THIRD SECTION
CASE OF STRUNIN AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA
(Applications nos. 39000/18 and 13 others –
see appended list)
JUDGMENT
STRASBOURG
4 July 2024
This judgment is final but it may be subject to editorial revision.
In the case of Strunin and Others v. Russia,
The European Court of Human Rights (Third Section), sitting as a Committee composed of:
Peeter Roosma, President,
Ioannis Ktistakis,
Andreas Zünd, judges,
and Viktoriya Maradudina, Acting Deputy Section Registrar,
Having deliberated in private on 30 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 lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of the prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings. They also raised other complaints under the provisions of the Convention and its Protocols.
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 6 § 1 of the Convention7. The applicants complained principally of the lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of the prosecuting party in administrative‑offence proceedings. They relied, expressly or in substance, on Article 6 § 1 of the Convention.
8. In the leading case of Karelin v. Russia, no. 926/08, 20 September 2016, the Court already found a violation in respect of issues similar to those in the present case.
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.
10. These complaints are therefore admissible and disclose a breach of Article 6 § 1 of the Convention.
OTHER ALLEGED VIOLATIONS UNDER WELL-ESTABLISHED CASE-LAW11. The 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. Having examined all the material before it, the Court concludes that they also disclose violations of the Convention and its Protocols in the light of its findings in 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; Bouton v. France, no. 22636/19, §§ 42-68, 13 October 2022 and Tatár and Fáber v. Hungary, nos. 26005/08 and 26160/08, §§ 36-42, 12 June 2012, concerning restrictions on public performance as an avenue for political expression; Yartsev v. Russia, no. 16683/17, §§ 28-38, 20 July 2021, concerning the administrative conviction for waving banners with slogans that did not correspond to the declared aims of the public assembly; 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 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 Article 6
of the Convention concerning other aspects of fairness of the administrative‑offence proceedings. In view of the findings in paragraph 10 above, the Court considers that there is no need to deal separately with these remaining complaints.
APPLICATION OF ARTICLE 4 APPLICATION OF ARTICLE 41 OF THE CONVENTION13. Regard being had to the documents in its possession and to its case‑law (see, in particular, Kuratov and Others v. Russia [Committee], nos. 24377/15 and 2 others, 22 October 2019 and, mutatis mutandis, Navalnyy and Others v. Russia [Committee], nos. 25809/17 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 facts that took place before 16 September 2022; Declares the complaints under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention concerning the absence of the prosecuting party from the administrative‑offence proceedings 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 of the applicants under Article 6 of the Convention;Holds that these applications disclose a breach of Article 6 § 1 of the Convention concerning the lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of the prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings;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 4 July 2024, pursuant to Rule 77 §§ 2 and 3 of the Rules of Court.
Viktoriya Maradudina Peeter Roosma
Acting Deputy Registrar President
APPENDIX
List of applications raising complaints under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention
(lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of the prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings)
No.
Application no.
Date of introduction
Applicant’s name
Year of birth
Representative’s name and location
Penalty
Date of final domestic decision
Name of court
Other complaints under
well-established case-law
Amount awarded for pecuniary and non‑pecuniary damage and costs and expenses per applicant
(in euros)[1]
39000/18
01/08/2018
Anton Viktorovich STRUNIN
1982
fine of RUB 1,000
12/03/2018 Oktyabrskiy District Court of Penza
Art. 10 (1) - conviction for the display of slogans/banners/other symbols by participants in public events - In three separate sets of administrative offence proceedings the applicant was fined RUB 1,000 for distributing leaflets about forthcoming anti-government manifestations, Article 5.12 § 1of the CAO, final decisions: Zheleznodorozhniy District Court of Penza 02/02/2018, Oktyabrskiy District Court of Penza 12/03/2018, Leninskiy District Court of Penza 15/03/2019.
