FOURTH SECTION
CASE OF YENCH AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA
(Applications nos. 6494/20 and 22 others –
see appended list)
JUDGMENT
STRASBOURG
13 April 2023
This judgment is final but it may be subject to editorial revision.
In the case of Yench and Others v. Russia,
The European Court of Human Rights (Fourth Section), sitting as a Committee composed of:
Faris Vehabović, President,
Armen Harutyunyan,
Anja Seibert-Fohr, judges,
and Viktoriya Maradudina, Acting Deputy Section Registrar,
Having deliberated in private on 23 March 2023,
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 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, nos. 40792/10 and 2 others, §§ 68-73, 13 July 2021).
ALLEGED VIOLATION OF ARTICLE 11 OF THE CONVENTION7. The applicants complained principally of disproportionate measures taken against them as participants of public assemblies, namely the dispersal of these assemblies, as well as their arrest followed by their conviction for administrative offence. 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, and having taken into account the issue of compliance with the six-month time-limit under Article 35 § 1 of the Convention (see Saakashvili v. Georgia (dec.), nos. 6232/20 and 22394/20, §§ 46-59, 1 March 2022, in which the Court addressed the COVID-related extension of the period in question), 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. The 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 well‑established case-law (see Butkevich v. Russia, no. 5865/07, §§ 63-65, 13 February 2018; Kalyapin v. Russia, no. 6095/09, § 76, 23 July 2019; and Korneyeva v. Russia, no. 72051/17, §§ 34-36, 8 October 2019, concerning different aspects of unlawful deprivation of liberty of the organisers or participants of public events; and Karelin v. Russia, no. 926/08, 20 September 2016, concerning examination of criminal cases in the absence of a prosecuting party in the judicial proceedings governed by the Federal Code of Administrative Offences (CAO)).
REMAINING COMPLAINTS13. Some applicants further raised additional complaints under Articles 5 and 6 of the Convention concerning other aspects of their detention and fairness of the administrative-offence proceedings. In view of the above findings, the Court considers that there is no need to deal separately with these remaining complaints.
14. Lastly, some applicants also raised other complaints under various Articles of the Convention.
15. The Court has examined these complaints and considers that, in the light of all the material in its possession and in so far as the matters complained of are within its competence, these complaints either do not meet the admissibility criteria set out in Articles 34 and 35 of the Convention or do not disclose any appearance of a violation of the rights and freedoms enshrined in the Convention or the Protocols thereto.
16. It follows that this part of the applications must be rejected in accordance with Article 35 § 4 of the Convention.
APPLICATION OF ARTICLE 41 OF THE CONVENTION17. Article 41 of the Convention provides:
“If the Court finds that there has been a violation of the Convention or the Protocols thereto, and if the internal law of the High Contracting Party concerned allows only partial reparation to be made, the Court shall, if necessary, afford just satisfaction to the injured party.”
18. 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 and dismisses the remainder of the applicants’ claims for just satisfaction.
FOR THESE REASONS, THE COURT, UNANIMOUSLY,
Decides to join the applications;Holds that it has jurisdiction to deal with the applicants’ complaints as they relate to facts that took place before 16 September 2022;Declares the complaints concerning the dispersal of the public assembly and the other complaints under well-established case-law of the Court, as set out in the appended table, admissible; decides that there is no need to examine separately the remaining complaints under Articles 5 and 6 of the Convention about other aspects of their detention and the fairness of the administrative offence proceedings; and declares the remainder of the applications inadmissible;Holds that these complaints disclose a breach of Article 11 of the Convention concerning the dispersal of the public assembly;Holds that there has been a violation of the Convention as regards the other complaints raised under 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;
Dismisses the reminder of the applicants’ claims for just satisfaction.Done in English, and notified in writing on 13 April 2023, pursuant to Rule 77 §§ 2 and 3 of the Rules of Court.
