CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 30 novembre 2023

.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 } .s665E407E { margin-top:66pt; margin-bottom:14pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s2D9C6089 { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .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 } .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 } .s3A357E38 { text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-family:Arial; font-size:8pt; list-style-position:inside } .s1DE04BC { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:8pt } .sF8B62762 { height:99.3pt } Published on 8 January 2024   SECOND SECTION Application no.   42576/21 Natalya Anatolyevna LONGINOVA against Russia and 20 other applications (see list appended) PROCEDURAL INFORMATION Following a preliminary examination of the admissibility of the applications on 30 November 2023, 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 list of applications, 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 11 of the Convention relating to disproportionate measures against organisers and participants of public assemblies which are the subject of well-established case law of the Court (see Frumkin v. Russia, no. 74568/12, ECHR 2016 (extracts), Navalnyy and Yashin v. Russia, no. 76204/11, 4 December 2014 and Kasparov and Others v. Russia, no. 21613/07, 3 October 2013).   APPENDIX – STATEMENT OF FACTS List of applications raising complaints under Article 11 of the Convention (disproportionate measures against organisers and participants of public assemblies) No. Application no. Date of introduction Applicant’s name Year of birth   Representative’s name and location Name of the public event Location Date Administrative / criminal offence Penalty Final domestic decision Court Name Date Other complaints under   well-established case-law     42576/21* 12/08/2021 Natalya Anatolyevna LONGINOVA 1995 Aleksandr Yevgenyevich Pomazuyev Moscow Rally “Free Navalnyy”   Yakutsk   23/01/2021 article 20.2.2 § 1 of CAO fine of RUB 10,000 Supreme Court of the Sakha Republic 26/02/2021 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - Arrest and detention on 23/01/2021- Applicant taken to the police station as an administrative suspect: no evidence/assessment that it was impracticable, on the spot, to compile the offence record (Art. 27.2 § 1 CAO) and achieve the objectives set out in Art. 27.1 CAO, e.g. to establish the suspect’s identity (see Korneyeva v. Russia, no.   72051/17, § 34, 8 October 2019; Ryabinina and Others v. Russia [Committee], nos. 50271/06 and 8 other applications, §   35, 2 July 2019); the complaint was raised on appeal in the administrative proceedings,   Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings,     Art. 6 (1) - and Art. 6 (3) (d) - unfair trial in view of restrictions on the right to examine witnesses - inability to cross-examine the police officers on whose written statements her conviction was based     43766/21* 23/08/2021 Nigmatulla Musayevich NIGMATULLIN 1998 Aleksandr Yevgenyevich Pomazuyev Vilnius Rally “Free Navalnyy”   Omsk   23/01/2021 article 20.2 § 5 of CAO fine of RUB 10,000 Omsk Regional Court 06/04/2021 Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings     43924/21* 23/08/2021 Timofey Alekseyevich BEREZIN 1997 Aleksandr Yevgenyevich Pomazuyev Vilnius Rally “Free Navalnyy”   Surgut   23/01/2021 article 20.2 § 5 of CAO fine of RUB 15,000 Court of the Khanty-Mansy Autonomous Region 06/04/2021 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - Arrest and detention on 23/01/2021 - Applicant taken to the police station as an administrative suspect: no evidence/assessment that it was impracticable, on the spot, to compile the offence record (Art. 27.2 § 1 CAO) and achieve the objectives set out in Art. 27.1 CAO, e.g. to establish the suspect’s identity (see Korneyeva v. Russia, no.   72051/17, § 34, 8 October 2019; Ryabinina and Others v. Russia [Committee], nos. 50271/06 and 8 other applications, §   35, 2 July 2019); the complaint was raised on appeal