CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 24 janvier 2020

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .sA6BC7FA7 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:right } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .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 } .sA8776625 { margin-top:18pt; margin-left:29.2pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-indent:-17.6pt; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .s58699FB5 { margin-top:14pt; margin-bottom:12pt; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .sCB9E0544 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:left } .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 } .s4ACA9207 { page-break-before:always; clear:both; mso-break-type:section-break } .s6DB91820 { text-align:center } .s25B97BCD { margin-right:auto; margin-left:auto; border:0.75pt solid #808080; border-collapse:collapse } .s166AB0A7 { height:14.25pt } .sD1CDDC62 { border-right:0.75pt solid #808080; border-bottom:0.75pt solid #808080; padding-right:5.03pt; padding-left:5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#e0e0e0 } .sDF237D91 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; font-size:8pt } .s2490CDBC { border-right:0.75pt solid #808080; border-left:0.75pt solid #808080; border-bottom:0.75pt solid #808080; padding-right:5.03pt; padding-left:5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#e0e0e0 } .s8DB21C27 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:center; font-size:8pt } .s26ADB50A { border-left:0.75pt solid #808080; border-bottom:0.75pt solid #808080; padding-right:5.03pt; padding-left:5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#e0e0e0 } .s8235E78A { height:14.2pt } .sC2958733 { border:0.75pt solid #808080; padding-right:5.03pt; padding-left:5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#e0e0e0 } .s94117A4F { border-top:0.75pt solid #808080; border-left:0.75pt solid #808080; border-bottom:0.75pt solid #808080; padding-right:5.03pt; padding-left:5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#e0e0e0 } .sFD306575 { height:35.55pt } .s2F4AF114 { border-top:0.75pt solid #808080; border-right:0.75pt solid #808080; border-bottom:0.75pt solid #808080; padding-right:5.03pt; padding-left:5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s6B505E72 { margin:0pt; padding-left:0pt } .s6CF83D49 { margin-left:11.67pt; padding-left:6.18pt; font-family:Arial; font-size:8pt; font-weight:bold } .s898DAE93 { border:0.75pt solid #808080; padding-right:5.03pt; padding-left:5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .sB217F55D { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:justify; font-size:8pt } .sA0B2759 { margin-top:0pt; margin-left:0.45pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:-0.45pt; text-align:justify; font-size:8pt } .sB71F2881 { border-top:0.75pt solid #808080; border-left:0.75pt solid #808080; border-bottom:0.75pt solid #808080; padding-right:5.03pt; padding-left:5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .sBCA334AF { border-top:0.75pt solid #808080; border-right:0.75pt solid #808080; padding-right:5.03pt; padding-left:5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s7CB6920E { border-top:0.75pt solid #808080; border-right:0.75pt solid #808080; border-left:0.75pt solid #808080; padding-right:5.03pt; padding-left:5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s62945D10 { border-top:0.75pt solid #808080; border-left:0.75pt solid #808080; padding-right:5.03pt; padding-left:5.03pt; vertical-align:top }   Communicated on 24 January 2020 Published on 10 February 2020   THIRD SECTION Application no. 38503/18 Anatoliy Anatolyevich MIRONOVSKIY against Russia and 3 other applications (see list appended) The applicants are Russian nationals. They were represented before the Court by lawyers of the Memorial Human Rights Centre based in Moscow. The circumstances of the case The facts of the case, as submitted by the applicants, may be summarised as follows. The applicants were arrested by the police on the charge of violation of the procedure prescribed for the conduct of the public gathering and taken to the police station for the preparation of the administrative record. In court the applicants denied the charges and claimed that they had not taken part in the gatherings. The courts heard their cases in the absence of a prosecuting party. The applicants were found guilty as charged and ordered to pay a monetary fine. The details pertaining to each application appear in Appendix below.   COMPLAINTS The applicants complain under Article 5   §   1 of the Convention that their arrest and detention were not “lawful” or “in accordance with a procedure prescribed by law”. The applicants complain under Article   6   §   1 of the Convention that the courts which dealt with their cases were not impartial. The applicants (applications nos.   38508/18 and 56891/18) complain under Article   6   §§   1 and 3   (d) of the Convention that they were unable to examine police officers responsible for their arrest and detention.     COMMON QUESTIONS 1.     Were the applicants’ arrest and detention “lawful” and “in accordance with a procedure prescribed by law” as required by Article   5   §   1 of the Convention (see Lashmankin and Others v. Russia , nos. 57818/09 and 14   others, §§   489-90, 7 February 2017)?   2.     Were the courts which dealt with the applicants’ cases impartial, as required by Article   6   §   1 of the Convention (see Karelin v. Russia , no.   926/08, §§   38-85, 20 September 2016)? CASE SPECIFIC QUESTION As regards applications nos.   38508/18 and 56891/18, were the applicants able to examine witnesses (police officers) against them, as required by Article   6   §§   1 and 3   (d) of the Convention (see Schatschaschwili v.   Germany [GC], no.   9154/10, §§   100-31, ECHR 2015)?   APPENDIX No. Application no. Lodged on Applicant name date of birth place of residence Date of the arrest; Length of detention Judicial proceedings Tverskoy District Court of Moscow Moscow City Court   38503/18 06/08/2018 Anatoliy Anatolyevich MIRONOVSKIY 03/06/1990 Moscow 12 June 2017 From 3 p.m. to 8 p.m. 11   September 2017 6   February 2018     38508/18 06/08/2018 Mikhail Igorevich STAVITSKIY 09/06/1987 Moscow 12 June 2017 From 3:15 p.m. to 8 p.m. 19 September 2017 6 February 2018   38553/18 06/08/2018 Yuriy Valentinovich KHOKHLOV 01/05/1973 Moscow 12 June 2017 From 2.40 p.m. to 6 p.m. 11   September 2017 8   February 2018   56891/18 28/18/2018 Timofey Yuryevich FEDOTOV 05/06/1991 Smolensk 12 June 2017 From 3.40 p.m. to 8 p.m. 27   March 2018 28   May 2018