FOURTH SECTION
CASE OF DMITRIYEVA AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA
(Applications nos. 4604/17 and 38 others –
see appended list)
JUDGMENT
STRASBOURG
15 February 2024
This judgment is final but it may be subject to editorial revision.
In the case of Dmitriyeva and Others v. Russia,
The European Court of Human Rights (Fourth Section), sitting as a Committee composed of:
Branko Lubarda, President,
Armen Harutyunyan,
Ana Maria Guerra Martins, judges,
and Viktoriya Maradudina, Acting Deputy Section Registrar,
Having deliberated in private on 25 January 2024,
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 organisers or participants of public assemblies. Some applicants 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 organisers or participants of public assemblies, namely their arrest in relation to the dispersal of these assemblies and their conviction for administrative offences. 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, 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. Some applicants submitted other complaints which also raised issues under the Convention and its Protocols, given the relevant well-established case-law of the Court (see the 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.
13. Having examined all the material before it, the Court concludes that these complaints also disclose violations of the Convention and its Protocols in the light of its findings in Butkevich v. Russia, no. 5865/07, §§ 63-65, 13 February 2018, Tsvetkova and Others v. Russia, nos. 54381/08 and 5 others, §§ 115-31, 10 April 2018, and Korneyeva v. Russia, no. 72051/17, §§ 34-36, 8 October 2019, Ryabinina and Others v. Russia [Committee], nos. 50271/06 and 8 other applications, § 35, 2 July 2019, and Timishev v. Russia [Committee], no. 47598/08, § 21, 28 November 2017 as to various aspects of unlawful deprivation of liberty of organisers or participants of public assemblies; Karelin v. Russia, no. 926/08, §§ 58-85, 20 September 2016, concerning the absence of a prosecuting party in the proceedings under the Code of Administrative Offences (the CAO); Novikova and Others v. Russia, nos. 25501/07 and 4 others, §§ 106-225, 26 April 2016, related to disproportionate measures taken by the authorities against participants of solo manifestations; Martynyuk v. Russia, no. 13764/15, §§ 38-42, 8 October 2019, relating to the lack of suspensive effect of an appeal against the sentence of administrative detention; Korneyeva, cited above, §§ 62-65 concerning the right of the organisers or participants of public assemblies not to be tried and punished twice for the same offence.
14. In view of the above findings, the Court considers that there is no need to deal separately with the remainder of the applicants’ complaints under Article 6 of the Convention concerning alleged restrictions on the right to examine witnesses.
REMAINING COMPLAINTS15. Mr Gumerbayev (application no. 3864/18) alleged a violation of his rights set out in Articles 6 and 11 of the Convention in connection with his participation in a public assembly on 14 May 2017 and ensuing administrative proceedings. Mr Shuvatov (application no. 21312/21) complained under Article 6 of the Convention about the lack of impartiality of domestic courts. The Court has examined the complaints and considers that, in the light of all the material in its possession and in so far as the matters complained of are within its competence, these complaints either do not meet the admissibility criteria set out in Articles 34 and 35 of the Convention or do not disclose any appearance of a violation of the rights and freedoms enshrined in the Convention or the Protocols thereto. It follows that this part of applications nos. 3864/18 and 21312/21 must be rejected in accordance with Article 35 § 4 of the Convention.
APPLICATION OF ARTICLE 41 OF THE CONVENTION16. Regard being had to the documents in its possession and to its case‑law (see in particular Navalnyy and Others v. Russia [Committee], nos. 25809/17 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 under Article 11 of the Convention and the other complaints under the well-established case-law of the Court, as set out in the appended table, admissible, and the remainder of applications nos. 3864/18 and 21312/21 inadmissible;Holds that these complaints disclose a breach of Article 11 of the Convention;Holds that there has been a violation of the Convention and the Protocols thereto as regards the other complaints raised under the well-established case-law of the Court (see the appended table);Holds that it is not necessary to deal separately with the remainder of the applicants’ complaints under Article 6 of the Convention concerning the alleged unfairness of the criminal (administrative) proceedings against them;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 15 February 2024, pursuant to Rule 77 §§ 2 and 3 of the Rules of Court.
