CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 19 juin 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 } .s7ACB8D74 { margin-top:0pt; margin-left:14.2pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt } .sCB9E0544 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:left } .s76CF415B { page-break-before:always; clear:both } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .s75A32C27 { border-collapse:collapse } .s3695F815 { border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .s2EF62ED2 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:12pt } .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 } .s8F670191 { font-family:Arial; font-size:12pt; list-style-position:inside } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .s4EFEAD { width:14.32pt; font:7pt 'Times New Roman'; display:inline-block } .sE6610776 { height:50.5pt }   Communicated on 19 June 2018   THIRD SECTION Application no. 16094/17 LEVADA CENTRE against Russia and 14 other applications (see list appended) SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASES The cases concern the Russian Foreign Agents Act, according to which every Russian NGO engaged in political activity and receiving grants from foreign donors was declared to be a “foreign agent” and subjected to various restrictions (see Ecodefence and Others v. Russia , no. 9988/13 and 48 other applications). Application no. 27215/17 also concerns the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative offence proceedings (see Karelin v. Russia , no.   926/08, §§   69-85, 20 September 2016). QUESTIONS tO THE PARTIES 1.     In respect of all the applicants, was there a violation of Articles 10 and 11 of the Convention? In particular: (a)     Do the provisions of the Foreign Agents Act meet the “quality of law” requirements contained in Article 10 § 2 and Article 11 § 2 of the Convention? In particular: (i)     Is the definition of the term “foreign agent” sufficiently clear and foreseeable? (ii)     Are the provisions on foreign financing foreseeable? Does Russian law establish any specific amount, period or form of foreign financing in order for an entity to be recognised a foreign agent? (iii)     Is the definition of “political activity” sufficiently clear and foreseeable in its application? (iv)     Are the labelling requirements formulated with sufficient clarity? Does the national law prescribe with sufficient clarity what material requires labelling or from where the material should originate? Do the domestic courts draw a distinction between publications on behalf of an organisation and those made by a private individual? (v)     Is the amount of the fine for violation of the Foreign Agents Act sufficiently foreseeable? (b)     Was the interference “necessary in a democratic society”? Were the reasons for the interference “relevant” and “sufficient”? In particular: (i)     Were the negative connotations of the term “foreign agents” considered when choosing a name for organisations receiving foreign funding? Was such branding “necessary in a democratic society”? (ii)     Was the restriction of applicants’ access to foreign funding “necessary in a democratic society”? What were the consequences of such restriction in terms of the availability of alternative funding? The Government are requested to illustrate their response with specific examples. (iii)     Did registration as a foreign agent have an impact on the applicants’ ability to freely express their ideas and carry out political activity? Was the suppression of the applicant organisations’ free debate and political activities necessary in a democratic society? (iv)     Are the additional reporting requirements applicable to the applicant organisations – such as labelling publications, keeping separate records of income or expenses obtained from foreign sources, submitting reports on activities and the composition of their management bodies, and auditing – proportionate to the aim pursued, and do they impose an excessive burden on the applicants? (v)     Are the sanctions for violation of the Foreign Agents Act proportionate to the gravity of the imputed offences? Did the domestic courts weigh the amount of a fine against the financial standing of an applicant and the potential impact of the fine on the applicant’s sustainability?   2.     As regards the applicants who rely on Article 14, have they suffered discrimination in the enjoyment of their Convention rights on account of their being labelled as foreign agents, contrary to Article 14 of the Convention, read in conjunction with Articles 10 and 11?   3.     As regards the applicants who rely on Article 18, were the restrictions imposed by the State on the applicant organisations, ostensibly pursuant to Articles 10 and 11 of the Convention, applied for purposes other than those envisaged by these provisions, contrary to Article 18 of the Convention?   4.     As regards application no. 27215/17, did the absence of the prosecuting party in the administrative proceedings result in a breach of the impartiality requirement under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention (see Karelin v. Russia , no.   926/08, §§ 69-85, 20 September 2016)? APPENDIX   No. Application no. Lodged on Applicant Date of birth Place of residence Represented by   16094/17 21/02/2017 LEVADA CENTRE 18/09/2002 Moscow   Ilnur Ilgizovich SHARAPOV   18995/17 28/02/2017 MAN AND LAW 24/11/1999 Yoshkar-Ola   Darya Sergeyevna PIGOLEVA   27215/17 21/03/2017 Irina Nikolayevna DUBOVITSKAYA 13/05/1966 Krasnodar   Darya Sergeyevna PIGOLEVA   29482/17 23/03/2017 SAKHALIN ENVIRONMENT WATCH 30/09/1997 Yuzhno-Sakhalinsk   Maksim Vladimirovich OLENICHEV   34499/17 02/05/2017 HUMAN RIGHTS ACADEMY 13/06/1997 Yekaterinburg   Anton BURKOV   53490/17 19/07/2017 SOUTH HUMAN RIGHTS CENTRE 24/03/2004 Sochi   Irina Vladimirovna KHRUNOVA   60569/17 06/08/2017 CHAPAYEVSK MEDICAL ASSOCIATION 29/09/1999 Chapayevsk   Yelena Yuryevna PERSHAKOVA   61111/17 24/07/2017 CENTRE FOR SOCIAL AND LABOUR RIGHTS 18/03/1999 Moscow       62848/17 01/08/2017 LEGAL MISSION 18/03/2009 Chelyabinsk   Maksim Vladimirovich OLENICHEV             64181/17 21/08/2017 Oleg Vladimirovich SERGEYEV 21/07/1972 Syktyvkar   Irina Anatolyevna BIRYUKOVA             69157/17 15/08/2017 SCHOOL OF THE RECRUIT 11/07/2014 Chelyabinsk   Maksim Vladimirovich OLENICHEV             81560/17 18/11/2017 WOMAN’S WORLD 30/11/2011 Kaliningrad   Maksim Vladimirovich OLENICHEV             81751/17 18/11/2017 SOVA CENTRE 21/10/2002 Moscow   Yelena Yuryevna PERSHAKOVA             130/18 11/12/2017 Viktor Pavlovich YUKECHEV 06/11/1984 Novosibirsk TAK-TAK-TAK 19/06/2013 Novosibirsk   Ilnur Ilgizovich SHARAPOV             15813/18 29/03/2018 RYAZAN MEMORIAL 30/06/1999 Ryazan   Karinna Akopovna MOSKALENKO