FIRST SECTION
CASE OF BESTUZHEV AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA
(Applications nos. 11350/20 and 26 others –
see appended list)
JUDGMENT
STRASBOURG
27 April 2023
This judgment is final but it may be subject to editorial revision.
In the case of Bestuzhev and Others v. Russia,
The European Court of Human Rights (First Section), sitting as a Committee composed of:
Lətif Hüseynov, President,
Ivana Jelić,
Erik Wennerström, judges,
and Viktoriya Maradudina, Acting Deputy Section Registrar,
Having deliberated in private on 6 April 2023,
Delivers the following judgment, which was adopted on that date:
PROCEDURE
1. The case originated in applications against Russia lodged with the Court under Article 34 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (“the Convention”) on the various dates indicated in the appended table.
2. The Russian Government (“the Government”) were given notice of the applications.
THE FACTS
3. The list of applicants and the relevant details of the applications are set out in the appended table.
4. The applicants complained of the disproportionate measures taken against them as participants of public assemblies. They also raised other complaints under the provisions of the Convention.
THE LAW
JOINDER OF THE APPLICATIONS5. Having regard to the similar subject matter of the applications, the Court finds it appropriate to examine them jointly in a single judgment.
JURISDICTION6. The Court observes that the facts giving rise to the alleged violations of the Convention occurred prior to 16 September 2022, the date on which the Russian Federation ceased to be a party to the Convention. The Court therefore decides that it has jurisdiction to examine the present applications (see Fedotova and Others v. Russia [GC], nos. 40792/10 and 2 others, §§ 68‑73, 17 January 2023).
ALLEGED VIOLATION OF ARTICLE 11 OF THE CONVENTION7. The applicants complained principally of disproportionate measures taken against them as participants of public assemblies, namely the dispersal of these assemblies, as well as their arrest followed by their conviction for administrative offence. They relied, expressly or in substance, on Article 11 of the Convention.
8. The Court refers to the principles established in its case-law regarding freedom of assembly (see Kudrevičius and Others v. Lithuania [GC], no. 37553/05, ECHR 2015, with further references) and proportionality of interference with it (see Oya Ataman v. Turkey, no. 74552/01, ECHR 2006‑XIV, and Hyde Park and Others v. Moldova, no. 33482/06, 31 March 2009).
9. In the leading cases of 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, the Court already found a violation in respect of issues similar to those in the present case.
10. Having examined all the material submitted to it, and having taken into account the issue of compliance with the six-month time-limit under Article 35 § 1 of the Convention (see Saakashvili v. Georgia (dec.), nos. 6232/20 and 22394/20, §§ 46-59, 1 March 2022, in which the Court addressed the COVID-related extension of the period in question), the Court has not found any fact or argument capable of persuading it to reach a different conclusion as to the admissibility and merits of these complaints. Having regard to its case-law on the subject, the Court considers that in the instant case the interferences with the applicants’ freedom of assembly were not “necessary in a democratic society”.
11. These complaints are therefore admissible and disclose a breach of Article 11 of the Convention.
OTHER ALLEGED VIOLATIONS UNDER WELL-ESTABLISHED CASE-LAW12. The applicants submitted other complaints which also raised issues under the Convention, given the relevant well-established case-law of the Court (see appended table). These complaints are not manifestly ill-founded within the meaning of Article 35 § 3 (a) of the Convention, nor are they inadmissible on any other ground. Accordingly, they must be declared admissible. Having examined all the material before it, the Court concludes that they also disclose violations of the Convention in the light of its well‑established case-law (see Butkevich v. Russia, no. 5865/07, §§ 63-65, 13 February 2018, Kalyapin v. Russia, no. 6095/09, § 76, 23 July 2019, and Korneyeva v. Russia, no. 72051/17, §§ 34-36, 8 October 2019, concerning different aspects of unlawful deprivation of liberty of the organisers or participants of public events; and Karelin v. Russia, no. 926/08, 20 September 2016, concerning examination of criminal cases in the absence of a prosecuting party in the judicial proceedings governed by the Federal Code of Administrative Offences (CAO)).
