SECOND SECTION
CASE OF YELYSHEV AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA
(Applications nos. 32180/21 and 20 others –
see appended list)
JUDGMENT
STRASBOURG
14 March 2024
This judgment is final but it may be subject to editorial revision.
In the case of Yelyshev and Others v. Russia,
The European Court of Human Rights (Second Section), sitting as a Committee composed of:
Lorraine Schembri Orland, President,
Frédéric Krenc,
Davor Derenčinović, judges,
and Viktoriya Maradudina, Acting Deputy Section Registrar,
Having deliberated in private on 15 February 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.
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. 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.
13. 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 Lashmankin and Others v. Russia, nos. 57818/09 and 14 others, § 489, 7 February 2017, 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); mutatis mutandis, Sürek v.Turkey (no. 1) [GC], no. 26682/95, § 58, ECHR 1999-IV, and Mariya Alekhina and Others v. Russia, no. 38004/12, §§ 197-201, 17 July 2018, concerning administrative conviction for discreditation of the Russian Army in the context of anti-war protest actions; Martynyuk v. Russia, no. 13764/15, §§ 38-42, 8 October 2019, and Tsvetkova and Others, cited above, §§ 178‑88, relating to the lack of suspensive effect of an appeal against the sentence of administrative detention.
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 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 the 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 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 14 March 2024, pursuant to Rule 77 §§ 2 and 3 of the Rules of Court.
Viktoriya Maradudina Lorraine Schembri Orland
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 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
(in euros)[1]
32180/21
11/06/2021
Eldar Erikovich YELYSHEV
1997
Memorial Human Rights Centre
Moscow
Rally in support of Navalnyy
Ufa
31/01/2021
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
fine of RUB 14,000
Supreme Court of the Bashkortostan Republic
24/03/2021
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 1.25 p.m. to 5.50 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 - final decision - Supreme Court of the Bashkortostan Republic, 24/03/2021
4,000
38692/21
15/07/2021
Pavel Robertovich PUSHNOV
1968
Memorial Human Rights Centre
Moscow
Rally in support of Navalnyy
Moscow
31/01/2021
article 20.2 § 6.1 of CAO
fine of RUB 15,000
Moscow City Court
17/05/2021
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 1.05 p.m. on 31/01/2021 to 1.00 a.m. on 01/02/2021,
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings - final decision: Moscow City Court, 17/05/2021
4,000
38915/21
12/07/2021
Sergey Ivanovich GAMBARYAN
2000
Aksenova Darya Dmitriyevna
Kolomna
Rally in support of Navalnyy
Moscow
31/01/2021
article 20.2 § 8 of CAO
administrative detention of
15 days
Moscow City Court
09/02/2021
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 5.30 p.m. on 31/01/2021 to 02/02/2021, 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 - final decision: Moscow City Court, 09/02/2021
5,000
39335/21
22/07/2021
Valeriy Vitalyevich PEREPELKIN
1985
Memorial Human Rights Centre
Moscow
Rally in support of Navalnyy
Moscow
31/01/2021
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
fine of RUB 10,000
Moscow City Court
12/04/2021
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 1.30 p.m. to 11.30 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 - final decision: Moscow City Court, 12/04/2021.
4,000
39868/21
29/07/2021
Revaz Davidovich GABELAYA
1993
Pershakova Yelena Yuryevna
Moscow
Rally in support of Navalnyy
Moscow
31/01/2021
article 20.2 § 6.1 of CAO
administrative detention of
15 days
Moscow City Court
04/02/2021
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 12.45 a.m. on 31/01/2021 to 1.11 a.m. on 01/02/2021,
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings - final decision: Moscow City Court, 04/02/2021,
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
41309/21
30/07/2021
Adel Radikovna GORSHENINA
2000
Bayeva Aleksandra Nikolayevna
Moscow
Rally in support of Navalnyy
Ufa
31/01/2021
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
fine of RUB 10,000
Supreme Court of the Bashkortostan Republic
29/03/2021
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 12.25 p.m. to 4.00 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 - final decision: Supreme Court of the Bashkortostan Republic, 29/03/2021
4,000
46000/21
01/09/2021
Kirill Vladimirovich PAVLOV
1971
Markin Konstantin Aleksandrovich
Velikiy Novgorod
Rally in support of Navalnyy
Velikiy Novgorod
23/01/2021
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
community work of
20 hours
Novgorod Regional Court
04/03/2021
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings - final decision: Novgorod Regional Court, 04/03/2021
3,500
47233/21
16/09/2021
Nikita Olegovich SHIPUGIN
2000
Memorial Human Rights Centre
Moscow
Rally in support of Navalnyy
Barnaul
31/01/2021
article 20.2 § 6.1 of CAO
fine of RUB 10,000
Altay Regional Court
19/03/2021
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 2.05 p.m. to 7.45 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 - final decision: Altay Regional Court, 19/03/2021
4,000
47241/21
10/09/2021
Kirill Andreyevich SLOTIN
1998
Mezak Ernest Aleksandrovich
Saint-Barthélemy-d’Anjou
Rally in support of Navalnyy
Syktyvkar
31/01/2021
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
fine of RUB 10,000
Supreme Court of the Komi Republic
10/03/2021
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings - final decision: Supreme Court of the Komi Republic, 10/03/2021
