CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 25 mars 2025

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .s379BC09C { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:right } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .s10950C61 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify } .s5E1364CA { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .s339D85E6 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:14pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s665E407E { margin-top:66pt; margin-bottom:14pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .s5FFF0A75 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:7pt } .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 } .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 } .sA1D3DA2E { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:justify } Published on 14 April 2025   FOURTH SECTION Application no. 24097/22 Dylyaver Kurtseyitovych KHALILOV against Russia and 2 other applications (see list appended) communicated on 25 March 2025 SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASES The applications concern the alleged restrictions imposed by the Russian authorities on the applicants’ right to freedom of religion in Crimea following the Russian Federation’s assertion of jurisdiction over the peninsula in 2014. The applications were lodged by religious leaders and religious organisations based in Crimea and registered in Ukraine. Relying on Article   9 of the Convention, the applicants refer to numerous instances that took place in Crimea in alleged violation of their right to freedom of religion. In particular, they argue that the obligation to undergo a re-registration procedure under Russian law in Crimea violated their right to freedom of religion. The applicant in application no. 24345/22 is a priest of the Orthodox Church of Ukraine who conducted a worship service in Crimea on 8   August 2021 within his religious community. The applicant in application no.   24097/22 is an imam of the Muslim Community “Chelebidjikhan” who held a public worship service inside a mosque in Crimea on 20 March 2020 in accordance with Islamic traditions. In their respective applications, the applicants allege that they were subjected to administrative liability and fined: the former for engaging in a missionary activity without proper registration, and the latter for organising a public gathering without prior authorisation. The applicant in application no. 6584/23 is a religious organisation of the Orthodox Church of Ukraine. Although registered in Ukraine, the organisation did not re-register under Russian law applied in Crimea after 21   March 2014. In September 2019 the local administration of Yevpatoriya filed a claim in a Crimean court seeking demolition of the church used by the applicant organisation. The applicant alleges that the courts in Crimea, established under Russian law, refused to recognise the legal standing of the organisation due to its failure to re-register under Russian law. Finally, the applicants in applications nos. 24097/22 and 24345/22 complain that their religious communities were treated less favourably than other religious organisations in Crimea, namely the Ukrainian Orthodox Church of the Moscow Patriarchate (in so far as the former application is concerned), and organisations affiliated with the Religious Board of Muslims   of Crimea (as regards the latter application). In this regard, these applicants argue that they have been subjected to discrimination in the enjoyment of their right to freedom of religion, contrary to Article 14, read in conjunction with Article 9 of the Convention. QUESTIONS TO THE PARTIES 1.     Have the applicants complied with the admissibility requirements set forth in Article 35 § 1 of the Convention?   2.     Has there been an interference with the applicants’ right to freedom of religion, within the meaning of Article   9 §   1 of the Convention? If so, was that interference prescribed by law and necessary in terms of Article   9 §   2?   3.     Have the applicants in applications nos. 24097/22 and 24345/22 been subjected to discriminatory treatment in the enjoyment of their Convention rights, contrary to Article 14 taken in conjunction with Article 9 of the Convention?       APPENDIX No. Application no. Case name Lodged on Applicant Year of Birth Place of Residence Nationality Represented by 1. 24097/22 Khalilov v.   Russia 15/03/2022 Dylyaver Kurtseyitovych KHALILOV 1969 Zavitne Ukrainian                 Sergiy Anatoliyovych ZAYETS 2. 24345/22 Skokov v.   Russia 15/03/2022 Pavlo Georgiyovych SKOKOV 1966 Balky Ukrainian 3. 6584/23 Parish in the Name of the Holy Image of the Mother of God "Neopalyma Kupyna" v.   Russia 16/01/2023 PARISH IN THE NAME OF THE HOLY IMAGE OF THE MOTHER OF GOD “NEOPALYMA KUPYNA” 2006 Yevpatoriya Ukrainian