FIRST SECTION
CASE OF KOMPANIYETS AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA
(Applications nos. 24147/21 and 24 others –
see appended list)
JUDGMENT
STRASBOURG
6 June 2024
This judgment is final but it may be subject to editorial revision.
In the case of Kompaniyets 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 16 May 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. They also raised other complaints under the provisions of the Convention and its Protocol.
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. The applicants submitted other complaints which also raised issues under the Convention and its Protocol, 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.
13. Having examined all the material before it, the Court concludes that these complaints also disclose violations of the Convention and its Protocol in the light of its findings in 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); 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, as to various aspects of unlawful deprivation of liberty of organisers or participants of public assemblies; 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; and Korneyeva, cited above, §§ 62-65, as to the right of the organisers or participants of public assemblies not to be tried and punished twice for the same offence.
REMAINING COMPLAINTS14. Some applicants raised further additional complaints under Article 6 of the Convention concerning the fairness of the administrative-offence proceedings. In view of the findings above, the Court considers that there is no need to deal separately with these remaining complaints.
APPLICATION OF ARTICLE 41 OF THE CONVENTION15. 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 these applications 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 finds that there is no need to examine separately the remaining complaints under Article 6 of the Convention;Holds that these applications disclose a breach of Article 11 of the Convention;Holds that there has been a violation of the Convention and the Protocol thereto as regards the other complaints raised under the 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 6 June 2024, 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 / criminal offence
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]
24147/21
16/04/2021
Aleksey Maksimovich KOMPANIYETS
1992
Memorial Human Rights Centre
Moscow
Rally “Free Navalnyy”
Moscow
31/01/2021
article 20.2 § 6.1 of CAO
detention for 12 days
Moscow City Court
08/02/2021
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - arrest and detention from 3.02 p.m. on 31/01/2021 to 5.30 p.m. on 01/02/2021 until the court hearing for the sole purpose of drawing up an administrative offence record, 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: Moscow City Court, 08/02/2021,
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
5,000
31707/21
07/06/2021
Aleksey Nikolayevich RODIONOV
1991
Memorial Human Rights Centre
Moscow
Rally “Free Navalnyy”
Moscow
02/02/2021
article 20.2 § 6.1 of CAO
detention for 15 days
Moscow City Court
09/02/2021
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - arrest and detention from 11.05 a.m. on 02/02/2021 to 3 p.m. on 03/02/2021 until the court hearing for the sole purpose of drawing up an administrative offence record, 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: Moscow City Court, 09/02/2021,
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
5,000
45313/21
23/08/2021
Tatyana Viktorovna SITNICHKINA
1999
Glukhov Aleksey Vladimirovich
Novocheboksarsk
Rally “Free Navalnyy”
Cheboksary
23/01/2021
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
fine of RUB 10,000
Supreme Court of the Chuvashia Republic
19/03/2021
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - arrest and detention on 23/01/2021 for the sole purpose of drawing up an administrative offence record, 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: Supreme Court of the Chuvashia Republic, 19/03/2021
4,000
45320/21
23/08/2021
Anastasiya Ruslanovna ANDRIYANOVA
2000
Glukhov Aleksey Vladimirovich
Novocheboksarsk
Rally “Free Navalnyy”
Cheboksary
23/01/2021
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
fine of RUB 10,000
Supreme Court of the Chuvashia Republic
23/03/2021
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - arrest and detention on 23/01/2021 for the sole purpose of drawing up an administrative offence record, 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: Supreme Court of the Chuvashia Republic, 23/03/2021
4,000
45335/21
23/08/2021
Olga Arkadyevna KHRASTINOVA
1990
Glukhov Aleksey Vladimirovich
Novocheboksarsk
Rally “Free Navalnyy”
Cheboksary
23/01/2021
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
fine of RUB 10,000
Supreme Court of the Chuvashia Republic
30/03/2021
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - arrest and detention on 23/01/2021 for the sole purpose of drawing up an administrative offence record, 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: Supreme Court of the Chuvashia Republic, 30/03/2021
4,000
45336/21
30/08/2021
Mariya Aleksandrovna ZAGVOZKINA
1998
Vasin Vladimir Valeryevich
Krasnoyarsk
