THIRD SECTION
CASE OF POKATILOV AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA
(Applications nos. 22224/21 and 20 others –
see appended list)
JUDGMENT
STRASBOURG
11 December 2025
This judgment is final but it may be subject to editorial revision.
In the case of Pokatilov and Others v. Russia,
The European Court of Human Rights (Third Section), sitting as a Committee composed of:
Úna Ní Raifeartaigh, President,
Mateja Đurović,
Vasilka Sancin, judges,
and Viktoriya Maradudina, Acting Deputy Section Registrar,
Having deliberated in private on 20 November 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 taken against them as organisers or participants of public assemblies, including with reference to COVID-related restrictions which were in force at the material time in the relevant Russian regions. 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). It further refers to Nemytov and Others v. Russia (nos. 1257/21 and 2 others, 27 May 2025) in so far as the application by the authorities of the COVID-19-related restrictions to assemblies are concerned.
9. In the leading cases of Nemytov and Others, cited above, 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.
11. In particular, the Court acknowledges that wide margin of appreciation is allowed to the authorities dealing with the COVID-19 health crisis (see Nemytov and Others, cited above, §§ 115-17, and Central Unitaria de Traballadores/as v. Spain, no. 49363/20, § 81, 17 October 2024). At the time of relevant events (see the appended table), the virus was still actively circulating and various COVID-19 related restrictions were still in place generally pursuing a pressing social need to protect individual and public health (see Nemytov and Others, cited above, § 139).
12. However, the Court notes that at the time of the events in the present cases (see the appended table) the regime of strict lockdowns in the relevant regions was no longer in force, several COVID-19-related restrictions had been altered or eased, indoors and outdoors sports, cultural, entertainment and other events could be held, albeit with some restrictions. Under these circumstances, no sufficient justification has been advanced as to why regional bans on all forms of protest were maintained, while leisure activities were allowed under certain conditions. Furthermore, the judicial decisions imposing sanctions on the applicants in the present cases lacked a meaningful proportionality analysis. Therefore, the fines and administrative detention orders by the domestic courts had been disproportionate to the aim pursued, and the domestic authorities overstepped the wide margin of appreciation afforded to them (see, mutatis mutandis, Nemytov and Others, cited above, §§ 136-51). Having regard to its case-law on the subject, the Court considers that in the instant cases the interferences with the applicants’ freedom of assembly were not “necessary in a democratic society”.
13. These complaints are therefore admissible and disclose a breach of Article 11 of the Convention.
OTHER ALLEGED VIOLATIONS UNDER WELL-ESTABLISHED CASE-LAW14. 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 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.
15. 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, 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); Glukhin v. Russia, no. 11519/20, §§ 64-91, 4 July 2023, concerning processing of applicants’ personal biometric data by using highly intrusive facial recognition technology in administrative-offence proceedings in order to identify, locate and arrest them; and Novikova and Others v. Russia, nos. 25501/07 and 4 others, §§ 106-225, 26 April 2016, relating to disproportionate measures taken by the authorities against participants of solo manifestations.
REMAINING COMPLAINTS16. Some applicants raised further additional complaints under various provisions of the Convention. In view of the findings in paragraphs 9-15 above, the Court considers that there is no need to deal separately with these remaining complaints.
APPLICATION OF ARTICLE 41 OF THE CONVENTION17. 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 raised by the applicants;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 Protocols 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 11 December 2025, pursuant to Rule 77 §§ 2 and 3 of the Rules of Court.