4,000
13606/21
12/02/2021
Kristina Salakhovna ALTSHULER
1989
Aleksey Vladimirovich
Bushmakov
Yekaterinburg
fine of RUB 20,000
03/11/2020 Sverdlovsk Regional Court
Art. 10 (1) - conviction for making calls to participate in public events – calls to participate in manifestation on 01/08/2020 in Yekaterinburg, Article 20.2 § 2 of CAO, fine of RUB 20,000, final decision 03/11/2020, Sverdlovsk Regional Court.
4,000
20524/21
29/03/2021
Sergey Vladimirovich TOLMACHEV
1979
Andrey
Gennadyevich
Lepekhin
Chelyabinsk
fine of RUB 25,000
30/09/2020 Chelyabinsk Regional Court
Art. 10 (1) - conviction for making calls to participate in public events – calls to participate in a manifestation in Chelyabinsk on 25/07/2020, Article 20.2 § 2 of CAO, fine of RUB 25,000, final decision 30/09/2020, Chelyabinsk Regional Court.
4,000
24232/21
19/04/2021
Andrey Sergeyevich PROKUDIN
1990
Aleksandr Yevgenyevich
Pomazuyev
Vilnius
detention for 10 days,
detention for 4 days,
fine of RUB 160,000
28/01/2021,
Tver Regional Court
23/04/2021,
Tver Regional Court
30/06/2021
Tver Regional Court
Art. 10 (1) - conviction for making calls to participate in public events – calls to participate in a rally to support A. Navalnyy on 23/01/2021 in Tver, Article 20.2 § 2 CAO, detention for 10 days, final decision Tver Regional Court, 28/01/2021,
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention –
(1) escorting to the police station on 23/01/2021 for compiling an offence report, detention beyond the three-hour statutory period (complaint lodged on 19/04/2021);
(2) escorting to the police station on 19/04/2021 for compiling an offence report, detention beyond the three-hour statutory period (complaint lodged on 15/10/2021).
5,000
29002/21
11/05/2021
Pavel Valeryevich CHERNUKHIN
1978
Vyacheslav Sergeyevich
Ivanets
Tbilisi, Georgia
detention for 10 days
28/04/2021
Irkutsk Regional Court
Art. 10 (1) - conviction for making calls to participate in public events – calls to participate in a rally in support of A. Navalnyy on 21/04/2021 in Irkutsk, Article 20.2. § 2 of CAO, detention of 10 days, 28/04/2021 Irkutsk Regional Court.
5,000
41318/21
05/08/2021
Anton Maksimovich TALYKOV
1998
Aleksandr Yevgenyevich
Pomazuyev
Vilnius
detention for 10 days
09/02/2021
Kurgan Regional Court (two sets of the proceedings with the same outcome and on the same day)
Art. 10 (1) - conviction for making calls to participate in public events - two convictions for calls to take part in rallies to support A. Navalnyy on 23/01/2021 and 31/01/2021 in Kurgan, Article 20.2 § 2 of CAO, detention for 10 days, final decisions on 09/02/2021 Kurgan Regional Court (in both sets of proceedings).
