FIFTH SECTION
CASE OF ZHILINA AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA
(Applications nos. 10524/20 and 19 others –
see appended list)
JUDGMENT
STRASBOURG
20 April 2023
This judgment is final but it may be subject to editorial revision.
In the case of Zhilina 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 30 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 organisers or participants of public assemblies, namely, manifestations for fair elections to Mosgorduma. 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 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, 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 findings in its well-established case-law (see Butkevich v. Russia, no. 5865/07, §§ 63‑65, 13 February 2018, Tsvetkova and Others v. Russia, nos. 54381/08 and 5 others, §§ 121-23, 10 April 2018, Kalyapin v. Russia, no. 6095/09, § 76, 23 July 2019, and Korneyeva v. Russia, no. 72051/17, §§ 34-36, 8 October 2019, concerning various aspects of unlawful deprivation of liberty of organisers or participants of public events; and Karelin v. Russia, no. 926/08, 20 September 2016, related to the 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. In view of the above findings, the Court considers that there is no need to deal separately with the applicants’ complaints under Article 6 of the Convention concerning other aspects of the fairness of the administrative offence proceedings and alleged restrictions on the right to examine witnesses.
APPLICATION OF ARTICLE 41 OF THE CONVENTION14. 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.”
15. 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 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 the well-established case-law of the Court, as set out in the appended table, admissible, and finds that there is no need to deal separately with the remaining complaints of the applicants 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 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 20 April 2023, 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 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]
10524/20
11/02/2020
Yekaterina Vladimirovna ZHILINA
1981
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
10/09/2019
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty - arrest and escorting to the police office on 27/07/2019 for the purpose of drawing up a record of administrative offence; detention in excess of 3 hours;
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of tribunal - absence of a prosecuting party in the administrative offence proceedings.
4,000
10959/20
16/02/2020
Dmitriy Yuryevich CHERNYAVSKIY
1989
Eysmont Mariya Olegovna
Moscow
Manifestation for fair elections to Mosgorduma
Moscow
27/07/2019
Article 20.2 § 6 of CAO
fine of
RUB 15,000
Moscow City Court
26/08/2019
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty - unlawful detention from 27/07/2019 till 29/07/2019 for the sole purpose of compiling a record of administrative offence; detention in excess of 3 hours;
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of tribunal - lack of the prosecuting party in the administrative offence proceedings.
4,000
11439/20
15/02/2020
Viktor Igorevich ARTAMONOV
1997
Markin Konstantin Aleksandrovich
Velikiy Novgorod
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
16/08/2019
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of tribunal - absence of a prosecuting party in the administrative offence proceedings;
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty - arrest and escorting to the police office on 27/07/2019 for the purpose of drawing up a record of administrative offence; detention in excess of 3 hours until 29/07/2019; belated drawing up of the record of administrative arrest (raised on appeal).
4,000
12380/20
28/02/2020
Mikhail Alekseyevich FAYTO
1990
Vanslova Yekaterina
Nizhniy Novgorod
Manifestation for fair elections to Mosgorduma
Moscow
27/07/2019
Article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
fine of
RUB 15,000
Moscow City Court
30/08/2019
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty - 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 tribunal - absence of a prosecuting party in the administrative offence proceedings.
4,000
12745/20
22/02/2020
Artem Viktorovich ABRAMOV
1988
Dubinin Nikolay Anatolyevich
Moscow
Manifestation for fair elections to Mosgorduma
Moscow
27/07/2019
Article 20.2 § 6
of CAO
fine of
RUB 20,000
Moscow City Court
24/09/2019
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty - lack of legal grounds for arrest and escorting to the police station on 27/07/2019; no examination of the possibility of drawing up a record of offence on the spot.
4,000
12996/20
26/02/2020
Aleksandr Yevgenyevich SOLUKOV
1993
Vasilyev Nikolay Vladimirovich
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
26/08/2019
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of tribunal - absence of a prosecuting party in the administrative offence proceedings.
3,500
13011/20
26/02/2020
Pavel Aleksandrovich DMITRIYENKO
1987
Vasilyev Nikolay Vladimirovich
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
26/08/2019
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of tribunal - lack of prosecuting party in the administrative offence proceedings.