Viktoriya Maradudina Faris Vehabović
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 charges
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]
6494/20
17/01/2020
Roman Sergeyevich YENCH
1979
Lawyers of former Memorial Human Rights Centre
Moscow
Manifestation for fair elections to Mosgorduma
Moscow
27/07/2019
Article 20.2 § 6.1 of CAO
fine of RUB 15,000
Moscow City Court
10/10/2019
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty, including unrecorded detention and detention without a judicial order and any other legal basis - arrest, escorting to a police station, detention between 27/07/2019 and 29/07/2019 as administrative suspect: no evidence/ assessment of “exceptional circumstances” under the CAO, and after the administrative offence record had been compiled on 27/07/2019;
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings
4,000
6872/20
28/01/2020
Vladimir Aleksandrovich GELMEL
1996
Lawyers of the former Memorial Human Rights Centre
Moscow
Manifestation for fair elections to Mosgorduma
Moscow
27/07/2019
Article 20.2 § 6.1 of CAO
10 days’ administrative arrest
Moscow City Court
02/08/2019
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty, including unrecorded detention and detention without a judicial order and any other legal basis - arrest, escorting to a police station, detention between 27/07/2019 and 29/07/2019: no evidence/ assessment of “exceptional circumstances” under the CAO;
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings
5,000
7331/20
23/01/2020
Aleksey Nikolayevich KORNILOV
1990
Lawyers of former Memorial Human Rights Centre
Moscow
Manifestation for fair elections to Mosgorduma
Moscow
27/07/2019
Article 20.2 § 6.1, of CAO
fine of RUB 20,000
Moscow City Court
10/09/2019
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty, including unrecorded detention and detention without a judicial order and any other legal basis - arrest, escorting to a police station, detention between 27/07/2019 and 29/07/2019 as administrative suspect: no evidence/ assessment of “exceptional circumstances” under the CAO;
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings
4,000
8342/20
03/02/2020
Dmitriy Vladimirovich POLEVOV
1993
Lawyers of the former Memorial Human Rights Centre
Moscow
Manifestation for fair elections to Mosgorduma
Moscow
27/07/2019
Article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
fine of RUB 10,000
Moscow City Court
12/09/2019
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty, including unrecorded detention and detention without a judicial order and any other legal basis - arrest and escorting to a police office on 27/07/2019 for the sole purpose of drawing up a record of administrative offence; detention in excess of 3 hours (administrative offence record was compiled on 31/07/2019);
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings
4,000
8479/20
03/02/2020
Yuriy Vladimirovich POLYAKOV
1972
Lawyers of former Memorial Human Rights Centre
Moscow
Manifestation for fair elections to Mosgorduma
Moscow
27/07/2019
Article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
fine of RUB 10,000
Moscow City Court
26/09/2019
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings
3,500
8487/20
03/02/2020
Vasiliy Aleksandrovich YEREMEYEV
1983
Lawyers of former Memorial Human Rights Centre
Moscow
Manifestation for fair elections to Mosgorduma
Moscow
27/07/2019
Article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
fine of RUB 10,000
Moscow City Court
24/09/2019
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty, including unrecorded detention and detention without a judicial order and any other legal basis - arrest and detention on 27/07/2019 in excess of 3 hours 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
8491/20
03/02/2020
Maksim Anatolyevich BAZHENOV
1986
Lawyers of former Memorial Human Rights Centre
Moscow
Manifestation for fair elections to Mosgorduma
Moscow
27/07/2019
Article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
fine of RUB 10,000
Moscow City Court
06/09/2019
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty, including unrecorded detention and detention without a judicial order and any other legal basis - arrest, escorting to a police station, detention on 27/07/2019 for the sole purpose of drawing up a record of an administrative offence (the record was compiled on 31/07/2019);
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings
4,000
10151/20
13/02/2020
Yevgeniy Viktorovich SVAROVSKIY
1971
Savelyev Anton Alekseyevich
Domodedovo
Manifestation for fair elections to Mosgorduma
Moscow
27/07/2019
Article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
fine of RUB 10,000
Moscow City Court
20/09/2019
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings
3,500
10389/20
11/02/2020
Danila Aleksandrovich PAKHOMOV
2000
Sergeyeva Irina Vadimovna
Moscow
Manifestation for fair elections to Mosgorduma
Moscow
27/07/2019
Article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
fine of RUB 10,000
Moscow City Court
