FIFTH SECTION
CASE OF USKOV AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA
(Applications nos. 58703/21 and 19 others –
see appended list)
JUDGMENT
STRASBOURG
16 May 2024
This judgment is final but it may be subject to editorial revision.
In the case of Uskov and Others v. Russia,
The European Court of Human Rights (Fifth Section), sitting as a Committee composed of:
María Elósegui, President,
Mattias Guyomar,
Kateřina Šimáčková, judges,
and Viktoriya Maradudina, Acting Deputy Section Registrar,
Having deliberated in private on 18 April 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, and Pivkina and Others v. Russia (dec.), nos. 2134/23 and 6 others, § 46, 6 June 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, 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 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); and Glukhin v. Russia, no. 11519/20, §§ 64-91, 4 July 2023, concerning unjustified processing of the applicant’s personal biometric data by using highly intrusive facial recognition technology in the proceedings under the Code of Administrative Offences, in order to identify, locate and arrest the applicant.
REMAINING COMPLAINTS14. 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 paragraphs 10‑11 and 13 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 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 16 May 2024, pursuant to Rule 77 §§ 2 and 3 of the Rules of Court.
Viktoriya Maradudina María Elósegui
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]
58703/21
19/11/2021
Anton Vyacheslavovich USKOV
1977
Memorial Human Rights Centre
Moscow
Rally “Free Navalnyy”
Tambov
23/01/2021
article 20.2 § 6.1 of CAO
administrative detention for 10 days
Tambov Regional Court
19/05/2021
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 his subsequent conviction (raised on appeal)
5,000
58747/21
11/11/2021
Daniil Dmitriyevich MELNIK
1991
Memorial Human Rights Centre
Moscow
Rally “Free Navalnyy”
Moscow
31/01/2021
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
fine of RUB 19,000
Moscow City Court
11/05/2021
3,500
58762/21
10/11/2021
Yevgeniy Alekseyevich BORISOV
2004
Borisov Oleg Vyacheslavovich
Ulyanovsk
Rally “Free Navalnyy”
Ulyanovsk
31/01/2021
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
fine of RUB 5,000
Ulyanovsk Regional Court
03/06/2021
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty - escorting to a police station for the purpose of drawing up a record of administrative offence; detention in excess of 3 hours and without “exceptional circumstances”, from 1.40 p.m. to 6.10 p.m. on 31/01/2021
4,000
59029/21
11/11/2021
Sergey Anatolyevich STARODUBTSEV
1984
Memorial Human Rights Centre
Moscow
Rally “Free 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 deprivation of liberty - escorting to a police station for the purpose of drawing up a record of administrative offence; detention in excess of 3 hours and without “exceptional circumstances”, from 3.30 p.m. to 7.05 p.m. on 31/01/2021,
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings
4,000
59554/21
19/11/2021
Fedor Mikhaylovich YELISEYEV
2001
Memorial Human Rights Centre
Moscow
Rally “Free Navalnyy”
Moscow
02/02/2021
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
fine of RUB 10,000
Moscow City Court
19/05/2021
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty - escorting to a police station for the purpose of drawing up a record of administrative offence; detention in excess of 3 hours and without “exceptional circumstances”, from 11 a.m. to 9.00 p. m. on 02/02/2021; the applicant spent 2h30min in the police van,
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings
4,000
61203/21
25/11/2021
Ivan Viktorovich MEKHANOSHIN
1997
Trutnev Matvey Sergeyevich
Perm
Rally “Free Navalnyy”
Perm
31/01/2021
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
20 hours of community works
Perm Regional Court
11/06/2021
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty - escorting to a police station for the purpose of drawing up a record of administrative offence on 31/01/2021,
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings
4,000
450/22
02/12/2021
Gennadiy Dmitriyevich SITENKO
1953
Sannikova Yelena Nikitichna
Moscow
Rally “Free Navalnyy”
Moscow
31/01/2021
article 20.2 § 6.1 of CAO
fine of RUB 15,000
Moscow City Court
03/06/2021
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty - escorting to a police station for the purpose of drawing up a record of administrative offence; detention in excess of 3 hours and without “exceptional circumstances”, from 12.10 a.m. on 31/01/2021 to 00.45 a.m. on 01/02/2021; the applicant spent 3h30 in the police van,
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings
4,000
866/22
15/12/2021
Ilya Konstantinovich YERMAKOV
2002
Filatchev Oleg Vladimirovich
Moscow
Rally “Free Navalnyy”
Kaluga
21/04/2021
article 20.2.2. § 1 of CAO
fine of RUB 12,000
Kaluga Regional Court
16/06/2021
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty - escorting to a police station for the purpose of drawing up a record of administrative offence on 21/04/2021,
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings
4,000
1805/22
09/12/2021
Mikhail Andreyevich LITOMIN
1990
Balog Natalya Andreyevna
Krasnoyarsk
Rally “Free Navalnyy”
Krasnoyarsk
23/01/2021
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
fine of RUB 10,000
Krasnoyarsk Regional Court
10/06/2021
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty - escorting to a police station for the purpose of drawing up a record of administrative offence; detention in excess of 3 hours and without “exceptional circumstances”, from 4.15 p.m. to 8.35 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
44513/22
22/08/2022
Margarita Igorevna LEVASHOVA
1996
Kulikov Sergey Sergeyevich
Nizhniy Novgorod
Anti-war protest
Nizhniy Novgorod
06/03/2022
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