Viktoriya Maradudina Branko Lubarda
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 per applicant
(in euros)[1]
4604/17
04/01/2017
Mariya Borisovna DMITRIYEVA
1961
Manifestation in support of N. Savchenko
Moscow
08/03/2016
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
article 19.3 § 1 of CAO
fine of RUB 10,000
fine of RUB 1,000
Moscow City Court
08/07/2016
Moscow City Court
28/07/2016
Prot. 7 Art. 4 - right not to be tried or punished twice in criminal proceedings - the applicant was convicted under Art. 20.2 § 5 of CAO by the final decision adopted by Moscow City Court on 08/07/2016 and under Art. 19.3 § 1 of CAO by final decision of Moscow City Court on 28/07/2016 concerning the same event on 08/03/2016. The applicant complains about being punished twice for the same offence
3,500
8385/17
14/01/2017
Lyudmila Andreyevna PUDRIK
1955
Manifestation in support of N. Savchenko
Moscow
08/03/2016
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO,
article 19.3 § 1 of CAO
fine of RUB 10,000;
fine of RUB 500
Moscow City Court
20/07/2016 (both decisions on the same day)
Prot. 7 Art. 4 - right not to be tried or punished twice in criminal proceedings - convicted twice for the same public event (under Articles 20.2 § 5 and 19.3 § 1 of the Code of Administrative Offences)
3,500
12156/17
30/01/2017
Aleksandr Vladimirovich EYSMAN
1974
Public gathering dedicated to the Constitution Day
Moscow
12/12/2015
Public gathering
Moscow
30/05/2018
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
fine of RUB 10,000
fine of RUB 10,000
Moscow City Court
02/08/2016
Moscow City Court
04/10/2018
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty - administrative arrest and detention on 30/05/2018 - 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, raised in administrative proceedings;
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings – three sets of the administrative offence proceedings which ended with the final decisions on 02/08/2016, 04/10/2018, 16/01/2017, by the Moscow City Court;
Art. 10 (1) - disproportionate measures against solo demonstrators – on 08/03/2016, Moscow, Manezhnaya square, a solo demonstration next to the Zhukov monument with a banner relating to Savchenko; article 20.2 § 5 of CAO, administrative fine of RUB 15,000; conviction by the final decision of the Moscow City Court on 16/01/2017; rotation - event classified as assembly post facto, ban on public events next to the Residence of the President of the Russian Federation (Zhukov monument on Manezhnaya square)
4,000
37727/17
06/05/2017
Yelena Yuryevna STARSHININA
1977
Zboroshenko Nikolay Sergeyevich
Mytishchi
Hunger strike in support of housing rights near the United Russia’s headquarters
Moscow
01/07/2016
Hunger strike in support of housing rights near the United Russia’s headquarters
Moscow
01/07/2016
Hunger strike in support of housing rights near the United Russia’s headquarters
Moscow
02/07/2016
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
fine of RUB 10,000
fine of RUB 10,000
fine of RUB 10,000
Moscow City Court
22/05/2017
Moscow City Court
16/11/2016
Moscow City Court
22/05/2017
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings - absence of the prosecutor in three sets of the proceedings which ended with the final decisions on 16/11/2016 and 22/05/2017, Moscow City Court
4,000
2748/18
15/12/2017
Aleksandr Dmitriyevich TURBIN
1992
Anti-corruption Manifestation
St Petersburg
12/06/2017
Anti-corruption Manifestation
St Petersburg
12/06/2017
article 19.3 § 1 of CAO
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
arrest of 5 days
fine of RUB 10,000
St Petersburg City Court
16/06/2017
St Petersburg City Court
30/06/2017
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings - the complaint is raised in respect of both sets of the proceedings against the applicant which ended on 16/06/2017 and 30/06/2017.
