THIRD SECTION
CASE OF LUKOMSKAYA AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA
(Applications nos. 15395/18 and 15 others –
see appended list)
JUDGMENT
STRASBOURG
12 June 2025
This judgment is final but it may be subject to editorial revision.
In the case of Lukomskaya and Others v. Russia,
The European Court of Human Rights (Third Section), sitting as a Committee composed of:
Diana Kovatcheva, President,
Mateja Đurović,
Canòlic Mingorance Cairat, judges,
and Viktoriya Maradudina, Acting Deputy Section Registrar,
Having deliberated in private on 22 May 2025,
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 against solo demonstrators. 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 10 of the Convention7. The applicants complained principally of the disproportionate measures taken against them as participants or organisers of solo demonstrations, notably the termination of their demonstrations, arrest and conviction for administrative offences. They relied, expressly or in substance, on Articles 10 and 11 of the Convention. The Court will examine the complaints under Article 10 of the Convention taking into account, where appropriate, the general principles it has established in the context of Article 11 of the Convention (see Novikova and Others v. Russia, nos. 25501/07 and 4 others, § 91, 26 April 2016).
8. In the leading case of Novikova and Others (cited above, §§ 112-225) the Court already found a violation in respect of issues similar to those in the present case (see also Glukhin v. Russia, no. 11519/20, §§ 53-57, 4 July 2023 and, mutatis mutandis, Lashmankin and Others v. Russia, nos. 57818/09 and 14 others, §§ 432-42, 7 February 2017).
9. 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 on 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 expression were not “necessary in a democratic society”.
10. These complaints are therefore admissible and disclose a breach of Article 10 of the Convention.
OTHER ALLEGED VIOLATIONS UNDER WELL-ESTABLISHED CASE-LAW11. Some 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 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, as to various aspects of unlawful deprivation of liberty of organisers or participants of public assemblies; Dirdizov v. Russia, no. 41461/10, 27 November 2012 concerning unreasonably lengthy detention on remand; Idalov v. Russia [GC], no. 5826/03, §§ 154-58, 161-65, 22 May 2012, and Khodorkovskiy and Lebedev v. Russia, nos. 11082/06 and 13772/05, §§ 522-23, 25 July 2013, as regards the deficiencies in proceedings for review of the lawfulness of detention; 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; Elvira Dmitriyeva v. Russia, nos. 60921/17 and 7202/18, §§ 77-90, 30 April 2019, as to administrative conviction for making calls to participate in public assemblies; Teslenko and Others v. Russia, nos. 49588/12 and 3 others, §§ 100-145, 5 April 2022, as to other restrictions on the right to freedom of expression; Frumkin v. Russia, no. 74568/12, §§ 93-142, ECHR 2016 (extracts), as to disproportionate measures in respect of participants and organisers of public events; and 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.
Remaining complaints12. Some applicants raised further additional complaints under various Convention provisions. In view of the findings in paragraphs 9-11 above, the Court considers that there is no need to deal separately with these remaining complaints.
APPLICATION OF ARTICLE 41 OF THE CONVENTION13. Regard being had to the documents in its possession and to its case‑law (see, mutatis mutandis, Navalnyy and Others v. Russia [Committee], nos. 5809/17 and 14 others, § 22, 4 October 2022), the Court considers 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 the facts that took place before 16 September 2022;Declares the complaints under Article 10 concerning disproportionate measures against solo demonstrators and the other complaints under the 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 of the applicants;Holds that these applications disclose a breach of Article 10 of the Convention concerning the disproportionate measures against solo demonstrators;Holds that there has been a violation of the Convention and its Protocols 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 12 June 2025, pursuant to Rule 77 §§ 2 and 3 of the Rules of Court.
Viktoriya Maradudina Diana Kovatcheva
Acting Deputy Registrar President
APPENDIX
List of applications raising complaints under Article 10 of the Convention
(disproportionate measures against solo demonstrators)
No.
Application no.