5,000
45365/21
24/08/2021
Olga Yuryevna KOMLEVA
1979
Memorial Human Rights Centre
Moscow
fine of RUB 30,000,
fine of RUB 25,000,
fine of RUB 150, 000
24/02/2021 Supreme Court of the Bashkortostan Republic
24/02/2021 Supreme Court of the Bashkortostan Republic
17/05/2021 Supreme Court of the Bashkortostan Republic
Art. 10 (1) - various restrictions on the right to freedom of expression - disproportionate interference with her freedom of expression on account of her convictions under Art. 20.2 § 2 CAO for publishing (1) on 26/01/2021 on her Facebook page a call to participate in a rally "Free Navalnyy" on 31/01/2021 in Ufa, final decision 24/02/2021 by the Supreme Court of the Bashkortostan Republic; (2) on 21/01/2021 on her Facebook page a call to participate in a rally "Free Navalnyy" on 23/01/2021 in Ufa, final decision 24/02/2021 by the Supreme Court of Bashkortostan Republic
6,000
60774/21
07/12/2021
Vladislav Andreyevich OSIPOV
1996
Yelena Yuryevna
Pershakova
Moscow
detention for 5 days
09/06/2021 Voronezh Regional Court
Art. 10 (1) - various restrictions on the right to freedom of expression – calls to participate in a rally to support A. Navalnyy on 21/04/2021 in Voronezh, Article 20.2 § 2 of CAO, detention for 5 days, final decision by the Voronezh Regional Court on 09/06/2021,
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
3655/22
30/12/2021
Olga Vladimirovna BELOVA
1974
Ivan Yuryevich
Zhdanov
Vilnius
fine of RUB 20,000
06/07/2021
Omsk Regional Court
Art. 10 (1) - conviction for making calls to participate in public events – calls to participate in a rally to support A. Navalnyy on 21/04/2021 in Omsk, Article 20.2 § 2 of CAO, fine of RUB 20,000, final decision Omsk Regional Court 06/07/2021
4,000
7996/22
14/01/2022
Roman Aleksandrovich PISHCHALNIKOV
1990
Popkov Aleksandr Vasilyevich
Sochi
detention for 10 days
18/08/2021 Krasnodar Regional Court
Art. 10 (1) - conviction for making calls to participate in public events - rally to support A. Navalnyy on 21/04/2021 in Sochi, Article 20.2 § 2 of CAO, detention for 10 days, final decision - Krasnodar Regional Court, 18/08/2021,
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
11784/22
31/01/2022
Dmitriy Aleksandrovich SPIRIN
1975
Yeva Viktorovna
Levenberg
Moscow
fine of RUB 25,000
25/10/2021, Moscow City Court
Art. 10 (1) - various restrictions on the right to freedom of expression – calls to participate in a rally to support A. Navalnyy on 23/01/2021 in Moscow, Article 20.2 § 2 CAO, fine of RUB 25,000, final decision 25/10/2021, Moscow City Court
4,000
35314/22
01/07/2022
Aleksandr Yuryevich LEBEDEV
1965
Natalya Andreyevna
Baranova
Moscow
fine of RUB 20,000
24/01/2022
Saratov Regional Court
Art. 10 (1) - conviction for making calls to participate in public events – calls to participate in a manifestation in support of local business on 22/10/2021 in Saratov, Article 20.2 § 2 of CAO, fine of RUB 20,000, final decision Saratov Regional Court 24/01/2022.
4,000
54423/22
08/11/2022
Ruslan Aleksandrovich BOROVSKIY
1983
Damir Ravilevich
Gaynutdinov
Kazan
detention for 10 days
08/07/2022
Moscow City Court
Art. 10 (1) - conviction for the display of slogans/banners/other symbols by participants in public events - public display of symbols of Navalnyy’s organisation, Article 20.3 § 1 of CAO, detention for 10 days, final decision 08/07/2022 by the Moscow City Court,
Prot. 7 Art. 2 - delayed review of conviction by a higher tribunal - the applicant started serving his 10 days’ sentence right after the judgment of the first-instance court and even before his appeal was examined by the Moscow City Court.
5,000
56631/22
27/11/2022
Marat Viktorovich NIKITIN
1975
Stanislav Aleksandrovich
Seleznev
Samara
fine of RUB 1,000
04/08/2022, the Supreme Court of the Chuvashia Republic
Art. 10 (1) - various restrictions on the right to freedom of expression - On 21/08/2020 the applicant posted a photo of A. Navalnyy with a FBK sign on it, conviction to a fine of RUB 1,000, Article 20.3 § 1 of the CAO, final decision by the Supreme Court of the Chuvashia Republic on 04/08/2022
4,000
[1] Plus any tax that may be chargeable to the applicants.