REMAINING COMPLAINTS13. Some applicants further raised additional complaints under Articles 5 and 6 of the Convention concerning other aspects of their detention and fairness of the administrative-offence proceedings. In view of the findings in paragraphs 11 and 12 above, the Court considers that there is no need to deal separately with these remaining complaints.
APPLICATION OF ARTICLE 41 OF THE CONVENTION14. Article 41 of the Convention provides:
“If the Court finds that there has been a violation of the Convention or the Protocols thereto, and if the internal law of the High Contracting Party concerned allows only partial reparation to be made, the Court shall, if necessary, afford just satisfaction to the injured party.”
15. Regard being had to the documents in its possession and to its case‑law (see, in particular, Navalnyy and Others v. Russia [Committee], nos. 5809/17 and 14 others, § 22, 4 October 2022), the Court finds it reasonable to award the sums indicated in the appended table.
FOR THESE REASONS, THE COURT, UNANIMOUSLY,
Decides to join the applications;Holds that it has jurisdiction to deal with the applicants’ complaints as they relate to facts that took place before 16 September 2022;Declares the complaints concerning the dispersal of the public assembly and the other complaints under well-established case-law of the Court, as set out in the appended table, admissible, and decides that there is no need to examine separately the remaining complaints under Articles 5 and 6 of the Convention about other aspects of their detention and the fairness of the administrative offence proceedings;Holds that these applications disclose a breach of Article 11 of the Convention concerning the dispersal of the public assembly;Holds that there has been a violation of the Convention as regards the other complaints raised under well-established case-law of the Court (see appended table);Holds(a) that the respondent State is to pay the applicants, within three months, the amounts indicated in the appended table, to be converted into the currency of the respondent State at the rate applicable at the date of settlement;
(b) that from the expiry of the above-mentioned three months until settlement simple interest shall be payable on the above amounts at a rate equal to the marginal lending rate of the European Central Bank during the default period plus three percentage points.
Done in English, and notified in writing on 27 April 2023, pursuant to Rule 77 §§ 2 and 3 of the Rules of Court.
Viktoriya Maradudina Lətif Hüseynov
Acting Deputy Registrar President
APPENDIX
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 charges
Penalty
Final domestic decision
Court Name
Date
Other complaints under
well-established case-law
Amount awarded for pecuniary and
non-pecuniary damage and costs and expenses per applicant
(in euros)[1]
11350/20
18/02/2020
Mikhail Yuryevich BESTUZHEV
1974
Pomazuyev Aleksandr Yevgenyevich
Vilnius
Manifestation for fair elections to Mosgorduma
Moscow
27/07/2019
Article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
fine of RUB 15,000
Moscow City Court
16/09/2019
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty - arrest, escorting to a police station, detention there on 27/07/2019, in excess of three hours, for the sole reason of drawing up a record of administrative offence
4,000
12507/20
21/02/2020
Bair Solbonovich TOKTOKHOYEV
1990
Sirosh Fedor Yevgenyevich
Moscow
Manifestation for fair elections to Mosgorduma
Moscow
27/07/2019
Article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
fine of RUB 10,000
Moscow City Court
06/09/2019
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty - arrest, escorting to a police station, detention on 27/07/2019 in excess of three hours, for the sole purpose of drawing up a record of an administrative offence;
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings
4,000
12519/20
21/02/2020
Sergey Vladimirovich NIKIFOROV
1991
Sirosh Fedor Yevgenyevich
Moscow
Manifestation for fair elections to Mosgorduma
Moscow
27/07/2019
Article 20.2 § 6 of CAO
fine of RUB 20,000
Moscow City Court
30/10/2019
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty - arrest, escorting to a police station, detention between 27/07/2019 and 29/07/2019 for drawing up a record of administrative offence and "to put an end to the administrative offence": no evidence/ assessment of “exceptional circumstances” under the CAO; administrative offence record compiled already on 27/07/2019;