Prot. 7 Art. 4 - right not to be tried or punished twice in criminal proceedings - final decisions on 16/06/2017, by the St Petersburg City Court, Art. 19.3 § 1 CAO; and on 30/06/2017, by the St Petersburg City Court, Art. 20.2 § 5 CAO; overlap of the facts constituting the basis for the applicant’s prosecution in the second set of proceedings with substantially the same facts underlying her conviction in the first set of proceedings.
5,000
3212/18
29/12/2017
Anatoliy Viktorovich ZVEREV
1993
Smorodina Polina Romanovna
St Peterburg
Anti-corruption manifestation
St Petersburg
12/06/2017
article 19.3 § 1 of CAO,
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
fine of RUB 15,000
fine of RUB 1,000
St Petersburg City Court
03/07/2017
(both decisions issued on the same day)
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty - arrest and detention at the police station from 12/06/2017 to 13/06/2017 – the applicant was 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; Detention as an administrative suspect: the applicant remained in detention after the offence record had been compiled. The applicant raised the relevant complaint in the course of the administrative proceedings;
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in both sets of the administrative-offence proceedings;
Prot. 7 Art. 4 - right not to be tried or punished twice in criminal proceedings - final decisions on 03/07/2017, by the St Petersburg City Court, Art. 19.3 § 1 CAO and Art. 20.2 § 5 CAO; overlap of the facts constituting the basis for the applicant’s prosecution in the second set of proceedings with substantially the same facts underlying her conviction in the first set of proceedings.
4,000
3439/18
25/12/2017
Nikolay Nikolayevich MANKO
1967
Zboroshenko Nikolay Sergeyevich
Mytishchi
Truck Drivers’ Manifestation
Khimki, Moscow Region
21/05/2017
article 19.3 § 1 of CAO,
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
fine of RUB 500
fine of RUB 10,000
Moscow Regional Court
06/07/2017 (both decisions on the same day)
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - arrest and detention on 21/05/2017 in excess of 3 hours for the sole purpose of drawing up a record of administrative offence. The applicant raises the complaint in the course of the administrative proceedings against him;
Prot. 7 Art. 4 - right not to be tried or punished twice in criminal proceedings - decisions on 06/07/2017, by the Moscow City Court, Art. 19.3 § 1 CAO and Art. 20.2 § 5 CAO; overlap of the facts constituting the basis for the applicant’s prosecution in the second set of proceedings with substantially the same facts underlying her conviction in the first set of proceedings,
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in both sets of the administrative-offence proceedings
4,000
3641/18
18/12/2017
Pavel Vladimirovich SHALAGIN
1985
Yesipova Alina Vladimirovna
St Petersburg
Anti-corruption Manifestation
St Petersburg
12/06/2017
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO,
article 19.3 § 1 of CAO
fine of RUB 11,000
St Petersburg City Court
29/06/2017
(both decisions on the same day)
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty - arrest and escort to the police station on 12/06/2017-13/06/2017 in excess of 3 hours for the sole purpose of drawing a record of administrative offence; unrecorded detention until escort to the court on 14/06/2017. The applicant raised the complaint in the course of the administrative proceedings against him;
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in both sets of the administrative-offence proceedings
Prot. 7 Art. 4 - right not to be tried or punished twice in criminal proceedings - final decision in both sets of proceedings - 29/06/2017, St Petersburg City Court; Art. 19.3 § 1 CAO and Art. 20.2 § 5 CAO; overlap of the facts constituting the basis for the applicant’s prosecution in the second set of proceedings with substantially the same facts underlying her conviction in the first set of proceedings.