Date of introduction
Applicant’s name
Year of birth
Representative’s name and location
Location
Date
Purpose of the demonstration
Administrative charges
Penalty
Final domestic decision
Date
Name of the court
Other relevant information
Other complaints under well-established case-law
Amount awarded for pecuniary and non-pecuniary damage and costs and expenses per applicant
(in euros)[1]
15395/18
23/03/2018
Anastasiya Ilyinichna LUKOMSKAYA
1989
Moscow, 08/07/2017, distribution of leaflets, sticking leaflets on the walls in support of A. Navalnyy’s presidential campaign
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO,
fine of RUB 10,000
26/10/2017, Moscow City Court
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - arrest and detention on 07/07/2018, 27/07/2019 and on 03/08/2019, each time 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 - three sets of proceedings,
Art. 11 (2) - disproportionate measures against organisers and participants of public assemblies - two latest sets of proceedings:
(i) Rally for fair elections to Mosgorduma, 27/07/2019 - arrest, conviction under article 20.2 § 5 of the CAO, fine of RUB 12,000, final judgment of 10/09/2019 by the Moscow City Court, and
(ii) Rally for fair elections to Mosgorduma and in support of E. Zhukov, 03/08/2019 - arrest, conviction under article 20.2 § 5 of CAO, fine of RUB 10,000, final judgment of 12/11/2019 by the Moscow City Court
4,000
46953/18
26/09/2018
Aleksandr Andreyevich MARKIN
1999
Bryansk, 10/08/2019, support of opposition candidates for the elections in Moscow City Council
article 20.2 § 2 of CAO,
fine of RUB 30,000
28/10/2019 Bryansk Regional Court
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention:
(i) on 12/02/2018 as administrative suspect, pending trial in respect of the events of 14/10/2017 (the offence record had been compiled on 06/12/2017); and
(ii) between 02/09/2019 and 03/09/2019, as an administrative suspect, after the offence record in respect of the event of 10/08/2019 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 - both sets of administrative proceedings,
Art. 11 (2) - disproportionate measures against organisers and participants of public assemblies - conviction under article 20.2 § 8 of CAO on account of organising a public distribution of leaflets in support of A. Navalnyy, administrative detention of 5 days, Bryansk Regional Court, 27/03/2018
5,000
57908/18
13/12/2018
Lev Aleksandrovich PONOMAREV
1941
Shukhardin Valeriy Vladimirovich
Moscow
(i)
Moscow, 23/07/2018, support of political prisoners;
(ii)
Moscow, 20/02/2022, Protest against the potential war in Ukraine (the applicant was arrested at the venue when he was waiting for his turn to stage a picket)
(i)
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO,
fine of RUB 10,000,
(ii)
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO,
fine of RUB 10,000
(i) 18/09/2018, Moscow City Court,
(ii) 01/07/2022, Moscow CIty Court
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - arrest, escorting to a police station, detention:
(i) on 23/07/2018 for the sole purpose of drawing up a record of administrative offence,
(ii) on 01/12/2018, for the purpose of compiling a record of administrative offence in respect of the calls to participate in a rally posted on 25/10/2018; and
(iii) on 20/02/2022, for the purpose of drawing up a record of administrative offence –
no evidence/assessment that it was impossible to draw up an offence record on the spot in either case,
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 administrative proceedings,
Art. 10 (1) - conviction for making calls to participate in public events - on 25/10/2018 the applicant published a Facebook post calling to participate in a rally on 28/10/2018 in Moscow in support of defendants in criminal cases "Novoye Velichiye" and "Set’" - arrest, conviction under article.20.2 §.8 of CAO, administrative detention of 16 days, final judgment of 07/12/2018, Moscow City Court
5,000
21833/19
12/04/2019
Lev Yevgenyevich GYAMMER
2000
Sholokhov Igor Nikolayevich
Kazan
(i)
Novokuznetsk, 09/09/2018, Shouting slogans in support of A. Navalnyy and against the pension reform from the balcony of the applicant’s flat,
(ii)
Novokuznetsk, 30/10/2018, Picket in memory of the victims of political repressions
(i), (ii)
article 20.2 § 2 of CAO,
fine of RUB 20,000, in each of the two sets of proceedings
(i) 23/01/2019, Kemerovo Regional Court
(ii) 28/01/2019,
Kemerovo Regional Court
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. 10 (1) - conviction for making calls to participate in public events - (Elvira Dmitriyeva v. Russia, nos. 60921/17 and 7202/18, §§ 77-90, 30 April 2019) - conviction under article 20.2 § 2 of CAO for making calls to participate in a series of simultaneous solo demonstrations of 30/10/2018 to commemorate the victims of political repressions, "Immortal Gulag", fine of RUB 20,000, final judgment of 28/01/2019 by the Kemerovo Regional Court (the same as cited in respect of the 2nd set of proceedings)