Viktoriya Maradudina Úna Ní Raifeartaigh
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]
22224/21
02/04/2021
Sergey Andreyevich POKATILOV
2021
Ivanets Vyacheslav Sergeyevich
Tbilisi, Georgia
Rally in support of A. Navalnyy
Irkutsk
23/01/2021
article 20.2 § 2 of CAO
administrative detention of 10 days
Irkutsk Regional Court
28/01/2021
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings
5,000
24703/21
16/04/2021
Nina Aleksandrovna BELYAYEVA
1989
Sivoldayev Ilya Vladimirovich
Voronezh
Event in support of S. Furgal
Voronezh
25/07/2020
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
fine of RUB 15,000
Voronezh Regional Court
21/10/2020
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings
4,000
33779/21
03/06/2021
Dmitriy Valeryevich IVANOV
1990
Glukhov Aleksey Vladimirovich
Novocheboksarsk
Rally in support of Navalnyy
Cheboksary
23/01/2021
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
fine of RUB 10,000
Supreme Court of the Chuvashia Republic
11/03/2021
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - arrest, escorting to a police station, detention on 23/01/2021 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
35148/21
25/06/2021
Vladislav Sergeyevich MAKAROV
1997
Memorial Human Rights Centre
Moscow
Rally in support of A. Navalnyy
Tula
23/01/2021
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
fine of RUB 10,000
Tula Regional Court
18/03/2021
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - arrest, escorting to a police station, detention on 23/01/2021 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
38189/21
16/07/2021
Oleg Valeryevich VLASOV
1987
Memorial Human Rights Centre
Moscow
Rally in support of A. Navalnyy
Moscow
31/01/2021
article 20.2 § 6.1 of CAO
fine of RUB 10,000
Moscow City Court
30/03/2021
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - arrest, escorting to a police station, detention on 31/01/2021 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
41146/21
28/07/2021
Aleksey Anatolyevich TUPITSIN
1969
Ivanets Vyacheslav Sergeyevich
Tbilisi, Georgia
Rally in support of A. Navalnyy
Ust-Kut
21/04/2021
article 20.2 § 2 of CAO
administrative detention of 9 days
Irkutsk Regional Court
17/05/2021
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings
5,000
45061/21
01/09/2021
Denis Viktorovich KUZNETSOV
1985
Pomazuyev Aleksandr Yevgenyevich
Vilnius
Rally in support of A. Navalnyy
Penza
23/01/2021
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
fine of RUB 10,000
Penza Regional Court
18/03/2021
3,500
45857/21
27/08/2021
Ilya Vladimirovich LESHUKOV
2003
Kychin Aleksey Mikhaylovich
Arkhangelsk
Rally in support of A. Navalnyy
Arkhangelsk
31/01/2021
Rally in support of A. Navalnyy
”
Arkhangelsk
21/04/2021
article 20.2 § 2 of CAO
article 20.2 § 8 of CAO
community works of 40 hours
fine of RUB 75,000
Arkhangelsk Regional Court
06/04/2021
Arkhangelsk Regional Court
10/06/2021
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - escorting to the police station for and after drawing up a record of administrative offence, from 27/04/2021 to 28/04/2021,
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
4,000
49611/21
17/09/2021
Anatoliy Mariyevich SVECHNIKOV
1972
Ruchko Irina Yuryevna
Yekaterinburg
Rally in support of A. Navalnyy
Yekaterinburg
23/01/2021
Rally in support of A. Navalnyy
Yekaterinburg
31/01/2021
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
20 hours of community work
20 hours of community work
Sverdlovsk Regional Court
28/07/2021
Sverdlovsk Regional Court
14/07/2021
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention – arrest, escorting to a police station, detention on 07/04/2021 at a police station for compiling an offence report in relation to the rally on 23/01/2021,
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings - final decisions on 28/07/2021 and 14/07/2021 by the Sverdlovsk Regional Court (respectively, as to the rally on 23/01/2021 and the event on 06/03/2021 mentioned below),
Art. 10 (1) - disproportionate measures against solo demonstrators -
(i) on 06/03/2021 the applicant participated in a series of solo demonstrations against political persecution; the courts classified it as a single group event and sentenced the applicant to 30 hours of community work (article 20.2 § 5 of CAO, final decision on 14/07/2021 by the Sverdlovsk Regional Court);
and
(ii) on 27/02/2022 the applicant placed B. Nemtsov’s photograph and a candle at a public venue, to commemorate his murder; the courts classified it as participation in an assembly and sentenced him to administrative detention of thirty days, referring to the breach of the regional COVID regulations banning all public events such as rallies (article 20.2 § 8 of CAO, final decision on 04/03/2022 by the Sverdlovsk Regional Court)
5,000
50886/21
01/10/2021
Dinar Ayratovich GIMAYEV
1982
Zhdanov Ivan Yuryevich
Vilnius
Rally in support of A. Navalnyy
Penza
23/01/2021
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
20 hours of community service
Penza Regional Court
08/04/2021
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - escorting to the police station on 23/01/2021 for compiling an offence report,
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings
4,000
51784/21
30/09/2021
Leonid Dmitriyevich YEGOROV
1996
Rally in support of A. Navalnyy
Samara
31/01/2021
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
administrative fine of RUB 10,000
Samara Regional Court
01/04/2021
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - arrest and detention from 31/01/2021 to 01/02/2021 for drawing up an administrative 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
52295/21
11/10/2021
Anastasiya Vladimirovna TSVETKOVA
1998
Martynova Tatyana Georgiyevna
Pskov
Rally in support of A. Navalnyy
Pskov
31/01/2021
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
fine of RUB 12,000
Pskov Regional Court
12/04/2021
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention – arrest, escorting to a police station and detention on 31/01/2021 for the sole purpose of drawing up an administrative 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
55132/21
17/10/2021
Anastasiya Olegovna MARYINA
1994
Memorial Human Rights Centre
Moscow
Rally in support of A. Navalnyy
Tambov
21/04/2021
article 20.2 § 6.1 of CAO,
and
article 20.6.1 § 1 of CAO
administrative detention for 3 days
and
fine of RUB 3,000
Tambov Regional Court
31/05/2021
and
Tambov Regional Court 01/07/2021
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - escorting to the police station on 18/05/2021 for compiling an offence report,
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 the proceedings,
Art. 8 (2) - restrictions on the right to private life of participants in public assemblies - use of facial recognition technology for the identification of the applicant as a participant of a rally and her subsequent conviction (raised on appeal).