4,000
3864/18
26/12/2017
Iskander Rafailevich GUMERBAYEV
1991
Anti-corruption Manifestation
Kazan
14/05/2017
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
community service of 35 hours
Supreme Court of Tatarstan Republic
21/06/2017 (sent by the Supreme Court to the applicant on 26/06/2017)
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party
4,000
5252/18
02/01/2018
Anastasiya Vyacheslavovna KOVROVA
1987
Yesipova Alina Vladimirovna
St Petersburg
Anti-Corruption Manifestation
St Petersburg
12/06/2017
article 19.3 § 1 of CAO,
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
fine of RUB 15,000
fine of RUB 600
St Petersburg City Court
03/07/2017 (both decisions on the same day)
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty - arrest and detention at the police station from 12/06/2017 to 13/06/2017 - (1) 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;
(2) Detention as an administrative suspect: the applicant remained in detention after the offence record had been compiled;
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in both sets of the administrative-offence proceedings
Prot. 7 Art. 4 - right not to be tried or punished twice in criminal proceedings - decisions on 03/07/2017, by the St Petersburg City Court, Art. 19.3 § 1 CAO and Art. 20.2 § 5 CAO; overlap of the facts constituting the basis for the applicant’s prosecution in the second set of proceedings with substantially the same facts underlying her conviction in the first set of proceedings
4,000
7616/18
10/01/2018
Aleksey Mikhaylovich IVANOV
1990
Zhdanov Ivan Yuryevich
Vilnius
Opposition rally
St Petersburg
12/06/2017
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO, article 19.3 § 1 of CAO
fine of RUB 10,000 fine of RUB 1,000
St Petersburg City Court
11/07/2017 (both decisions on the same day)
Prot. 7 Art. 4 - right not to be tried or punished twice in criminal proceedings - the applicant was punished twice for essentially the same action under article 20.2 § 5 of CAO, article 19.3 § 1 of CAO;
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in both sets of the administrative‑offence proceedings
3,500
13129/18
22/02/2018
Igor Nikolayevich FINKOVSKIY
1964
Yatsenko Irina Aleksandrovna
Moscow
Truck Drivers’ Manifestation
Khimki, Moscow Region
21/05/2017
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
fine of RUB 10,000
Moscow Regional Court
22/08/2017
Prot. 7 Art. 4 - right not to be tried or punished twice in criminal proceedings - decisions on 22/08/2017, by the St Petersburg City Court and on 16/08/2017 by the St Peterburg City Court, Art. 19.3 § 1 CAO and Art. 20.2 § 5 CAO; overlap of the facts constituting the basis for the applicant’s prosecution in the second set of proceedings with substantially the same facts underlying her conviction in the first set of proceedings,
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 21‑22/05/2017 in excess of 3 hours (arrested on 21/05/2017 at 2 p.m., released on 23/05/2017); raised on appeal
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings – final decision on 22/08/2017
4,000
19607/18
30/03/2018
Rafail Viktorovich SHEPELEV
1970
March of the "Artpodgotovka" movement
Ekaterinburg
23/07/2017
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
fine of RUB 10,000
Sverdlovsk Regional Court
21/11/2017
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of tribunal - lack of the prosecuting party in the administrative proceedings
3,500
21716/18
25/04/2018
Polina Pavlovna MIKHAYLOVA
1999
Manifestation in support of A. Navalnyy
St Petersburg
08/10/2017
article 19.3 § 1 of CAO,
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
detention for 5 days
and
fine of RUB 10,000
St Petersburg City Court
25/10/2017 (both decisions on the same day)
Prot. 7 Art. 4 - right not to be tried or punished twice in criminal proceedings decisions on 25/10/2017, St Petersburg City Court, Art. 19.3 § 1 CAO and Art. 20.2 § 5 CAO; overlap of the facts constituting the basis for the applicant’s prosecution in the second set of proceedings with substantially the same facts underlying her conviction in the first set of proceedings,
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty - arrest and detention on 08/10/2017 in excess of 3 hours for the sole purpose of drawing up a record of an administrative offence (arrested at 10.20 p.m. and detained till the court hearing on 09/10/2017); raised on appeal;