04/09/2019
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty, including unrecorded detention and detention without a judicial order and any other legal basis - arrest, escorting to a police station, detention on 27/07/2019 in excess of three hours, for "putting an end to the administrative offence" (the administrative offence record was compiled on 31/07/2019);
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings
4,000
10539/20
17/02/2020
Igor Vladislavovich ABRAZHEVICH
1998
Lawyers of former Memorial Human Rights Centre
Moscow
Manifestation for fair elections to Mosgorduma
Moscow
27/07/2019
Article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
fine of RUB 10,000
Moscow City Court
16/10/2019
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty, including unrecorded detention and detention without a judicial order and any other legal basis - arrest and escorting to a police station, detention on 27/07/2019, in excess of three hours for the sole purpose of drawing up the administrative offence record, delayed escorting to the police station;
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings
4,000
10606/20
17/02/2020
Konstantin Anatolyevich BOYKOV
1968
Lawyers of former Memorial Human Rights Centre
Moscow
Manifestation for fair elections to Mosgorduma
Moscow
27/07/2019
Article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
fine of RUB 20,000
Moscow City Court
30/08/2019
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty, including unrecorded detention and detention without a judicial order and any other legal basis - arrest, escorting to a police station, detention on 27/07/2019, in excess of three hours, 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
13339/20
03/03/2020
Vladimir Aleksandrovich GLADYSHEV
1947
Lawyers of former Memorial Human Rights Centre
Moscow
Manifestation in support of I. Golunov
Moscow
12/06/2019
Manifestation for fair elections to Mosgorduma
Moscow
27/07/2019
Article 20.2 § 8 of CAO
Article 20.2 § 8 of CAO
fine of RUB 150,000
10 days’ administrative arrest
Moscow City Court
16/09/2019
Moscow City Court
20/09/2019
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty, including unrecorded detention and detention without a judicial order and any other legal basis - arrest, detention, escorting to a police station (i) on 12/06/2019 in excess of 3 hours for the sole purpose of drawing up an administrative record, and (ii) between 27/07/2019 and 29/07/2019 as administrative suspect: no evidence/assessment of any "exceptional circumstances" under the CAO, after the arrest record had been compiled on 27/07/2019;
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in both sets of administrative-offence proceedings
5,000
13343/20
03/03/2020
Viktor Viktorovich KIRILENKO
1994
Lawyers of former Memorial Human Rights Centre
Moscow
Manifestation for fair elections to Mosgorduma
Moscow
27/07/2019
Article 20.2 § 6.1 of CAO
fine of RUB 15,000
Moscow City Court
10/09/2019
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty, including unrecorded detention and detention without a judicial order and any other legal basis - arrest, escorting to a police station, detention between 27/07/2019 and 29/07/2019 as administrative suspect (and after the administrative offence record had been compiled on 28/07/2019): no evidence/assessment of any "exceptional circumstances" under the CAO;
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings
4,000
19868/20
29/03/2020
Yegor Aleksandrovich KRUK
1985
Pomazuyev Aleksandr Yevgenyevich
Vilnius
Manifestation for fair elections to Mosgorduma
Moscow
27/07/2019
Article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
fine of RUB 20,000
Moscow City Court
24/10/2019
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty, including unrecorded detention and detention without a judicial order and any other legal basis - arrest, escorting, detention at a police station on 27/07/2019 for the sole purpose of drawing up an administrative offence record
4,000
27084/20
05/06/2020
Aleksey Aleksandrovich SEDOV
1996
Pomazuyev Aleksandr Yevgenyevich
Vilnius
Manifestation for fair elections to Mosgorduma
Moscow
27/07/2019
Article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
fine of RUB 15,000
Moscow City Court
12/11/2019
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty, including unrecorded detention and detention without a judicial order and any other legal basis - arrest and escorting to a police station, detention on 27/07/2019, in excess of three hours, 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
29649/20
18/06/2020
Aleksandr Nikolayevich SUVOROV
1985
Manifestation for fair elections to Mosgorduma
Moscow
27/07/2019
Article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
fine of RUB 10,000
Moscow City Court
22/01/2020
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty, including unrecorded detention and detention without a judicial order and any other legal basis - arrest, escorting and detention at a police station on 27/07/2019 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