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings
4,000
12521/20
21/02/2020
Ildar Rinatovich KHUSNUTDINOV
1993
Sirosh Fedor Yevgenyevich
Moscow
Manifestation for fair elections to Mosgorduma
Moscow
27/07/2019
Article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
fine of RUB 15,000
Moscow City Court
04/09/2019
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty - arrest, escorting to a police station, detention there on 27/07/2019 in excess of three hours for the sole purpose of drawing up a record of administrative offence;
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings
4,000
12524/20
21/02/2020
Sergey Dmitriyevich PAVLOV
1991
Sirosh Fedor Yevgenyevich
Moscow
Manifestation for fair elections to Mosgorduma
Moscow
27/07/2019
Article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
fine of RUB 10,000
Moscow City Court
04/09/2019
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty - arrest, escorting to a police station, detention there on 27/07/2019 in excess of three hours for the sole purpose of drawing up a record of administrative offence;
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings
4,000
15272/20
12/03/2020
Aleksey Igorevich GRISHIN
1996
Pomazuyev Aleksandr Yevgenyevich
Vilnius
Manifestation for fair elections to Mosgorduma
Moscow
27/07/2019
Article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
fine of RUB 15,000
Moscow City Court
08/10/2019
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty - arrest and escorting to a police station, detention there on 27/07/2019 in excess of three hours, for the sole purpose of drawing up a record of administrative offence;
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings
4,000
17824/20
30/03/2020
Konstantin Pavlovich GLAZKOV
1991
Pomazuyev Aleksandr Yevgenyevich
Vilnius
Manifestation for fair elections to Mosgorduma
Moscow
27/07/2019
Article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
fine of RUB 10,000
Moscow City Court
06/11/2019
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty - arrest and escorting to a police station, detention there on 27/07/2019 in excess of three hours, for the sole purpose of drawing up a record of administrative offence
4,000
17894/20
30/03/2020
Aleksandr Igorevich GONCHARENKO
1999
Pomazuyev Aleksandr Yevgenyevich
Vilnius
Manifestation for fair elections to Mosgorduma
Moscow
27/07/2019
Article 20.2 § 6.1 of CAO
fine of RUB 20,000
Moscow City Court
10/10/2019
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty - arrest, escorting to a police station, detention between 27/07/2019 and 29/07/2019 as administrative suspect: no evidence/ assessment of “exceptional circumstances” under the CAO; administrative offence record compiled already on 27/07/2019;
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings
4,000
18723/20
30/03/2020
Daniil Igorevich TYAZHKUN
1985
Pomazuyev Aleksandr Yevgenyevich
Vilnius
Manifestation for fair elections to Mosgorduma
Moscow
27/07/2019
Article 20.2 § 8 of CAO
fine of RUB 250,000
Moscow City Court
16/01/2020
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty - arrest and escorting to the police office on 27/07/2019 for the purpose of drawing up a record of administrative offence; detention in excess of 3 hours until 7.00 a.m. on 28/07/2019 (raised on appeal)
7,500
19117/20
23/03/2020
Kirill Sergeyevich CHERNYY
1993
Pomazuyev Aleksandr Yevgenyevich
Vilnius
Manifestation for fair elections to Mosgorduma
Moscow
27/07/2019
Article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
fine of RUB 20,000
Moscow City Court
10/10/2019
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty - arrest, escorting to a police station, detention there on 27/07/2019 in excess of three hours for the sole purpose of drawing a record of administrative offence
4,000
19118/20
17/03/2020
Ivan Anatolyevich KULNEV
1983
Pomazuyev Aleksandr Yevgenyevich
Vilnius
Manifestation for fair elections to Mosgorduma
Moscow
27/07/2019
Article 20.2 § 6.1 of CAO
fine of RUB 10,000
Moscow City Court
18/09/2019
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings
3,500
19122/20
23/03/2020
Mikhail Sergeyevich BELOUSOV
2000
Pomazuyev Aleksandr Yevgenyevich
Vilnius
Manifestation for fair elections to Mosgorduma
Moscow
27/07/2019
Article 20.2 § 6.1 of CAO
fine of RUB 15,000
Moscow City Court
16/10/2019
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty - arrest, escorting to a police station, detention between 27/07/2019 and 29/07/2019 for the sole purpose of drawing up a record of administrative offence (such record had already been drawn up on 28/07/2019): no evidence/assessment of any "exceptional circumstances" under the CAO;
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings
4,000
19123/20
23/03/2020
Yevgeniy Nikolayevich ARAPOV
1997
Pomazuyev Aleksandr Yevgenyevich
Vilnius
Manifestation for fair elections to Mosgorduma
Moscow
27/07/2019
Article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
fine of RUB 10,000
Moscow City Court
10/10/2019
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty - arrest, escorting to a police station, detention there on 27/07/2019 in excess of 3 hours for the sole purpose of drawing up a record of administrative offence;
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings
4,000
19127/20
23/03/2020
Yekaterina Sergeyevna NIZOVTSEVA
1994
Pomazuyev Aleksandr Yevgenyevich
Vilnius
Manifestation for fair elections to Mosgorduma
Moscow
27/07/2019
Article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
fine of RUB 10,000
Moscow City Court
30/10/2019
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty - arrest, escorting to a police station, detention on 27/07/2019 for the sole purpose of compiling a record of administrative offence
4,000
19131/20
23/03/2020
Maksim Vladimirovich IVANOV
1976
Pomazuyev Aleksandr Yevgenyevich
Vilnius
Manifestation for fair elections to Mosgorduma
Moscow
27/07/2019
Article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
fine of RUB 10,000
Moscow City Court
22/10/2019
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty - arrest and escorting to a police station, detention on 27/07/2019 for the sole purpose of drawing up a record of administrative offence
4,000
19132/20
23/03/2020
Anton Dmitriyevich DEGTYAREV
1998
Pomazuyev Aleksandr Yevgenyevich
Vilnius
Manifestation for fair elections to Mosgorduma
Moscow
27/07/2019
Article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
fine of RUB 10,000
Moscow City Court
18/10/2019
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty - arrest and escorting to the police office on 27/07/2019 for the sole purpose of drawing up a record of administrative offence;
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings
4,000
19310/20
23/03/2020
Vasiliy Pavlovich RODIONOV
1996
Pomazuyev Aleksandr Yevgenyevich
Vilnius
Manifestation for fair elections to Mosgorduma
Moscow
27/07/2019
Article 20.2 § 6.1 of CAO
fine of RUB 20,000
Moscow City Court
10/10/2019
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty - arrest and escorting to the police station, detention between 27/07/2019 and 29/07/2019 for the purpose of drawing up a record of administrative offence and "case examination" (administrative offence record drawn up on 27/07/2019): no evidence/assessment of any "exceptional circumstances" under the CAO;
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings
4,000
19314/20
23/03/2020
Artem Aleksandrovich ZAYCHIKOV
1978
Pomazuyev Aleksandr Yevgenyevich
Vilnius
Manifestation for fair elections to Mosgorduma
Moscow
27/07/2019
Article 20.2 § 8 of CAO
fine of RUB 150,000
Moscow City Court
30/10/2019
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty - arrest and escorting to a police station, detention between 27/07/2019 and 29/07/2019 for the purpose of drawing up a record of administrative offence (compiled on 29/07/2019): no evidence/assessment of any "exceptional circumstances" under the CAO;
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings
6,000
19315/20
25/03/2020
Elvin ALLAKHVERDIYEV
1998
Pomazuyev Aleksandr Yevgenyevich
Vilnius
Manifestation for fair elections to Mosgorduma
Moscow
27/07/2019
Article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
fine of RUB 10,000
Moscow City Court
14/10/2019
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty - arrest and escorting to a police station, detention on 27/07/2019 in excess of three hours, for the sole purpose of drawing up a record of administrative offence;