4,000
48580/19
04/09/2019
Tatyana Pavlovna ARSHINOVA
1984
Valenkov Andrey Olegovich
Nizhniy Novgorod
(i)
Nizhniy Novgorod, 01/06/2018, Support of Oleg Sentsov and Ukrainian political prisoners in Russia
(ii)
Nizhniy Novgorod, 18/06/2018, Support of political prisoners
(i)
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO, community service of 20 hours
(ii)
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO, community service of 20 hours
(i)
06/03/2019, Nizhniy Novgorod Regional Court
(ii) 06/03/2019,
Nizhniy Novgorod Regional Court
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - arrest, escorting to a police station, detention (1) on 31/01/2021 for the sole purpose of drawing up an offence record; and (2) between 25/02/2022 and 27/02/2022 as administrative suspect, pending trial, after the offence record in respect of the applicant’s participation in a rally of 24/02/2022 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 - four sets of proceedings,
Art. 11 (1) - various restrictions on the right to freedom of peaceful assembly:
(1) Rally in support of A. Navalnyy, Nizhniy Novgorod, 31/01/2021 -arrest, conviction under article 20.2 § 5 of CAO, fine of RUB 15,000, final judgment of 21/04/2021 by the Nizhniy Novgorod Regional Court; and
(2) Anti-war rally, Nizhniy Novgorod, 24/02/2022 - conviction under article 20.2 § 8 of CAO, fine of RUB 150,000, final judgment of 20/04/2022 by the Nizhniy Novgorod Regional Court
6,500
11487/21
30/12/2020
Pavel Anatolyevich STEPANCHENKO
1988
Moscow
21/02/2020 Support of political prisoners
article 19.3 § 1 of CAO, administrative detention for 10 days
30/06/2020, Moscow City Court
distance requirement - event classified as assembly post facto
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - arrest, escorting to and detention at the police station on 21/02/2020 for the sole purpose of drawing up an offence record,
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings
5,000
20515/21
27/03/2021
Gleb Kirillovich MATVEYEV
1997
Gilmanov Mansur Idrisovich
Podolsk
Protest against arrest and prosecution of journalist M. Zemtsova, 19/07/2020, Moscow
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO,
fine of RUB 15,000
08/02/2021, Moscow City Court
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - arrest, escorting and detention at the police station between 7.30 p.m. and 10 p.m. on 19/07/2020 as an administrative suspect, for the sole purpose of drawing up an offence record,
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings
4,000
37336/21
05/07/2021
Nailya Maratovna MULLAYEVA
1995
Nurgaleyev Danil Ilnurovich
Kazan
Kazan, 21/08/2020, Support of A. Navalnyy
article 20.2 § 2 of CAO,
fine of RUB 20,000
31/03/2021, Supreme Court of the Republic of Tatarstan
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - arrest, escorting to a police station, detention on 21/08/2020 for the sole purpose of drawing up a record of administrative offence
4,000
38542/21
17/07/2021
Ronald Arkadyevich AYRAPETYAN
1999
Popkov Aleksandr Vasilyevich
Sochi
Sochi, 10/11/2020, Picket against long-lasting presidency of V. Putin
article 20.2 § 2 of CAO, administrative detention of 4 days
and
article 19.3 § 1 of CAO, fine of RUB 500
25/01/2021,
Krasnodar Regional Court
(article 20.2 § 2 of CAO)
and
27/01/2021,
Krasnodar Regional Court
(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 administrative-offence proceedings - in both sets of the proceedings,
Prot. 7 Art. 2 - delayed review of conviction by a higher tribunal - the sentence of administrative detention imposed on the applicant by the first-instance court on 11/11/2020 was executed immediately, on account of the lack of suspensive effect of an appeal under the CAO
5,000
40136/21
23/07/2021
Daniil Sergeyevich CHEBYKIN
1991
Cherkasov Vitaliy Viktorovich
St Petersburg
Support of A. Navalnyy, 08/11/2020, Omsk
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO,
fine of RUB 10,000
09/02/2021, Omsk Regional Court
3,500
47144/21
02/09/2021
Yuriy Valentinovich ALEKSEYEV
1974
(i) Vladimir Region, 12/06/2021, support of A. Navalnyy (a banner placed on a stand near the applicant’s dugout)
(ii)
Vladimir Region, 24/02/2022, Anti-war protest (an anti-war banner placed on a stand near the applicant’s dugout; the applicant recorded an anti-war video of himself using the banner as a background);
(i)
article 20.2 § 2 of CAO,
fine of RUB 10,000,
(ii)
article 20.2 § 8 of CAO,
administrative detention of 9 days
(i) 30/07/2021, Vladimir Regional Court
(ii) 11/03/2022, Vladimir Regional Court
conviction for using quickly (de)assembled objects (first and second sets of proceedings)
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - arrest, escorting to a police station, detention on 11/09/2021 for the sole purpose of drawing up an offence record (third set of 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 proceedings,