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in both sets of the administrative-offence proceedings
5,000
24932/18
15/05/2018
Margarita Yuryevna ZAYTSEVA
1970
Zhdanov Ivan Yuryevich
Vilnius
Manifestation in support of A. Navalnyy
Tambov
29/10/2017
article 20.2 § 2 of CAO
arrest for 5 days
Tambov Regional Court
15/11/2017
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings
5,000
26002/18
18/05/2018
(3 applicants)
Mikhail Mikhaylovich SEMENOV
1969
Artur Magsumovich ABASHEV
1986
Georgiy Olegovich USPENSKIY
1999
Zboroshenko Nikolay Sergeyevich
Mytishchi
1 applicant: Manifestation in support of A. Navalnyy
Kirov
07/10/2017
2 applicant: Manifestation in support of A. Navalnyy
Kirov
07/10/2017
3 applicant: Meeting "Voters Strike"
Kirov
28/01/2018
1 applicant: Manifestation against the war in Ukraine
Kirov
30/03/2022
article 20.2 § 2 of CAO
article 20.2 § 2 of CAO
article 20.2 § 2 of CAO
article 20.2 § 8 of CAO
detention of five days
detention of five days
fine of RUB 20,000
the fine was lifted on appeal
Kirov Regional Court
24/11/2017
Kirov Regional Court
27/02/2018
Kirov Regional Court
06/03/2018
Kirov Regional Court
23/08/2022
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings - the first applicant complained of the absence of a prosecuting party in the admin. proceedings in 2022
5,000,
to each of the applicants
35361/18
16/07/2018
Aleksandr Sergeyevich VESELOV
1984
Russian March
Moscow
04/11/2017
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
fine of RUB 15,000
Moscow City Court
14/03/2018
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 04/11/2017 - Detention as an administrative suspect: no evidence/assessment of “exceptional circumstances” under Art. 27.3 § 1 CAO; raised in the course of administrative proceedings
4,000
40027/18
11/08/2018
Yuliya Aleksandrovna FEDOSEYEVA
1978
Spontaneous meeting against local waste site
Klin, Moscow Region
13/10/2017
Article 20.2 § 6.1 of CAO
fine of RUB 10,000
Moscow Regional Court
15/02/2018
3,500
41676/18
14/08/2018
Dmitriy Vasilyevich DUBROVIN
1997
Zhdanov Ivan Yuryevich
Vilnius
"Voters’ Strike"
Volgograd
28/01/2018
Article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
fine of RUB 10,000
Volgograd Regional Court
21/02/2018
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty, including unrecorded - arrest and detention on 28/01/2018 - 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; raised on appeal;
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings
4,000
42411/18
24/08/2018
Dmitriy Mikhaylovich TEPLYAKOV
1987
Anti-corruption manifestation
Moscow
04/11/2017
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
fine of RUB 15,000
Moscow City Court
28/02/2018
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings
3,500
42842/18
22/08/2018
Artem Yevgenyevich YEVDOKIMOV
1991
Zhdanov Ivan Yuryevich
Vilnius
Distribution of political leaflets
Cherepovets
04/11/2017
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
fine of RUB 10,000
Vologda Regional Court
27/02/2018
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings
3,500
47334/18
20/09/2018
Tatyana Sergeyevna SERGEYEVA
1972
Yatsenko Irina Aleksandrovna
Moscow
Manifestation of the foreign currency mortgage borrowers in front of the Central Bank of the Russian Federation
Moscow
28/11/2017
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
fine of RUB 10,000
Moscow City Court
20/03/2018
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings
3,500
29407/19
20/05/2019
Mikhail Igorevich SHALASHNYY
1998
"Endless protest" activists’ meeting
Moscow
10/09/2018
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
fine of RUB 10,000
Moscow City Court
22/11/2018
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings
3,500
35192/19
16/06/2019
Yuriy Sergeyevich KURLYKOV
1999
Zubarev Dmitriy Vladimirovich
Vladivostok
Manifestation against the pension reform
Vladivostok
15/09/2018
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
fine of RUB 10,000
Primorye Regional Court
17/12/2018
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings
3,500
38762/19
07/07/2019
Aydar Albertovich ISLAMOV
1996
Tomilov Nikita Sergeyevich
BERLIN
Protest against construction of an orthodox church in a park
Yekaterinburg
14/05/2019
article 20.1 § 2 of CAO
5 days’ arrest
Sverdlovsk Regional Court
