CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 11 janvier 2018

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .sFE10DC93 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .sA6BC7FA7 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:right } .s9793A85B { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt } .s5E1364CA { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .s8229ABDD { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center } .s68C46B95 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center } .s3F59B822 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; text-transform:uppercase } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic }   Communicated on 11 January 2018   THIRD SECTION Application no. 19273/08 Galina Valentinovna YARTSEVA against Russia lodged on 9 February 2008 SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE The applicant, an editor of a newspaper distributed in Velikiy Novgorod, was convicted under Articles 5.10, 5.11 and 5.20 of the Code of Administrative Offences and was sentenced to fines for publishing two articles (she had written) during an election period. QUESTIONS tO THE PARTIES Was there a violation of Article 10 of the Convention on account of the applicant’s prosecution for administrative offences (compare Orlovskaya Iskra v. Russia , no. 42911/08, §§   117-35, 21 February 2017)? In particular: -     What legitimate aim was pursued by the applicable legislation and the applicant’s prosecution on the basis of that legislation? -     Was the   interference “necessary in a democratic society”? Namely, did it meet a “pressing social need”; was it proportionate to the aim pursued? -     Did the domestic courts adduce relevant and sufficient reasons and properly apply the standards under Article 10 of the Convention (see Orlovskaya Iskra , cited above, with further references; for the approach, see Terentyev v. Russia , no. 25147/09, §§   22 ‑ 25, 26 January 2017, and Annenkov and Others v. Russia , no. 31475/10, § 139, 25 July 2017)?