in the administrative proceedings,   Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings     45015/21* 03/09/2021 Azat Anvarovich MANSUROV 1995 Aleksandr Yevgenyevich Pomazuyev Vilnius Rally “Free Navalnyy”   Kazan   31/01/2021 article 20.2 § 5 of CAO fine of RUB 10,000 Supreme Court of the Tatarstan Republic 17/03/2021 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - Arrest and detention on 31/01/2021 - Applicant taken to the police station as an administrative suspect: no evidence/assessment that it was impracticable, on the spot, to compile the offence record (Art. 27.2 § 1 CAO) and achieve the objectives set out in Art. 27.1 CAO, e.g. to establish the suspect’s identity (see Korneyeva v. Russia, no.   72051/17, § 34, 8 October 2019; Ryabinina and Others v. Russia [Committee], nos. 50271/06 and 8 other applications, §   35, 2 July 2019); the complaint was raised on appeal in the administrative proceedings     45018/21* 03/09/2021 Darya Alekseyevna SIBILEVA 1998 Aleksandr Yevgenyevich Pomazuyev Vilnius Rally “Free Navalnyy”   Ryazan   31/01/2021 article 20.2 § 2 of CAO 20 hours of community work Ryazan Regional Court 18/03/2021 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - Arrest and detention on 31/01/2021 - Applicant taken to the police station as an administrative suspect: no evidence/assessment that it was impracticable, on the spot, to compile the offence record (Art. 27.2 § 1 CAO) and achieve the objectives set out in Art. 27.1 CAO, e.g. to establish the suspect’s identity (see Korneyeva v. Russia, no.   72051/17, § 34, 8 October 2019; Ryabinina and Others v. Russia [Committee], nos. 50271/06 and 8 other applications, §   35, 2 July 2019); the complaint was raised on appeal in the administrative proceedings,   Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings     46215/21* 10/09/2021 Yelena Viktorovna TABULOVICH 1972 Aleksandr Yevgenyevich Pomazuyev Vilnius Rally “Free Navalnyy”   Tomsk   23/01/2021 article 20.2 § 5 of CAO fine of RUB 13,000 Tomsk Regional Court 23/03/2021 Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings     49678/21 17/09/2021 Tatyana Gennadyevna KOROVINA 1955 Ernest Aleksandrovich Mezak Saint-Barthélemy-d’Anjou Rally “Free Navalnyy”   Syktyvkar   31/01/2021 article 20.2 § 5 of CAO fine of RUB 5,000 Supreme Court of the Republic of Komi 17/03/2021 Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings     50627/21* 29/09/2021 Andrey Alekseyevich KOLESOV 1994 Marina Alekseyevna Dubrovina Novorossiysk Rally “Free Navalnyy”   Novorossiysk   31/01/2021 article 20.2 § 2 of CAO fine of RUB 10,000 Krasnodar Regional Court 29/03/2021 Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings     56958/21* 19/11/2021 Aleksandr Nikolayevich LUCHNIKOV 1991 Ivan Yuryevich Zhdanov Vilnius Rally “Free Navalnyy”   Perm   31/01/2021 article 20.2 § 5 of CAO fine of RUB 10,000 Perm Regional Court 31/05/2021 Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings   56969/21* 19/11/2021 Aleksandr Sergeyevich ZENKOVSKIY 1987 Ivan Yuryevich Zhdanov Vilnius Rally “Free Navalnyy”   Perm   31/01/2021 article 20.2 § 5 of CAO fine of RUB 10,000 Perm Regional Court 08/06/2021 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - Arrest and detention at the police station on 31/01/2021 - Applicant taken to the police station as an administrative suspect: no evidence/assessment that it was impracticable, on the spot, to compile the offence record (Art. 27.2 § 1 CAO) and achieve the objectives set out in Art. 27.1 CAO, e.g. to establish the suspect’s identity (see Korneyeva v. Russia, no.   72051/17, § 34, 8 October 2019; Ryabinina and Others v. Russia [Committee], nos. 50271/06 and 8 other applications, §   35, 2 July 2019); complaint was raised on appeal in the administrative proceedings,   Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings   57009/21* 19/11/2021 Boris Anatolyevich KURKIN 1990 Ivan Yuryevich Zhdanov Vilnius Rally “Free Navalnyy”   Moscow   23/01/2021 article 20.2 § 5 of CAO fine of RUB 10,000 Moscow City Court 07/05/2021 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - Arrest and detention on 23/01/2021 - Applicant taken to the police station as an administrative suspect: no evidence/assessment that it was impracticable, on the spot, to compile the offence record (Art. 27.2 § 1 CAO) and achieve the objectives set out in Art. 27.1 CAO, e.g. to establish the suspect’s identity (see Korneyeva v. Russia, no.   72051/17, § 34, 8 October 2019; Ryabinina and Others v. Russia [Committee], nos. 50271/06 and 8 other applications, §   35, 2 July 2019); the complaint was raised on appeal in the administrative proceedings,   Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings   58200/21* 27/11/2021 Nikita Olegovich SHMATKO 1994 Ivan Yuryevich Zhdanov Vilnius Rally “Free Navalnyy”   Moscow   31/01/2021 article 20.2 § 5 of CAO fine of RUB 20,000 Moscow City Court 03/06/2021 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - Arrest and detention on 31/01/2021 - Applicant taken to the police station as an administrative suspect: no evidence/assessment that it was impracticable, on the spot, to compile the offence record (Art. 27.2 § 1 CAO) and achieve the objectives set out in Art. 27.1 CAO, e.g. to establish the suspect’s identity (see Korneyeva v. Russia, no.   72051/17, § 34, 8 October 2019; Ryabinina and Others v. Russia [Committee], nos. 50271/06 and 8 other applications, §   35, 2 July 2019); the complaint was raised on appeal in the administrative proceedings,   Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings   58201/21* 27/11/2021 Marat Ravilevich RYAZAPOV 1974 Ivan Yuryevich Zhdanov Vilnius Rally “Free Navalnyy”   Saratov   21/04/2021 article 20.2 § 5 of CAO fine of RUB 10,000 Saratov Regional Court 27/07/2021 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 detention - Arrest and detention on 21/04/2021 - Applicant taken to the police station as an administrative suspect: no evidence/assessment that it was impracticable, on the spot, to compile the offence record (Art. 27.2 § 1 CAO) and achieve the objectives set out in Art. 27.1 CAO, e.g. to establish the suspect’s identity (see Korneyeva v. Russia, no.   72051/17, § 34, 8 October 2019; Ryabinina and Others v. Russia [Committee], nos. 50271/06 and 8 other applications, §   35, 2 July 2019); the complaint was raised on appeal in the administrative proceedings   58261/21* 27/11/2021 Dilshod Ibragimovich SHARIPOV 1994 Ivan Yuryevich Zhdanov Vilnius Rally “Free Navalnyy”   Voronezh   31/01/2021 article 20.2 § 5 of CAO fine of RUB 10,000 Voronezh Regional Court 21/07/2021 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - Arrest and detention on 31/01/2021 - Applicant taken to the police station as an administrative suspect: no evidence/assessment that it was impracticable, on the spot, to compile the offence record (Art. 27.2 § 1 CAO) and achieve the objectives set out in Art. 27.1 CAO, e.g. to establish the suspect’s identity (see Korneyeva v. Russia, no. 72051/17, § 34, 8 October 2019; Ryabinina and Others v. Russia [Committee], nos. 50271/06 and 8 other applications, §   35, 2 July 2019); the complaint was raised on appeal in administrative proceedings   58270/21* 27/11/2021 Vladislav Igorevich DRUGOV 1989 Ivan Yuryevich Zhdanov Vilnius Rally “Free Navalnyy”   Vladimir   23/01/2021 article 20.2 § 6.1 of CAO fine of RUB 10,000 Vladimir Regional Court 29/07/2021 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - Arrest and detention on 23/01/2021 - Applicant taken to the police station as an administrative suspect: no evidence/assessment that it was impracticable, on the spot, to compile the offence record (Art. 27.2 § 1 CAO) and achieve the objectives set out in Art. 27.1 CAO, e.g. to establish the suspect’s identity (see Korneyeva v. Russia, no.   72051/17, § 34, 8 October 2019; Ryabinina and Others v. Russia [Committee], nos. 50271/06 and 8 other applications, §   35, 2 July 2019); the complaint was raised on appeal in the administrative proceedings   58281/21* 27/11/2021 Aygul Maratovna AMINEVA 1992 Ivan Yuryevich Zhdanov Vilnius Rally “Free Navalnyy”   Izhevsk   21/04/2021 article 20.2 § 5 of