CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 18 septembre 2025

.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 } .s2A7D9A9F { margin-top:66pt; margin-bottom:14pt; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s739D2AAB { width:129.28pt; display:inline-block } .s79A75BD5 { width:48.28pt; display:inline-block } .s2D9C6089 { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s4ACA9207 { page-break-before:always; clear:both; mso-break-type:section-break } .s75A32C27 { 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 } .s10950C61 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify } Published on 6 October 2025   THIRD SECTION Application no.   25302/19 COGITA PUBLISHING HOUSE against Russia and 19 other applications (see table appended) PROCEDURAL INFORMATION Following a preliminary examination of the admissibility of the applications on 18 September 2025, 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 table, 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 of the Convention relating to various restrictions on the right to freedom of expression which are the subject of well-established case law of the Court (see the Relevant case-law column in the table below). APPENDIX – STATEMENT OF FACTS List of applications raising complaints under Article 10 of the Convention (various restrictions on the right to freedom of expression) No. Application no. Date of introduction Applicant’s name Year of birth/registration   Representative’s name and location Summary of facts Final decision Date Name of the court Penalty (award, fine, imprisonment) Legal issues Relevant case-law Other complaints under well-established case-law     25302/19 24/04/2019 COGITA PUBLISHING HOUSE 2014   Ivan Yuryevich Pavlov St Petersburg The applicant publisher was prohibited from distributing in Russia a book by Polish author Jan Nowak-Jeziorański titled "Eastern Reflections: collection of articles and interviews 1991-2003" under section 10(6) of the Information Technologies Act on grounds that the book contained anti-Russian statements, misrepresentation of historical events about the USSR’s actions during WWII, and was deemed to form negative images of the USSR and Russia in readers, potentially threatening Russian society. Supreme Court of the Russian Federation, 26/10/2018 Book banned in Russia Unjustified restrictions on historical debate RID Novaya Gazeta and ZAO Novaya Gazeta v.   Russia, no. 44561/11, §§   111-12, 11 May 2021 (failure by the domestic authorities to apply standards in conformity with principles embodied in Article 10, or to base their decisions on an acceptable assessment of the relevant facts)       4658/20* 26/12/2019 Vyacheslav Sergeyevich LUKICHEV 1994     Memorial Human Rights Centre Moscow The applicant was convicted under Article   205.2 § 2 of the Criminal Code for having posted on his Telegram channel "Prometey", on 31/10/2018, a text dedicated to a 17-year-old’s self-immolation at the FSB building in Arkhangelsk, describing him as a "hero who sacrificed his life in the fight against injustice" whilst suggesting non ‑ violent alternatives for anarchist struggle. Supreme Court of the Russian Federation, 26/06/2019 Fine of RUB   300,000 Excessively broad interpretation of terrorism legislation for political commentary without evidence of incitement to violence Taganrog LRO and Others v. Russia, nos. 32401/10 and 19 others, §§ 158-59, 7 June 2022 (excessively broad definition of extremism)       7435/21* 26/12/2020 Grigoriy Yuryevich SEVERIN 1977   Ilya Vladimirovich Sivoldayev Voronezh The applicant was convicted under Article   20.3 of the CAO for having published drawings mocking the Russian President, using swastika symbols to compare government methods to the Nazi regime. Voronezh Regional Court, 26/06/2020 12 days’ imprisonment Imprisonment excessive for satirical political expression RID Novaya Gazeta and ZAO Novaya Gazeta v.   Russia, no. 44561/11, §§ 111-12, 11 May 2021 (failure by the domestic authorities to apply standards in conformity with principles embodied in Article 10, or to base their decisions on an acceptable assessment of the relevant facts) Prot. 7 Art. 2 - delayed review of conviction by a higher tribunal - Sentence enforced before the appeal was heard,   Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings.     58338/21* 18/11/2021 Aleksey Nikolayevich PODNEBESNYY 1978     Memorial Human Rights Centre Moscow (1)   The applicant was convicted under Article 20.2 § 5 of the CAO for having participated in a manifestation in support of Navalnyy in Nizhniy Novgorod on 31/01/2021 whilst working as a journalist reporting on the event.   (2)   The applicant was convicted under Article 20.3.3 § 1 of the CAO for having posted on social media the text message "Podnebsnyy (applicant’s name) - for peace!". (1)   Nizhniy Novgorod Regional Court, 11/08/2021         (2)   Nizhny Novgorod Regional Court, 24/08/2022 (1)   Fine of RUB 10,000             (2)   Fine of RUB 30,000 (1)   Persecution of journalist for reporting on peaceful assembly         (2)   Excessively broad and unforeseeable interpretation of legislation criminalising discrediting of armed forces for peaceful expression (1)   Pentikäinen v. Finland [GC], no. 11882/10, 20   October 2015 (journalists covering peaceful rallies)       (2)   Novaya Gazeta and Others v. Russia, nos.   11884/22 and 161   others, 11 February 2025 (conviction for discrediting Russian military) Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty, including unrecorded detention and detention without a judicial order and any other legal basis - The applicant was taken to a police station for the purpose of drawing up an administrative offence report. There is no indication that the report could not have been prepared on site,   Art. 11 (1) - Freedom of peaceful assembly – the applicant’s arrest and conviction for having participated in a peaceful assembly,   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 the proceedings.     60716/21* 24/11/2021 Karim Bekmirzayevich YAMADAYEV 1981   Andrey Vasilyevich Sabinin Stavropol The applicant was convicted under Article   205.2 of the Criminal Code for having filmed and uploaded on YouTube and VKontakte an episode of a series about Russia in the near future, where a fictional judge punishes high-ranking officials including President Putin, his spokesperson Peskov, and chairperson of Rosneft Sechin. Supreme Court of the Russian Federation, 02/09/2021 Fine of RUB   300,000 Excessively broad interpretation of terrorism legislation for fictional satirical content without evidence of incitement to violence Taganrog LRO and Others v. Russia, nos. 32401/10 and 19 others, §§ 158-59, 7 June 2022 (excessively broad definition of extremism)       60839/21* 26/11/2021 Svetlana Vladimirovna PROKOPYEVA 1979   Tumas Arsenovich Misakyan Moscow The applicant was convicted under Article   205.2 of the Criminal Code for statements made during her author programme on “Echo of Moscow in Pskov”. She linked a 2018 terrorist act committed by a 17-year-old at a FSB office in Arkhangelsk to the State’s “repressive” conduct and the fabrication of criminal cases. Supreme Court of the Russian Federation, 06/07/2021 Fine of RUB   500,000 Excessively broad interpretation of terrorism legislation for journalistic commentary without evidence of incitement to violence Taganrog LRO and Others v. Russia, nos. 32401/10 and 19 others, §§ 158-59, 7 June 2022 (excessively broad definition of extremism)       653/22 20/12/2021   INGUSHETIA PUBLIC MOVEMENT ‘COUNCIL OF INGUSH TRIBAL GROUPS’ 2016     Memorial Human Rights Centre Moscow The applicant organisation was liquidated for allegedly engaging in extremist activities related to the boundary dispute between Ingushetia and Chechnya, criticism of government policies, and failure to comply with NGO reporting requirements. Supreme Court of the Republic of Ingushetia, 01/07/2021 Organisation liquidated Excessively broad interpretation of extremism legislation leading to dissolution of NGO for legitimate political expression Taganrog LRO and Others v. Russia, nos. 32401/10 and 19 others, §§ 158-59, 7 June 2022 (excessively broad definition of extremism) Art. 11 (1) - Freedom of association – the applicant organisation also complained under Article 11 of the Convention about its liquidation.     12451/22 08/02/2022 Daniil Antonovich SHESTAKOV 1997   Aleksandr Dmitriyevich Peredruk St Petersburg The applicant was convicted under Article   354.1 of the Criminal Code for having posted online a photograph of General Vlasov regarded as endorsing Nazism. Fourth Cassation Court, 26/08/2021 9 months’ community service, withholding 15   percent of wages and seizure of personal computer Criminalisation of historical debate about past events RID Novaya Gazeta and ZAO Novaya Gazeta v.   Russia, no. 44561/11, §§ 111-12, 11 May 2021 (failure by the domestic authorities to apply standards in conformity with principles embodied in Article 10, or to base their decisions on an acceptable assessment of the relevant facts)       19663/22* 05/04/2022 Olga Ramilyevna ASEINOVA 1984   Vladimir Yuryevich Protasov Yoshkar - Ola The applicant was convicted under Article   20.1 of the CAO for having published on VKontakte information concerning the COVID situation which the domestic courts found to be untrue. Volzhsky Town Court of Mari El Republic, 21/10/2021 Fine of RUB   30,000 Incomplete assessment of fake-news legislation constituent elements Avagyan v. Russia, no.   36911/20, 29 April 2025     20981/22* 01/04/2022 Dmitriy Ivanovich SMOKOV 1983   Mikhail Vladislavovich Uvarov Tyumen The applicant was convicted under Article   20.3 § 1 of the CAO for having published on VKontakte in 2013 an excerpt from a film in which the swastika is shown. Khanty-Mansiysk-Ugra Regional Court, 29/11/2021 Fine of RUB   1,000 Expectation to anticipate future legal prohibitions not yet in force at the time of the posting Andrey Rylkov Foundation and Others v.   Russia, nos. 37949/18 and 83 others, § 111, 18   June 2024 (retrospective application of the prohibitions)     29995/22* 28/05/2022 Nataliya Borisovna TYSHKEVICH 1994   Andrey Vasilyevich Sabinin Stavropol The applicant was convicted of Nazi symbols propaganda for having posted on her personal Instagram page in 2017 a picture of the Ukrainian Insurgent Army (UPA) flag. Moscow City Court, 11/04/2022 15 days’ imprisonment Expectation to anticipate future legal prohibitions not yet in force at the time of the posting Andrey Rylkov Foundation and Others v.   Russia, nos. 37949/18 and 83 others, § 111, 18   June 2024 (retrospective application of the prohibitions) Prot. 7 Art. 2 - delayed review of conviction by a higher tribunal - Sentence enforced before the appeal was heard,   Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings.   30351/22* 31/05/2022 Nikolay Nikolayevich PLATOSHKIN 1965   Denis Aleksandrovich Timchenko Moscow The applicant was convicted under Articles   212 § 1.1 and 207.1 of the Criminal Code for having uploaded YouTube videos calling for peaceful demonstration in Moscow and criticising COVID-19 measures implemented by the authorities. Second Cassation Court, 10/03/2022 4 years and 9   months’ suspended imprisonment and fine of RUB 500,000 Excessive sanction for calls to peaceful protest and political expression Olga Kudrina v. Russia, no.   34313/06, 6   April 2021 (excessive prison sentence for peaceful expressive conduct), Avagyan v. Russia, no.   36911/20, 29 April 2025 (fake-news legislation)     32768/22* 15/06/2022 Darya Andreyevna SERENKO 1993   Daniil Borisovich Berman Moscow The applicant was convicted under Article   20.3 § 1 of the CAO for having published on Instagram, on 27/11/2021, a photo containing symbols associated with the Navalnyy Campaign Headquarters movement, whose activities had been banned as extremist in Russia. Moscow City Court, 15/02/2022 15 days’ imprisonment Excessively broad interpretation of the concept of extremism Taganrog LRO and Others v. Russia, nos. 32401/10 and 19 others, §§ 158-59, 7 June 2022 (excessively broad definition of extremism) Prot. 7 Art. 2 - delayed review of conviction by a higher tribunal - Sentence enforced before the appeal was heard,   Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative ‑ offence proceedings,   Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty, including unrecorded detention and detention without a judicial order and any other legal basis - The applicant’s arrest and detention on 08/02/2022 exceeded three hours and was carried out solely for the purpose of preparing a record of an administrative offence.   35119/22 04/07/2022 Darya Vladimirovna POLYUDOVA 1989   Leonid Alekseyevich Solovyev Moscow The applicant was convicted under Articles   280 § 1 and 205.2 § 2 of the Criminal Code for having made a real-time video recording and commentary on armed attacks against FSB officers near the FSB building in Moscow on 19/12/2019, and for a post about Chechen field commander Shamil Basayev. Supreme Court of the Russian Federation, 16/03/2022 6 years’ imprisonment Excessively broad interpretation of terrorism and extremism legislation for political commentary without evidence of incitement to violence Taganrog LRO and Others v. Russia, nos. 32401/10 and 19 others, §§ 158-59, 7 June 2022 (excessively broad definition of extremism)     36522/22* 07/07/2022 Mikhail Yevgenyevich ALFEROV 1985       The applicant was convicted under Articles   354.1 § 3 and 319 of the Criminal Code for having posted a video on YouTube on 09/05/2020 concerning Victory Day. In the video, he criticised the decoration of the city with flags and posters against the backdrop of poverty, expressed dissatisfaction with the excessive use of the St George ribbon, and referred to the copies of the Victory Banner displayed on residential buildings as “victorious rags”. Supreme Court of the Russian Federation, 23/06/2022 470 hours’ community service Criminalisation of political expression RID Novaya Gazeta and ZAO Novaya Gazeta v.   