fine of RUB 10,000
Nizhniy Novgorod Regional Court
18/05/2022
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty -escorting to a police station for the purpose of drawing up a record of administrative offence; detention in excess of 3 hours and without “exceptional circumstances”, from 2.50 p.m. on 06/03/2022 to 5.00 p.m. on 07/03/2022, hearing in the applicant’s administrative-offence case,
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings
4,000
46152/22
08/09/2022
Natalya Igorevna NEVAR
1991
Kulikov Sergey Sergeyevich
Nizhniy Novgorod
Anti-war protest
Nizhniy Novgorod
06/03/2022
article 20.2 § 6.1 of CAO
administrative detention of 3 days
Nizhniy Novgorod Regional Court
18/05/2022
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty - escorting to a police station for the purpose of drawing up a record of administrative offence; detention in excess of 3 hours and without “exceptional circumstances”, from 3.00 p.m. on 06/03/2022 to 5.00 p.m. on 07/03/2022, hearing in the applicant’s administrative-offence case; the applicant spent 3 hours in the police van,
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings
5,000
46155/22
15/09/2022
Aygul Ayratovna GADELSHINA
2003
Mikhaylova Varvara Dmitriyevna
St Petersburg
Anti-war protest
Ufa
27/02/2022
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
fine of RUB 18,000
Supreme Court of the Bashkortostan Republic
16/05/2022
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty - escorting to a police station for the purpose of drawing up a record of administrative offence on 27/02/2022,
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings
4,000
46199/22
13/09/2022
Sergey Aleksandrovich AREFYEV
1989
Kulikov Sergey Sergeyevich
Nizhniy Novgorod
Anti-war protest
Nizhniy Novgorod
06/03/2022
article 20.2 § 6.1 of CAO
fine of RUB 10,000
Nizhniy Novgorod Regional Court
18/05/2022
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty escorting to a police station for the purpose of drawing up a record of administrative offence; detention in excess of 3 hours and without “exceptional circumstances”, from 3.00 p.m. on 06/03/2022 to 6.30 p.m. on 07/03/2022, hearing in the applicant’s administrative-offence case; the applicant spent 3 hours in the police van,
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings
4,000
46752/22
14/09/2022
Yekaterina Pavlovna BEZHENAR
1996
Gerasimova Yekaterina Viktorovna
St Petersburg
Anti-war rally
St Petersburg
27/02/2022
article 20.2 § 6.1 of CAO
fine of RUB 10,000
St Petersburg City Court
31/05/2022
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty - escorting to a police station for the purpose of drawing up a record of administrative offence; detention in excess of 3 hours and without “exceptional circumstances”, from 6.30 p.m. on 27/02/2022 to 9.00 a.m. on 28/02/2022,
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings
4,000
46754/22
14/09/2022
Yelizaveta Vasilyevna SPIRIDONOVA
2000
Gerasimova Yekaterina Viktorovna
St Petersburg
Anti-war rally
St Petersburg
27/02/2022
article 20.2 § 6.1 of CAO
fine of RUB 10,000
St Petersburg City Court
31/05/2022
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty - escorting to a police station for the purpose of drawing up a record of administrative offence; detention in excess of 3 hours and without “exceptional circumstances”, from 7.15 p.m. on 27/02/2022 to 8.00 a.m. on 28/02/2021,
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings
4,000
48290/22
17/09/2022
Mikhail Gennadyevich STUPKO
1987
Lapuzin Aleksey Sergeyevich
Samara
Anti-war protest
Samara
27/02/2022
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
fine of RUB 10,000
Samara Regional Court
19/05/2022
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty - escorting to a police station for the purpose of drawing up a record of administrative offence on 27/02/2022,
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings
4,000
48306/22
15/09/2022
Yekaterina Andreyevna TKACHENKO
1995
Podolskiy Sergey Viktorovich
St Petersburg
Anti-war protest
St Petersburg
02/04/2022
article 20.2 § 6.1 of CAO
fine of RUB 12,000
St Petersburg City Court
31/05/2022
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty - escorting to a police station for the purpose of drawing up a record of administrative offence; detention in excess of 3 hours and without “exceptional circumstances”, from 2.15 p.m. on 02/04/2022 to 03/04/2022, hearing in the applicant’s administrative-offence case,
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings
4,000
48502/22
30/09/2022
Anastasiya Konstantinovna GORODNITSINA
2002
Lapuzin Aleksey Sergeyevich
Samara
Anti-war rally
Samara
27/02/2022
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
fine of RUB 10,000
Samara Regional Court
02/06/2022
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty - escorting to a police station for the purpose of drawing up a record of administrative offence; detention in excess of 3 hours and without “exceptional circumstances”, from 3.00 p.m. to 8.00 p.m. on 27/02/2022,
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings
4,000
48535/22
01/10/2022
Sergey Sergeyevich TYURIN
1987
Lapuzin Aleksey Sergeyevich
Samara
Anti-war rally
Samara
06/03/2022
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
fine of RUB 20,000
Samara Regional Court
02/06/2022
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty - escorting to a police station for the purpose of drawing up a record of administrative offence, from 2.25 p.m. to an unspecified time, at least 3.25 p.m., on 06/03/2022,
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings
4,000
50599/22
27/09/2022
Marina Sergeyevna VOLNUSHKINA
1963
Sozonov Ruslan Vladimirovich
Nizhniy Novgorod
Anti-war rally
Nizhniy Novgorod
24/02/2022
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
fine of RUB 10,000
Nizhniy Novgorod Regional Court
01/06/2022
3,500
[1] Plus any tax that may be chargeable to the applicants.