CEDH · CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITYCOM;ENG — 13 février 2025

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .s2EF17D91 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; font-size:2pt } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .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 } .s10950C61 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .sB9D5CABB { width:28.35pt; display:inline-block } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .s3AAE10DF { margin-top:14pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .s3CA22BA { font-family:Arial; text-transform:uppercase } .s2D9C6089 { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s84651E4E { margin-top:14pt; margin-left:14.2pt; margin-bottom:3pt; text-align:justify } .s69DCC830 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .sC986E16F { font-family:Arial; color:#ffffff } .sC646A315 { width:14.54pt; display:inline-block } .s6EC6BA2A { width:121.74pt; display:inline-block } .s9852CA4C { width:7.54pt; display:inline-block } .s9E436411 { width:138.09pt; display:inline-block } .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 } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold }   THIRD SECTION DECISION Application no. 48407/19 Svetlana Aleksandrovna BAKSHEYEVA against Russia (see appended table) The European Court of Human Rights (Third Section), sitting on 13   February 2025 as a Committee composed of:   Diana Kovatcheva , President ,   Úna Ní Raifeartaigh,   Mateja Đurović , judges , and Viktoriya Maradudina, Acting Deputy Section Registrar, Having regard to the above application lodged on 5   September 2019, Having deliberated, decides as follows: FACTS AND PROCEDURE The applicant’s details are set out in the appended table. She was represented by Mr I. Sholokhov, a lawyer practising in Kazan. The applicant’s complaints under Article 10 of the Convention, concerning an unjustified restriction on the right to freedom of expression, and under Article 6 of the Convention, regarding the absence of a prosecutor from the proceedings, were communicated to the Russian Government. THE LAW The Court notes that on 13 August 2020 the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation quashed the applicant’s conviction on the grounds that the statutory elements of the offence had not been met. In these circumstances, the applicant can no longer claim to be a victim of the alleged violation. Accordingly, this application is incompatible ratione personae with the provisions of the Convention within the meaning of Article 35 § 3 (a) and must be rejected in accordance with Article 35 § 4. It follows that this application must be rejected in accordance with Article   35 § 4 of the Convention. For these reasons, the Court, unanimously, Declares the application inadmissible. Done in English and notified in writing on 6 March 2025.     Viktoriya Maradudina   Diana Kovatcheva   Acting Deputy Registrar   President   APPENDIX Application raising complaints under Article   10 of the Convention (various restrictions on the right to freedom of expression) Application no. Date of introduction Applicant’s name Year of birth   Representative’s name and location Summary of facts Final decision Date Name of the court Penalty (award, fine, imprisonment) Legal issues Other complaints under well-established case ‑ law 48407/19 05/09/2019 Svetlana Aleksandrovna BAKSHEYEVA 1972   Igor Nikolayevich Sholokhov Kazan The applicant was convicted under Article 20.1(3) of the CAO for criticising the regional governor in online comments about a controversial landfill project. Arkhangelsk Regional Court, 30/07/2019     Supreme Court of the Russian Federation 13/08/2020 Fine of RUB 30,000         Conviction quashed Criminalisation of online criticism of public officials through vague legal provisions on "disrespect of authorities". Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings