CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 11 janvier 2024

.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 } Published on 5 February 2024   THIRD SECTION Application no.   19016/18 Stanislav Mikhaylovich DMITRIYEVSKIY against Russia and 9 other applications (see list appended) PROCEDURAL INFORMATION Following a preliminary examination of the admissibility of the applications on 11 January 2024, 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     19016/18* 06/04/2018 Stanislav Mikhaylovich DMITRIYEVSKIY 1966 Olga Aleksandrovna Sadovskaya Nizhniy Novgorod Rally “Free Navalnyy”   N. Novgorod   29/09/2017 Article 20.2 § 5 of CAO fine of RUB   20,000 Nizhniy Novgorod Regional Court 27/12/2017 Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings - both sets of 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 and other prosecution witnesses – both sets of proceedings,   Art. 10 (1) - conviction for making calls to participate in public events - disproportionate restriction of his freedom of assembly on account of his conviction under Art. 20.2 § 2 CAO for having published on his Facebook page calls to participate in the rally "Free Navalnyy" on 21/04/2021, fine of RUB   20,000, final decision by the Nizhniy Novgorod Regional Court on 10/06/2021,   Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - escorting to and detention at the police station after compiling an offence report on 21-22/04/2021 (proceedings ended on 10/06/2021).     56976/18 21/11/2018 Yuliya Igorevna BOTUKH 1991 Varvara Dmitriyevna Mikhaylova St Petersburg Rally against Putin’s re-election   St Petersburg   05/05/2018 Article 20.2 § 5 of CAO       Art. 19.3 § 1 CAO fine of RUB   10,000       detention of 3   days St Petersburg City Court 29/05/2018     St Petersburg City Court 22/05/2018 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - escorting to and detention at the police station after compiling an offence report on 05-06/05/2018,   Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings – both sets of the 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 – both sets of the proceedings,   Prot. 7 Art. 4 - right not to be tried or punished twice in criminal proceedings - overlap of the facts constituting the basis for the applicant’s prosecution in the first set of proceedings (Art. 19.3 § 1 of CAO) with substantially the same facts underlying his conviction in the second set of proceedings (Art. 20.2 §   5 of CAO).     41405/21* 02/08/2021 Valeriy Viktorovich SKRIPALSHCHIKOV 1951 Konstantin Vladimirovich Bubon Khabarovsk Rally to support S.   Furgal   Khabarovsk   24/10/2020 Article 20.2 § 8 of CAO fine of RUB   150,000 Khabarovsk Regional Court 29/06/2021 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - escorting to and detention at the police station after compiling an offence report between 01.55 p.m. on 22/05/2021 and 24/05/2021.     56248/21* 25/10/2021 Bulat Galiyevich KHALIULLIN 1992 Nikolay Sergeyevich Zboroshenko Mytishchi Forum of municipal deputies (Open Russia Civic Movement)   Moscow   13/03/2021 Article 20.33 of CAO fine of RUB   15,000 Izmaylovskiy District Court of Moscow 25/05/2021 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - escorting to and detention at the police station after compiling an offence report between 10.30 a.m. and 5.30   p.m. on 13/03/2021.     56279/21* 25/10/2021 Anna Svetlana Afredovna SHAPOSHNIKOVA 1964 Nikolay Sergeyevich Zboroshenko Mytishchi Forum of municipal deputies (Open Russia Civic Movement)   Moscow   13/03/2021 Article 20.33 of CAO fine of RUB   15,000 Izmaylovskiy District Court of Moscow 25/05/2021 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - escorting to and detention at the police station after compiling an offence report between 10.30 a.m. and 9.00   p.m. on 13/03/2021,   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.     57904/21* 25/10/2021 Yelena Anatolyevna PARIY 1969 Sergey Yuryevich Tiunov Yekaterinburg Rally "Free Navalnyy"   Yekaterinburg   23/01/2021   Rally “Free Navalnyy”   Yekaterinburg   31/01/2021 Article 20.2 § 5 of CAO           Article 20.2 § 5 of CAO 40 hours of community works         40 hours of community work Sverdlovsk Regional Court 19/05/2021         Sverdlovsk Regional Court 29/04/2021 Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings - both sets of 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 prosecution witnesses (both sets of proceedings).     61341/21* 03/12/2021 Viktor Viktorovich KARPUSHIN 1970   Memorial Human Rights Centre Moscow Forum of municipal deputies (Open Russia Civic Movement) Moscow   13/03/2021 Article 20.33 of CAO fine of RUB   15,000 Izmaylovskiy District Court of Moscow 04/08/2021 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.     12360/22* 24/02/2022 Iosif Ruslanovich DZHAGAYEV 1989 Kseniya Dmitriyevna Prosvirkina Moscow Forum of municipal deputies (Open Russia Civic Movement)   Moscow   13/03/2021 Article 20.33 of the CAO fine of RUB   5,000 Sovetskiy District Court of Vladikavkaz 27/08/2021 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - on 13/03/2021 and on 13/07/2022 the 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),   Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings - 2nd set of proceedings (final decision Moscow City Court 20/07/2022),   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 (2nd set of proceedings),   Art. 10 (1) - various restrictions on the right to freedom of expression - disproportionate interference with his freedom of expression on account of his conviction under Art. 20.3 § 1 CAO for publishing on his Facebook page a symbol of "Vote Smart" of an extremist organisation de-registered in Russia (movement of Navalnyy Headquarters), penalty of detention for 15 days, final decision Moscow City Court 20/07/2022,   Prot. 7 Art. 2 - delayed review of conviction by a higher tribunal - the sentence of administrative detention imposed on the applicant was executed immediately, on account of the lack of suspensive effect of an appeal under the CAO (2nd set of proceedings).     30061/22* 12/05/2022 Aducha Arankovich ERDNEYEV 1959     Rally of Chuulhn (congress of Oirat-Kalmyk people)   Elista   29/05/2021 Article 20.2 § 5 du CIA fine of RUB   5,000 Supreme Court of the Kalmykia Republic 24/11/2021     38307/23* 17/09/2023 Vladimir Sergeyevich NEMANOV 1996 Polina Artemovna Petrova Moscow Boris Nemtsov memorial   Moscow   27/02/2022 Article 20.2 § 5 of CAO fine of RUB   20,000 Moscow City Court 13/06/2023 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - escorting to and detention at the police station on 27/02/2022 for compiling an offence report between 02.35   p.m. and 06.15 p.m.