CAO fine of RUB 10,000 Supreme Court of the Udmurtia Republic 28/06/2021 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - Arrest and detention on 21/04/2021 - Applicant taken to the police station as an administrative suspect: no evidence/assessment that it was impracticable, on the spot, to compile the offence record (Art. 27.2 § 1 CAO) and achieve the objectives set out in Art. 27.1 CAO, e.g. to establish the suspect’s identity (see Korneyeva v. Russia, no.   72051/17, § 34, 8 October 2019; Ryabinina and Others v. Russia [Committee], nos. 50271/06 and 8 other applications, §   35, 2 July 2019); the complaint was raised on appeal in the administrative proceedings,   Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings   58295/21* 27/11/2021 Sergey Mikhaylovioch BIZYAYEV 1975 Ivan Yuryevich Zhdanov Vilnius Rally “Free Navalnyy”   Perm   31/01/2021 article 20.2 § 5 of CAO fine of RUB 10,000 Perm Regional Court 04/06/2021 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - Arrest and detention on 31/01/2021- Applicant taken to the police station as an administrative suspect: no evidence/assessment that it was impracticable, on the spot, to compile the offence record (Art. 27.2 § 1 CAO) and achieve the objectives set out in Art. 27.1 CAO, e.g. to establish the suspect’s identity (see Korneyeva v. Russia, no.   72051/17, § 34, 8 October 2019; Ryabinina and Others v. Russia [Committee], nos. 50271/06 and 8 other applications, §   35, 2 July 2019); the complaint was raised on appeal in administrative proceedings   58300/21* 27/11/2021 Aleksandr Viktorovich ANDREYEV 1989 Ivan Yuryevich Zhdanov Vilnius Rally “Free Navalnyy”   St Petersburg   31/01/2021 article 20.2.2 § 1 of CAO fine of RUB 10,000 St Petersburg City court 24/06/2021 Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings,   Art. 6 (1) - and Art. 6 (3) (d) - unfair trial in view of restrictions on the right to examine witnesses - inability to cross-examine in the trial the police officers on whose written statements the applicant’s conviction was based   58303/21* 27/11/2021 Natalya Alekseyevna BOBROVA 1967 Ivan Yuryevich Zhdanov Vilnius Rally “Free Navalnyy”   St Petersburg   23/01/2021 article 20.2.2 § 1 of CAO fine of RUB 4,000 Oktyabrskiy District Court of St   Petersburg 01/06/2021 Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings   58308/21* 27/11/2021 Anastasiya Yuryevna GALKINA 1998 Ivan Yuryevich Zhdanov Vilnius Rally “Free Navalnyy”   Vladimir   31/01/2021 article 20.2 § 5 of CAO fine of RUB 10,000 Vladimir Regional Court 24/06/2021 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - Arrest and detention on 31/01/2021 - Applicant taken to the police station as an administrative suspect: no evidence/assessment that it was impracticable, on the spot, to compile the offence record (Art. 27.2 § 1 CAO) and achieve the objectives set out in Art. 27.1 CAO, e.g. to establish the suspect’s identity (see Korneyeva v. Russia, no.   72051/17, § 34, 8 October 2019; Ryabinina and Others v. Russia [Committee], nos. 50271/06 and 8 other applications, §   35, 2 July 2019); the complaint was raised on appeal in the administrative proceedings   59141/21* 27/11/2021 Vladimir Nikolayevich DEMENTYEV 1989 Ivan Yuryevich Zhdanov Vilnius Rally “Free Navalnyy”   Volgograd   21/04/2021 article 20.2 § 5 of CAO fine of RUB 10,000 Volgograd Regional Court 10/06/2021 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty, including unrecorded detention and detention without a judicial order and any other legal basis - Arrest and detention on 21/04/2021 - Applicant taken to the police station as an administrative suspect: no evidence/assessment that it was impracticable, on the spot, to compile the offence record (Art.   27.2 § 1 CAO) and achieve the objectives set out in Art. 27.1 CAO, e.g. to establish the suspect’s identity (see Korneyeva v. Russia, no.   72051/17, § 34, 8 October 2019; Ryabinina and Others v. Russia [Committee], nos. 50271/06 and 8 other applications, §   35, 2 July 2019); the complaint was raised on appeal in the administrative proceedings