18/05/2019
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty - arrest and detention on 14/05/2019 - 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;
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings
5,000
45161/19
17/08/2019
Aleksandr Alekseyevich ABRAMOV
1997
Manifestation against the pension reform
Penza
09/08/2018
article 20.2 § 6.1 of CAO
fine of RUB 10,000
Penza Regional Court
14/03/2019
3,500
54061/19
27/09/2019
Valeriy Aleksandrovich SHPYAKIN
1994
Manifestation against the construction of the landfill at Sheis
Arkhangelsk
07/04/2019
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
fine of RUB 12,000
Arkhangelsk Regional Court
23/07/2019
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings
3,500
57851/19
18/10/2019
Aleksey Aleksandrovich CHISLOV
1987
Zadorkin Anton Vyacheslavovich
Yekarerinburg
Manifestation against construction of an orthodox church
Oktyabrskaya Square 2, Yekaterinburg
16/05/2019
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
fine of RUB 10,000
Sverdlovsk Regional Court
28/08/2019
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty - arrest on 16/05/2019 - Applicant taken to the police station as an administrative suspect for the purposes of compiling an offence record: no written record of the administrative escort (Art. 27.2 § 3 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
4332/20
28/12/2019
Yan Patvakanovich YEGIAZARYAN
1977
Tiunov Sergey Yuryevich
Yekaterinburg
Manifestation against the regional authorities
Yekaterinburg
07/07/2019
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
fine of RUB 10,000
Sverdlovsk Regional Court
11/09/2019
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings
3,500
4445/20
28/12/2019
Galina Vasilyevna KOROLEVA
1952
Tiunov Sergey Yuryevich
Yekaterinburg
Manifestation against the regional authorities
Yekaterinburg
07/07/2019
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
fine of RUB 10,000
Sverdlovsk Regional Court
02/10/2019
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings
3,500
9115/20
24/01/2020
Igor Vladimirovich SAFONOV
1991
Timakova Kristina Igorevna
Moscow
Protest against demolition of the "Solovey" cinema
Moscow
23/11/2018
article 20.2 § 8 of CAO
fine of RUB 100,000
Moscow City Court
24/07/2019
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings
3,500
1651/21
05/12/2020
Sofya Vladimirovna DURNOVA
2001
Sirosh Fedor Yevgenyevich
Moscow
Dopuskai Manifestation for free elections
Moscow
03/08/2019
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
fine of RUB 10,000
Moscow City Court
10/06/2020
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 deprivation of liberty - arrest and detention on 03/08/2019 - 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
4,000
10270/21
18/01/2021
Tatyana Valeryevna NAMAZBAYEVA
1989
Zubarev Dmitriy Vladimirovich
Vladivostok
Manifestation in support of Furgal
Vladivostok
25/07/2020
Manifestation in support of Furgal
Vladivostok
01/08/2020
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
fine of RUB 10,000
fine of
RUB 10,000
Primorye Regional Court
05/10/2020
Primorye Regional Court
13/10/2020
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty - arrest and detention on 01/08/2020 and on 15/08/2020 - 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;
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in both sets of the administrative-offence proceedings
4,000
10419/21
18/01/2021
Larisa Vasilyeva ALEKSEYEVA
1946
Zubarev Dmitriy Vladimirovich
Vladivostok
Manifestation in support of Furgal
Vladivostok, Svetlanskaya street
01/08/2020
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
fine of RUB 10,000
Primorye Regional Court
16/11/2020
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings - absence of a prosecuting party in both sets of administrative proceedings which ended on 02/11/2020 and 16/11/2020 respectively;
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty - arrest and detention at a police station on 15/08/2020 - 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; raised on appeal;
Art. 10 (1) - disproportionate measures against solo demonstrators - solo picket against unfair elections on 15/08/2020 in Vladivostok, the applicant convicted under article 20.2 § 5 of CAO, administrative fine of RUB 10,000. Upheld on appeal – by the Primorye Regional Court, 02/11/2020.