29696/20
13/07/2020
Aleksey Sergeyevich SMIRNOV
1983
Lawyers of former Memorial Human Rights Centre
Moscow
Manifestation for fair elections to Mosgorduma
Moscow
27/07/2019
Article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
fine of RUB 12,000
Moscow City Court
18/10/2019
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty, including unrecorded detention and detention without a judicial order and any other legal basis - arrest, escorting to a police station, detention between 27/07/2019 and 28/07/2019, in excess of three hours, for the sole purpose of compiling an administrative offence record (the record was compiled on 31/07/2019);
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings
4,000
29698/20
13/07/2020
Yuriy Viktorovich BALANOV
1972
Lawyers of former Memorial Human Rights Centre
Moscow
Manifestation for fair elections to Mosgorduma
Moscow
27/07/2019
Article 20.2 § 6.1 of CAO
fine of RUB 20,000
Moscow City Court
16/10/2019
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty, including unrecorded detention and detention without a judicial order and any other legal basis - arrest, escorting to a police station, detention between 27/07/2019 and 29/07/2019 as administrative suspect, and after the administrative offence record had been compiled on 27/07/2019: no evidence/assessment of any "exceptional circumstances" under the CAO;
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings
4,000
29707/20
09/07/2020
Aleksandr Alekseyevich ZHILIN
1991
Lawyers of the former Memorial Human Rights Centre
Moscow
Manifestation for fair elections to Mosgorduma
Moscow
27/07/2019
Article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
fine of RUB 10,000
Moscow City Court
16/10/2019
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty, including unrecorded detention and detention without a judicial order and any other legal basis - arrest and escorting to the police office on 27/07/2019 in excess of three hours 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
30057/20
13/07/2020
Ivan Alekseyevich LIPATOV
1992
Lawyers of former Memorial Human Rights Centre
Moscow
Manifestation for fair elections to Mosgorduma
Moscow
27/07/2019
Article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
fine of RUB 10,000
Moscow City Court
16/10/2019
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty, including unrecorded detention and detention without a judicial order and any other legal basis - arrest, escorting to a police station, detention on 27/07/2019 in excess of 3 hours 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
30701/20
30/06/2020
Ivan Igorevich GAVRIKOV
1995
Laptev Aleksey Nikolayevich
Moscow
Manifestation for fair elections to Mosgorduma
Moscow
27/07/2019
Article 20.2 § 6.1 of CAO
fine of RUB 10,000
Moscow City Court
18/10/2019
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty, including unrecorded detention and detention without a judicial order and any other legal basis - arrest and escorting to a police office, detention between 27/07/2019 and 29/07/2019 for the purpose of drawing up a record of administrative offence (compiled on 29/07/2019), in excess of three hours, no evidence/assessment of any "exceptional circumstances" under the CAO;
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings
4,000
30978/20
28/05/2020
Timofey Yevgenyevich KRUGLYAKOV
1999
Eysmont Mariya Olegovna
Moscow
Manifestation for fair elections to Mosgorduma
Moscow
27/07/2019
Article 20.2 § 6.1 of CAO
fine of RUB15,000
Moscow City Court
18/11/2019
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty, including unrecorded detention and detention without a judicial order and any other legal basis - arrest and escorting to a police office, detention between 27/07/2019 and 29/07/2019 in excess of three hours for the purpose of drawing up a record of administrative offence (compiled on 28/07/2019) and subsequently for full and correct consideration of the case: no evidence/assessment of any "exceptional circumstances" under the CAO;
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings
4,000
30988/20
30/06/2020
Aleksandr Andreyevich KOKORIN
1996
Yatsenko Irina Aleksandrovna
Moscow
Manifestation for fair elections to Mosgorduma
Moscow
27/07/2019
Article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
fine of RUB 18,000
Moscow City Court
30/09/2019
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty, including unrecorded detention and detention without a judicial order and any other legal basis - arrest and escorting to the police office, detention between 27/07/2019 and 29/07/2019 in excess of three hours for the purpose of drawing up a record of administrative offence (compiled on 28/07/2019) and subsequently for full and correct consideration of the case: no evidence/assessment of any "exceptional circumstances" under the CAO;
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings
4,000
[1] Plus any tax that may be chargeable to the applicants.