Rally “Free Navalnyy”
Krasnoyarsk
31/01/2021
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
fine of RUB 10,000
Krasnoyarsk Regional Court
03/06/2021
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings - Final decision: Krasnoyarsk Regional Court, 03/06/2021
3,500
45339/21
30/08/2021
Aleksandra Andreyevna POLEZHAYEVA
1993
Vasin Vladimir Valeryevich
Krasnoyarsk
Rally “Free Navalnyy”
Krasnoyarsk
23/01/2021
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
fine of RUB 10,000
Krasnoyarsk Regional Court
20/05/2021
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings - Final decision: Krasnoyarsk Regional Court, 20/05/2021
3,500
45344/21
30/08/2021
Semen Vitalyevich GUSAROV
2001
Vasin Vladimir Valeryevich
Krasnoyarsk
Rally “Free Navalnyy”
Krasnoyarsk
23/01/2021
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
fine of RUB 10,000
Krasnoyarsk Regional Court
03/06/2021
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - arrest and detention from 3 p.m. on 23/01/2021 to 4.30 p.m. on 25/01/2021 for the sole purpose of drawing up an administrative offence record, raised on appeal
4,000
45375/21
12/08/2021
Marat Anasovich KAMALOV
1968
Shagiyeva Regina Ilgizovna
Leninigorsk
Rally "Free Navalnyy"
Naberezhnyye Chelny
23/01/2021
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
fine of RUB 10,000
Supreme Court of the Tatarstan Republic
26/05/2021
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - arrest and detention on 31/01/2021 and 22/03/2021 for the sole purpose of drawing up an administrative offence record; escorting to the police station on 03/02/2021 without compiling any reports; arrest and escorting to the Naberezhnyye Chelny City Court on 19/04/2021; raised on appeal
4,000
53283/21
09/10/2021
Artem Andreyevich GAVRILOV
1989
Savin Aleksandr Vasilyevich
Stavropol
Rally “Free Navalnyy”
Stavropol
21/04/2021
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
fine of RUB 15,000
Stavropol Regional Court
08/09/2021
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - arrest and detention on 21/04/2021 for the sole purpose of drawing up an administrative offence record, 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: Stavropol Regional Court, 08/09/2021
4,000
1426/22
30/12/2021
Nikita Nilolayevich KATAYEV
1985
Zhdanov Ivan Yuryevich
Vilnius
Rally “Free Navalnyy”
Perm
21/04/2021
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
fine of RUB 10,000
Perm Regional Court
12/07/2021
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings - Final decision: Perm Regional Court, 12/07/2021
3,500
14670/22
26/02/2022
Aleksandr Viktorovich TISHCHENKO
1993
Rally “Free Navalnyy”
Voronezh
23/01/2021
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
fine of RUB 10,000
Voronezh Regional Court
31/08/2021
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - arrest and detention from 4 p.m. on 23/01/2021 to 12 a.m. on 24/01/2021 for the sole purpose of drawing up an administrative offence record, 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: Voronezh Regional Court, 31/08/2021
4,000
17064/22
05/03/2022
Anastasiya Anatolyevna YURCHENKO
1978
Ivanets Vyacheslav Sergeyevich
Tbilisi, Georgia
Rally “Free Navalnyy”
Usolye-Sibirskoye
20/11/2021
article 20.2 § 2 of CAO
fine of RUB 20,000
Irkutsk Regional Court
08/02/2022
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings - Final decision: Irkutsk Regional Court, 08/02/2022
3,500
23615/22
28/03/2022
Artem Viktorovich RYABOV
1992
Memorial Human Rights Centre
Moscow
Meeting with an MP
Moscow
25/09/2021
Meeting with an MP
Moscow
25/09/2021
article 19.3 § 1 of CAO
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
detention for 7 days
fine of RUB 10,000
Moscow City Court
29/09/2021
Moscow City Court
01/02/2022
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - arrest and detention from 4.30 p.m. on 25/09/2021 to 2.15 p.m. on 27/09/2021 until court hearing for the sole purpose of drawing up an administrative offence record, 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 decisions: Moscow City Court, 29/09/2021 and 01/02/2022,
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,
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 second set of proceedings (Art. 19.3 § 1 of CAO) with substantially the same facts underlying his conviction in the first set of proceedings (Art. 20.2 § 5 of CAO)
5,000
24677/22
06/08/2021
Maksim Sergeyevich DOROSHENKO
1996
Memorial Human Rights Centre
Moscow
Rally “Free Navalnyy”
Moscow
31/01/2021
article 20.2
§ 6.1 of CAO
detention for 7 days
Moscow City Court
13/05/2021
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - arrest and detention from 1.55 p.m. on 31/01/2021 to 5 p.m. on 01/02/2022 until court hearing for the sole purpose of drawing up an administrative offence record, 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 - Moscow City Court, 13/05/2021,
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
5,000
24684/22
06/08/2021
Dmitriy Romanovich YEPISHIN
1998
Memorial Human Rights Centre
Moscow
Rally “Free Navalnyy”
Moscow
31/01/2021
article 20.2
§ 6.1 of CAO
detention for 7 days
Moscow City Court
26/02/2021