5,000
58745/21
11/11/2021
Viktoriya Igorevna MATSNEVA
1987
Memorial Human Rights Centre
Moscow
Rally in support of A. Navalnyy
”
Moscow
31/01/2021
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
fine of RUB 10,000
Moscow City Court
13/05/2021
3,500
59686/21
13/11/2021
Nadezhda Sergeyevna BELOVA
1983
Memorial Human Rights Centre
Moscow
Rally in support of A. Navalnyy
Moscow
31/01/2021
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
fine of RUB 10,000
Moscow City Court
13/05/2021
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention – arrest, escorting to a police station, detention on 31/01/2021for the 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
5697/22
06/01/2022
Yevgeniya Viktorovna SURAVSKAYA
1989
Vlasov Aleksey Valeryevich
Tula
Rally in support of A. Navalnyy
Tula
31/01/2021
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
fine of RUB 15,000
Tula Regional Court
27/05/2021
(The applicant received a copy of the final judgment on 06/07/2021)
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - arrest, escorting to a police station, detention on 31/01/2021 for compiling an offence report,
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings
4,000
14014/22
26/02/2022
Yelizaveta Mikhaylovna NOVIKOVA
2000
Kuroptev Aleksey Mikhaylovich
Balashikha
Rally in support of A. Navalnyy
Arkhangelsk
21/04/2021
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
fine of RUB 10,000
Arkhangelsk Regional Court
31/08/2021
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings
4,000
14344/22
14/01/2022
Igor Vladimirovich KOROBKOV
1989
Aksenova Darya Dmitriyevna
Kolomna
Rally in support of A. Navalnyy
Moscow
31/01/2021
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
fine of RUB 10,000
Moscow City Court
15/07/2021
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings
4,000
21710/22
08/04/2022
Valeriy Valentinovich SHLYKOV
1963
Memorial Human Rights Centre
Moscow
Rally in support of A. Navalnyy
Ivanovo
21/04/2021
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
fine of RUB 12,000
Ivanovo Town Court
18/10/2021
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - arrest, escorting to and detention at the police station on 21/04/2021 for compiling an offence report,
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings
4,000
24310/22
12/04/2022
Miroslav Arkadyevich YAKOVLEV
1961
Vlasov Aleksey Valeryevich
Tula
Rally in support of A. Navalnyy
Tula
23/01/2021
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
fine of RUB 10,000
Tula Regional Court
07/09/2021
(The applicant received a copy of the final judgment of 07/09/2021 on 12/10/2021)
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - escorting to and detention at the police station for compiling an offence record between 3 p.m. and 7 p.m. on 23/01/2021,
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings
4,000
24618/22
06/08/2021
Dmitriy Yuryevich ANDREYEV
1986
Memorial Human Rights Centre
Moscow
Rally in support of A. Navalnyy
Penza
23/01/2021
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
20 hours of community work
Penza Regional Court
01/04/2021
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - arrest and detention from 3.20 p.m. to 8.30 p.m. on 23/01/2021 for the sole purpose of drawing up an administrative offence record
4,000
[1] Plus any tax that may be chargeable to the applicants.