4,000
20304/21
14/03/2021
Valentina Anatolyevna DYUMINA
1989
Vasin Vladimir Valeryevich
Krasnoyarsk
Manifestation in support of S. Furgal
Krasnoyarsk
01/08/2020
Manifestation in support of S. Furgal
Krasnoyarsk
08/08/2020
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
article 20.2 § 2 of CAO
fine of RUB 12,000
fine of RUB 20,000
Krasnoyarsk Regional Court
29/10/2020
Krasnoyarsk Regional Court
24/09/2020
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 deprivation of liberty - arrest and detention on 08/08/2020 - 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
4,000
20783/21
22/03/2021
Andrey Yuryevich MYAKOTIN
1974
Zubarev Dmitriy Vladimirovich
Vladivostok
Manifestation in support of S. Furgal
Vladivostok
18/07/2020
Manifestation in support of S. Furgal
Vladivostok
25/07/2020
Manifestation in support of S. Furgal
Vladivostok
08/08/2020
Manifestation in support of Mr. Navalnyy
Vladivostok
31/01/2021
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
article 20.2 § 8 of CAO
20 hours of compulsory work
20 hours of compulsory work
20 hours of compulsory work
40 hours of compulsory work
Primorye Regional Court
26/10/2020
Primorye Regional Court
02/11/2020
Primorye Regional Court
27/10/2020
Primorye Regional Court
13/04/2021
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty - Arrest and detention at the police station on 15/08/2020 and 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. The complaint was raised on appeal in the course of 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 - administrative proceedings relating to the applicant’s participation in the manifestation on 31/01/2021
5,000
21312/21
02/04/2021
Aleksey Nikolayevich SHUVATOV
1992
Sidelnikova Polina Aleksandrovna
Vladivostok
Manifestation in support of protests in Khabarovsk
Vladivostok
19/07/2020
Manifestation in support of protests in Khabarovsk
Vladivostok
25/07/2020
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
fine of RUB 10,000
fine of RUB 10,000
Primorye Regional Court
09/11/2020
Primorye Regional Court
09/11/2020
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty - arrest and detention on 22/08/2020 in excess of 3 hours for the sole purpose of drawing a record of administrative offence
4,000
21509/21
22/03/2021
Aleksey Vladimirovich BARICH
1993
Manifestation in support of protests in Khabarovsk
St Petersburg
01/08/2020
Manifestation in support of A. Navalnyy ("Otpuskay")
St Petersburg
23/01/2021
article 20.2 § 2 of CAO
article 20.2 § 8 of CAO
7 days’ detention
15 days’ detention
St Petersburg City Court
24/09/2020
St Petersburg City Court
04/03/2021
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty - arrest and overnight detention on 31/01-02/02/2021 - (1) 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; (2) Detention as an administrative suspect: the applicant remained in detention after the offence record had been compiled,
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings - concerning both public events and respective proceedings;
Prot. 7 Art. 2 - delayed review of conviction by a higher tribunal - immediate execution of administrative detention (in respect of the event of 23/01/2021)
6,000
23147/21
09/04/2021
Yevgeniy Olegovich RUDENKO
1996
Sidelnikova Polina Aleksandrovna
Vladivostok
Manifestation in support of S. Furgal
Vladivostok
18/07/2020
Manifestation in support of S. Furgal
Vladivostok
19/07/2020
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
fine of RUB 10,000
fine of RUB 10,000
Primorye Regional Court
24/11/2020
Primorye Regional Court
24/11/2020
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty - on 26/08/2020 the applicant was arrested at his office in relation to his participation in two manifestations, more than one month after the events in question - 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; raised in the domestic proceedings
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in both sets of the administrative offence proceedings
4,000
[1] Plus any tax that may be chargeable to the applicants.