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - arrest and detention from 4.20 p.m. on 31/01/2021 to 12 p.m. on 01/02/2021 until court hearing for the sole purpose of drawing up an administrative offence record, 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: Moscow City Court, 26/02/2021,
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
5,000
24699/22
06/08/2021
Aleksey Aleksandrovich KAYGORODTSEV
1993
Memorial Human Rights Centre
Moscow
Rally “Free Navalnyy”
Moscow
31/01/2021
article 20.2
§ 6.1 of CAO
detention for 7 days
Moscow City Court
26/02/2021
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - arrest and detention from 2.50 p.m. on 31/01/2021 to 5.40 p.m. on 01/02/2021 until court hearing for the sole purpose of drawing up an administrative offence record, 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 - Moscow City Court, 26/02/2021,
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
5,000
36204/22
04/07/2022
Olga Vadimovna MELNIKOVA
1991
Sirinova Olga Vladimirovna
St Petersburg
Anti-war protest
St Petersburg
15/02/2022
article 20.2 § 2 of CAO
fine of RUB 20,000
St Petersburg City Court
05/05/2022
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - arrest and detention from 8.30 p.m. on 24/02/2022 to 5.57 p.m. on 25/02/2022 for the sole purpose of drawing up an administrative offence record, 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: St Petersburg City Court, 05/05/2022
4,000
37271/22
06/07/2022
Pavel Valeryevich YAKOVLEV
1984
Baranova Natalya Andreyevna
Moscow
Anti-war protest
St Petersburg
03/03/2022
article 20.2
§ 6.1 of CAO
detention for 5 days
St Petersburg City Court
14/04/2022
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - arrest and detention from 7.53 p.m. on 03/03/2022 to 12 p.m. on 04/03/2022 for the sole purpose of drawing up an administrative offence record, 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: St Petersburg City Court, 14/04/2022,
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
5,000
40249/22
30/07/2022
Mikhail Vladimirovich KAZAKOV
2000
Usanova Olimpiada Valentinovna
Nizhniy Novgorod
Anti-war protest
Nizhniy Novgorod
24/02/2022
article 20.2
§ 6.1 of CAO
fine of RUB 10,000
Nizhniy Novgorod Regional Court
18/05/2022
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - arrest and detention from 7.40 p.m. on 24/02/2022 to 6.20 p.m. on 25/02/2022 until court hearing for the sole purpose of drawing up an administrative offence record, 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: Nizhniy Novgorod Regional Court, 18/05/2022
4,000
41422/22
13/08/2022
Pavel Vladimirovich LAPIN
1997
Zyryanova Mariya Sergeyevna
St Petersburg
Anti-war protest
St Petersburg
24/02/2022
article 20.2
§ 6.1 of CAO
detention for 5 days
St Petersburg City Court
14/04/2022
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - arrest and detention from 24/02/2022 to 25/02/2022 for the sole purpose of drawing up an administrative offence record, 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: St Petersburg City Court, 14/04/2022,
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
5,000
41720/22
12/08/2022
Ilya Anatolyevich KORKISHKO
1997
Baranova Natalya Andreyevna
Moscow
Anti-war protest
St Petersburg
06/03/2022
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
fine of RUB 10,000
St Petersburg City Court
12/04/2022
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - arrest and detention from 5.26 p.m. on 06/03/2022 to 3.14 p.m. on 07/03/2022 until court hearing for the sole purpose of drawing up an administrative offence record, 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 - St Petersburg City Court, 12/04/2022
4,000
47539/22
16/09/2022
Natalya Nikolayevna YERMOLINA-LUGOVSKAYA
1972
Anti-war protest
Samara
06/03/2022
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
fine of RUB 10,000
Samara Regional Court
09/06/2022
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - arrest and detention from 2.30 p.m. to 9.25 p.m. on 06/03/2022 for the sole purpose of drawing up an administrative offence record, 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: Samara Regional Court, 09/06/2022
4,000
48595/22
25/09/2022
Guliya Faridovna MUKHAMETZYANOVA
1993
Sabirov Rim Faridovich
Kazan
Anti-war protest
Kazan
06/03/2022
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
fine of RUB 10,000
Supreme Court of the Tatarstan Republic
25/05/2022
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - arrest and detention from 06/03/2022 to 07/03/2022 until court hearing for the sole purpose of drawing up an administrative offence record, 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: Supreme Court of the Tatarstan Republic, 25/05/2022
4,000
50135/22
14/10/2022
Anastasiya Andreyevna IBASHYAN
2003
Mikhaylova Varvara Dmitriyevna
St Petersburg
Anti-war protest
Moscow
28/02/2022
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
fine of RUB 15,000
Moscow City Court
11/07/2022
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - arrest and detention on 28/02/2022 for the sole purpose of drawing up an administrative offence record, 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: Moscow City Court, 11/07/2022
4,000
[1] Plus any tax that may be chargeable to the applicants.