Art. 10 (1) - various restrictions on the right to freedom of expression - 11/09/2021, Vladimir, distribution of leaflets calling not to vote for the United Russia political party at the parliamentary elections in 2021 - arrest, conviction under article 5.12 § 1 of CAO, fine of RUB 5,000 on account of dissemination of campaign material in breach of the electoral legislation; final judgment of 11/10/2021, Leninskiy District Court of Vladimir (see Teslenko and Others v. Russia, nos. 49588/12 and 3 others, §§ 100-45, 5 April 2022)
5,000
56096/21
25/10/2021
Irina Sergeyevna RONZHINA
1963
Mamedova Yelena Anatolyevna
Samara
Samara, 15/08/2020, Support of protesters in Khabarovsk and Belarus
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO, fine of RUB 10,000
29/04/2021, Samara Regional Court
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - escorting to and detention at the police station on 13/11/2020 for the sole purpose of drawing up an offence record in respect of the solo demonstration of 15/08/2020,
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings
4,000
57158/21
17/11/2021
Yevgeniy Igorevich MIKHAYLOV
1979
Moscow, 23/01/2021, Support of A. Navalnyy
article 20.2 § 6.1 of CAO,
fine of RUB 20,000
29/06/2021, Moscow City Court
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - arrest, delayed escorting to a police station, detention between 23/01/2021 and 25/01/2021 as administrative suspect, pending trial and after the offence record had been complied,
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings
4,000
717/22
06/12/2021
Pavel Olegovich KRISEVICH
2000
Solovyev Leonid Alekseyevich
Moscow
St Petersburg, 02/05/2021, Street exhibition in support of political prisoners
article 20.2 § 8 of CAO, administrative detention of 10 days
10/06/2021, St Petersburg City Court
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - arrest, escorting to a police station, detention between 02/05/2021 and 04/05/2021 as administrative suspect, pending trial,
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative offence proceedings - final judgment of 10/06/2021, St Petersburg City Court,
Prot. 7 Art. 2 - delayed review of conviction by a higher tribunal - the sentence of administrative detention imposed on the applicant on 04/05/2021 was executed immediately, on account of the lack of suspensive effect of an appeal under the CAO,
Art. 5 (3) - lack of relevant and sufficient reasons for pre-trial detention - the applicant’s pre-trial detention as from 11/06/2021 on charges of hooliganism (Article 213 (2) of the Criminal Code) - by the date of his latest correspondence (01/04/2022) the applicant had remained in detention – 9 month(s) and 20 day(s); fragility of the reasons employed by the courts; use of assumptions, in the absence of any evidentiary basis, of the risks of absconding or obstructing justice; failure to assess the applicant’s personal situation reducing the risks of re-offending, colluding or absconding; failure to conduct the proceedings with due diligence during the period of detention,
Art. 5 (4) - lack of speediness of review of detention (Idalov v. Russia [GC], no. 5826/03, §§ 154-58, 22 May 2012, and Khodorkovskiy and Lebedev v. Russia, nos. 11082/06 and 13772/05, §§ 522-23, 25 July 2013):
(i) Taganskiy District Court of Moscow, 09/09/2021, appeal lodged on 10/08/2021, examined by the Moscow City Court on 08/09/2021, 29 days (complaint lodged on 29/12/2021), and
(ii) Taganskiy District Court of Moscow, 09/09/2021, appeal lodged no later than 12/09/2021, examined by the Moscow City Court on 06/10/2021, 24 days (complaint lodged on 01/04/2022)
5,000
21235/22
05/04/2022
Vitaliy Vsevolodovich MANSKIY
1963
Borisova Alena Sergeyevna
Moscow
Moscow
22/12/2020
Protest against A. Navalnyy’s poisoning
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO,
fine of RUB 10,000
05/10/2021,
Moscow City Court
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings
3,500
43423/22
12/08/2022
Konstantin Olegovich VASILYEV
1987
Baranova Natalya Andreyevna
Moscow
(i)
Moscow, 05/04/2022,
Anti-war protest
(ii)
Moscow, 01/05/2022, Anti-war protest
(i)
article 19.3 § 1 of CAO, administrative detention of 15 days,
(ii)
article 19.3. § 1 of CAO, administrative detention of 15 days
(i) 12/04/2022, Moscow City Court
(ii)
07/05/2022, Moscow City Court
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention:
(i) arrest, escorting to and detention at the police station on 05/04/2022 for compiling an offence record; and
(ii) arrest, escorting to and detention at the police station between 01/05/2022 and 02/05/2022 as administrative suspect, pending trial and after the record of administrative offence was compiled,
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings (concerning the events of 05/04/2022 and 01/05/2022),
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, in both sets of proceedings (concerning the events of 05/04/2022 and 01/05/2022)
6,000
[1] Plus any tax that may be chargeable to the applicants.