Russia, no. 44561/11, §§ 111-12, 11 May 2021 (failure by the domestic authorities to apply standards in conformity with principles embodied in Article 10, or to base their decisions on an acceptable assessment of the relevant facts)     39211/22* 29/07/2022 Aleksandr Andreyevich RYBKIN 1996   Aleksey Sergeyevich Kalugin St Petersburg The applicant was convicted under Article   20.3 § 1 of the Code of Administrative Offences for having acted as a news anchor for the political party "The Other Russia of Eduard Limonov", using the party’s symbols in a YouTube video published on 22/10/2021. Moscow City Court, 29/03/2022 14 days’ imprisonment Excessively broad interpretation of the concept of extremism Taganrog LRO and Others v. Russia, nos. 32401/10 and 19 others, §§ 158-59, 7 June 2022 (excessively broad definition of extremism) Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty, including unrecorded detention and detention without a judicial order and any other legal basis - Detention at the police station from 10.30 a.m. on 24/01/2022 to 10.10   a.m. on 25/01/2022, in excess of three hours,   Prot. 7 Art. 2 - delayed review of conviction by a higher tribunal - Sentence enforced before the appeal was heard.   46140/22 18/08/2022 Nadezhda Aleksandrovna BELOVA 1983   Kirill Yevgenyevich Erlikhman Moscow The applicant was convicted under Article   205.2 of the Criminal Code for having left sympathetic comments under internet news posts about the 17-year-old who blew himself up at the local FSB office in Arkhangelsk in 2018. Supreme Court of the Russian Federation, 19/04/2022 Fine of RUB   390,000 Excessively broad interpretation of terrorism legislation for commentary without evidence of incitement to violence Taganrog LRO and Others v. Russia, nos. 32401/10 and 19 others, §§ 158-59, 7 June 2022 (excessively broad definition of extremism)     3072/23* 11/01/2023 Oleg Yevgenyevich MAKURIN 1975   Tatyana Borisovna Okushko Strasbourg The applicant was convicted under Article   205.2 of the Criminal Code for having posted a note on his VKontakte page on 21/12/2019. In the post, he expressed negative views towards the Federal Security Service (FSB), referring to several terrorist attacks on regional FSB offices that had occurred between 2017 and 2019. Supreme Court of the Russian Federation, 13/09/2022 Fine of RUB   300,000 Excessively broad interpretation of terrorism legislation for political commentary without evidence of incitement to violence Taganrog LRO and Others v. Russia, nos. 32401/10 and 19 others, §§ 158-59, 7 June 2022 (excessively broad definition of extremism)     30791/23 20/06/2023 Armen Vardanovich ARAMYAN 1997   Vladimir Aleksandrovich METELKIN 1994   Andrey Vasilyevich Sabinin Stavropol The applicants, editors of the student magazine DOXA, were convicted under Article 151.2 § 2 of the Criminal Code for having incited minors to participate in protests following the poisoning of opposition politician Aleksey Navalnyy. Second Cassation Court, 21/02/2023 2 years’ community work Excessive sanction for calls to peaceful forms of protest Olga Kudrina v. Russia, no.   34313/06, 6   April 2021 (excessive prison sentence for peaceful expressive conduct)     19101/25 10/06/2025 Ruslan Tabrizovich SHAVEDDINOV 1996   Anna Yevgenyevna Bochilo Barnaul The applicant, a former press secretary of Aleksey Navalnyy’s presidential campaign and employee of the Anti-Corruption Foundation, was designated as a "foreign agent" on 22/07/2022. The Ministry of Justice cited his social media publications, distribution of materials from independent journalists and media outlets previously recognised as "foreign agents", and receipt of funding from the Foundation for the Protection of Citizens’ Rights, previously designated as a "foreign agent". 17/04/2025, Supreme Court of the Russian Federation Designated as a foreign agent Foreign-agent designation is arbitrary and not necessary in a democratic society Ecodefence and Others v.   Russia, nos. 9988/13 and 60 others, 14 June 2022, and Kobaliya and Others v. Russia, nos.   39446/16 and 105   others, 22 October 2024 Art. 8 (1) - interference with the right to reputation, and inability to forge and maintain relationship with others in the professional and social sphere.