svetlana Valeryevna GETIYA 1955     Moscow, 27/02/2022, Anti-war protest article 20.2 § 5 of CAO, fine of RUB   20,000 05/09/2022, Moscow City Court   Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - arrest, escorting to a police station, detention on 27/02/2022 for the sole purpose of drawing up an administrative offence record,     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 conviction was based