3,500
47243/21
10/09/2021
Aleksey Vladimirovich MALOV
1978
Martynova Tatyana Georgiyevna
Pskov
Rally in support of Navalnyy
Pskov
23/01/2021
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
fine of RUB 10,000
Pskov Regional Court
22/03/2021
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty: escorting to the police station for the purpose of drawing up a record of administrative offence, on 23/01/2021, while the record was only drawn up on 26/01/2021,
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings - final decision: Pskov Regional Court, 22/03/2021
4,000
47245/21
10/09/2021
Nikolay Aleksandrovich KUZMIN
1980
Martynova Tatyana Georgiyevna
Pskov
Rally in support of Navalnyy
Pskov
23/01/2021
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
fine of RUB 15,000
Pskov Regional Court
22/03/2021
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty: escorting to a police station for the purpose of drawing up a record of administrative offence, as o 02.00 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 - final decisions: Pskov Regional Court, 22/03/2021 and 20/06/2022,
Art. 10 (1) – various restrictions of the liberty of expression - On 15/03/2015 the applicant published a post on his VK social network wall containing a video of Maria Ovsannikova’s public anti-war protest on TV and commented as follows: "Very brave woman". On 17/04/2022 the applicant was arrested and escorted to the police station where he was charged with and then convicted and sentenced to an administrative fine of RUB 30,000 for public actions aimed at discrediting the use of the Russian Armed Forces, under Art. 20.3.3 § 1 of the CAO; final decision: 20/06/2022, Pskov Regional Court
5,000
48039/21
09/09/2021
Igor Olegovich GOLOVIN
1999
Bochilo Anna Yevgenyevna
Barnaul
Rally in support of Navalnyy
Kursk
23/01/2021
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
fine of RUB 15,000
Kursk Regional Court
02/04/2021
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings - final decision: Kursk Regional Court, 02/04/2021.
3,500
50102/21
21/09/2021
Yekaterina Anatolyevna NAGORNAYA
2002
Aksenova Darya Dmitriyevna
Kolomna
Rally in support of Navalnyy
Moscow
31/01/2021
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
fine of RUB 15,000
Moscow City Court
22/03/2021
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 - final decision: Moscow City Court, 22/03/2021
4,000
54914/21
14/10/2021
Solomon Semenovich SHLOSMAN
1991
Aksenova Darya Dmitriyevna
Kolomna
Rally in support of Navalnyy
Moscow
31/01/2021
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
fine of RUB 10,000
Moscow City Court
20/04/2021
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 - final decision: Moscow City Court, 20/04/2021
4,000
54926/21
14/10/2021
Dmitriy Aleksandrovich YURYEV
1995
Aksenova Darya Dmitriyevna
Kolomna
Rally in support of Navalnyy
Moscow
31/01/2021
article 20.2 § 6.1 of CAO
fine of RUB 10,000
Moscow City Court
21/07/2021
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 12.15 p.m. to 9.30 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 - final decision: Moscow City Court, 21/07/2021
4,000
57075/21
26/10/2021
Elza Rafilevna MAYER
1995
Baranova Natalya Andreyevna
Moscow
Rally in support of Navalnyy
Moscow
23/01/2021
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
fine of RUB 20,000
Moscow City Court
26/04/2021
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 4.00 p.m. to 11.00 p.m. on 23/01/2021, the applicant spent 2 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 - final decision: Moscow City Court, 26/04/2021
4,000
57677/21
26/10/2021
Aleksey Sergeyevich TABACHINSKIY
1993
Glukhov Aleksey Vladimirovich
Novocheboksarsk
Rally in support of Navalnyy
Samara
23/01/2021
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
fine of RUB 10,000
Samara Regional Court
29/04/2021
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 3.50 p.m. to 9.55 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 - final decision: Samara Regional Court, 29/04/2021
4,000
58021/21
27/10/2021
Yelena Pavlovna SAMOKHVALOVA
1977
Bochilo Anna Yevgenyevna
Barnaul
Rally in support of Navalnyy
Moscow
23/01/2021
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
fine of RUB 10,000
Moscow City Court
11/05/2021
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 7.30 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 - final decision: Moscow City Court, 11/05/2021
4,000
58023/21
27/10/2021
Natalya Yevgenyevna KOSHURNIKOVA
1969
Bochilo Anna Yevgenyevna
Barnaul
Rally in support of Navalnyy
Moscow
31/01/2021
article 20.2 § 6.1 of CAO
community works of
55 hours
Moscow City Court
21/06/2021
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 2.15 p.m. on 31/01/2021 to 5.10 a.m. on 01/02/2021,
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings - final decision: Moscow City Court, 21/06/2021
4,000
58677/21
12/11/2021
Nataliya Dmitriyevna RUSAKOVICH
1998
Glukhov Aleksey Vladimirovich
Novocheboksarsk
Rally in support of Navalnyy
Samara
23/01/2021
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
fine of RUB 10,000
Samara Regional 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 2.30 p.m. to 8.00 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 - final decision: Samara Regional Court, 13/05/2021
4,000
59239/21
12/11/2021
Ilya Romanovich LITVINTSEV
1995
Aksenova Darya Dmitriyevna
Kolomna
Rally in support of Navalnyy
Moscow
31/01/2021
article 20.2 § 6.1 of CAO
administrative detention of
10 days
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 2.10 p.m. on 31/01/2021 to 1.15 p.m. on 01/02/2021, 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 - final decision: Moscow City Court, 13/05/2021
5,000
[1] Plus any tax that may be chargeable to the applicants.