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings
4,000
19317/20
25/03/2020
Olga Anatolyevna KUNGUROVA
1990
Pomazuyev Aleksandr Yevgenyevich
Vilnius
Manifestation for fair elections to Mosgorduma
Moscow
27/07/2019
Article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
fine of RUB 10,000
Moscow City Court
02/12/2019
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty - arrest and escorting to the police office, detention on 27/07/2019 in excess of three hours, for the sole purpose of drawing up a record of administrative offence
4,000
19557/20
23/03/2020
Artem Tsolakovich KARAPETYAN
1957
Pomazuyev Aleksandr Yevgenyevich
Vilnius
Manifestation for fair elections to Mosgorduma
Moscow
27/07/2019
Article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
fine of RUB 10,000
Moscow City Court
22/10/2019
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty - arrest and escorting to the police office, detention on 27/07/2019 in excess of three hours, for the sole purpose of drawing up a record of administrative offence
4,000
19608/20
16/03/2020
Andrey Gennadyevich AGAPOV
1984
Pomazuyev Aleksandr Yevgenyevich
Vilnius
Manifestation for fair elections to Mosgorduma
Moscow
27/07/2019
Article 20.2 § 6.1 of CAO
fine of RUB 10,000
Moscow City Court
10/10/2019
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty - arrest, escorting to a police station, detention between 27/07/2019 and 29/07/2019 as administrative suspect: no evidence/assessment of any "exceptional circumstances" under the CAO;
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings
4,000
19905/20
23/03/2020
Ilya Georgiyevich SHAFRANOV
1966
Pomazuyev Aleksandr Yevgenyevich
Vilnius
Manifestation for fair elections to Mosgorduma
Moscow
27/07/2019
Article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
fine of RUB 15,000
Moscow City Court
18/10/2019
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty - arrest, escorting to a police station and detention on 27/07/2019 in excess of three hours for the sole purpose of drawing a record of administrative offence;
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings
4.000
34493/20
26/06/2020
Andrey Konstantinovich KURNITSKIY
1987
Mezak Ernest Aleksandrovich
Saint-Barthélemy d’Anjou
Manifestation for fair elections to Mosgorduma
Moscow
27/07/2019
Article 20.2 § 6.1 of CAO
fine of RUB 10,000
Moscow City Court
26/09/2019
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty - arrest and escorting to a police station, detention between 27/07/2019 and 29/07/2019 for the purpose of drawing up a record of administrative offence: no evidence/assessment of any "exceptional circumstances" under the CAO;
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings
4,000
34841/20
29/03/2020
Dmitriy Aleksandrovich AMELIN
1973
Mezak Ernest Aleksandrovich
Saint-Barthélemy d’Anjou
Manifestation for fair elections to Mosgorduma
Moscow
27/07/2019
Article 20.2 § 6.1 of CAO
fine of RUB 10,000
Moscow City Court
10/10/2019
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty - arrest, escorting to a police station, detention between 27/07/2019 and 29/07/2019 for the sole purpose of drawing up an administrative offence record (complied on 29/07/2019 only)
4,000
35179/20
11/08/2020
Dmitriy Igorevich TIMOFEYEV
1995
Memorial Human Rights Centre
Moscow
Manifestation for fair elections to Mosgorduma
Moscow
27/07/2019
Article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
fine of RUB 10,000
Moscow City Court
12/11/2019
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty - arrest, escorting to a police station and detention on 27/07/2019 for the sole purpose of drawing a record of administrative offence;
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings
4,000
35211/20
11/08/2020
Mikhail Sergeyevich AVERIN
1999
Lawyers of former Memorial Human Rights Centre
Moscow
Manifestation for fair elections to Mosgorduma
Moscow
27/07/2019
Article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
fine of RUB 15,000
Moscow City Court
16/12/2019
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty - arrest, escorting to a police station, detention on 27/07/2019 for the sole purpose of drawing up a record of administrative offence,
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings
4,000
[1] Plus any tax that may be chargeable to the applicants.