3,500
13677/20
02/03/2020
Igor Aleksandrovich RATKE
1987
Antokhin Yevgeniy Vyacheslavovich
Moscow
Manifestation for fair elections to Mosgorduma
Moscow
27/07/2019
Article 20.2 § 5
of CAO
fine of
RUB 15,000
Moscow City Court
06/09/2019
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of tribunal - absence of a prosecuting party in the administrative offence proceedings;
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty - arrest and escorting to the police office on 27/07/2019 for the purpose of drawing up a record of administrative offence; detention in excess of 3 hours.
4,000
13953/20
27/02/2020
Semen Davydovich LOBANOV
1983
Vasilyev Nikolay Vladimirovich
Moscow
Manifestation for fair elections to Mosgorduma
Moscow
27/07/2019
Article 20.2 § 5
of CAO
fine of
RUB 15,000
Moscow City Court
28/08/2019
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of tribunal - absence of a prosecuting party in the administrative proceedings.
3,500
13957/20
27/02/2020
Aleksandr Sergeyevich KUKHTINOV
1994
Vasilyev Nikolay Vladimirovich
Moscow
Manifestation for fair elections to Mosgorduma
Moscow
27/07/2019
Article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
fine of
RUB 15,000
Moscow City Court
28/08/2019
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of tribunal - absence of a prosecuting party in the administrative proceedings.
3,500
14314/20
03/03/2020
Daniil Viktorovich GORBATOV
1998
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 - arrest on 27/07/2017 and detention in excess of 3 hours for the purpose of drawing up a record of administrative offence;
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of tribunal - absence of a prosecuting party in the administrative offence proceedings.
4,000
14361/20
28/02/2020
Anna Nikolayevna PAVLOVA
1986
Vasilyev Nikolay Vladimirovich
Moscow
Manifestation for fair elections to Mosgorduma
Moscow
27/07/2019
Article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
fine of
RUB 15,000
Moscow City Court
30/08/2019
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of tribunal - absence of a prosecuting party in the administrative offence proceedings.
3,500
14362/20
28/02/2020
Artem Vladimirovich TOLSTOV
1992
Vasilyev Nikolay Vladimirovich
Moscow
Manifestation for fair elections to Mosgorduma
Moscow
27/07/2019
Article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
fine of
RUB 15,000
Moscow City Court
28/08/2019
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of tribunal - absence of a prosecuting party in the administrative offence proceedings.
3,500
14722/20
06/03/2020
Yevgeniy Mikhaylovich SUNTSOV
1986
Gilmanov Mansur Idrisovich
Podolsk
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
24/09/2019
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty - 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 tribunal - absence of a prosecuting party in the administrative offence proceedings.
4,000
14799/20
03/03/2020
Yelizaveta Borisovna ALEKSANDROVA-ZORINA
1984
Vasilyev Nikolay Vladimirovich
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
14/10/2019
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of tribunal - absence of a prosecuting party in the administrative offence proceedings.
3,500
16637/20
10/03/2020
Mikhail Sergeyevich LYASIN
1993
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 - unlawful (unjustified) arrest on 27-29 July 2019 for the sole purpose of drawing up a record of administrative offence; detention in excess of 3 hours;
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of tribunal - absence of a prosecuting party in the administrative offence proceedings.
4,000
18728/20
09/04/2020
Sergey Viktorovich MELNIKOV
1988
Markin Konstantin Aleksandrovich
Velikiy Novgorod
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 - arrest and escorting to the police office on 27/07/2019 for the purpose of drawing up a record of administrative offence; detention in excess of 3 hours;
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of tribunal - absence of a prosecuting party in the administrative offence proceedings.
4,000
19378/20
23/03/2020
Marina Anatolyevna KEN
1975
Chervonnyy Grigoriy Sergeyevich
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
24/09/2019
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty - arrest and escorting to the police office on 27/07/2019 for the purpose of drawing up a record of administrative offence; detention in excess of 3 hours (until 29/07/2017);
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of tribunal - absence of a prosecuting party in the administrative offence proceedings
4,000
19850/20
10/03/2020
Ruslan Agilevich ASHEVSKIY
1997
Markin Konstantin Aleksandrovich
Velikiy Novgorod
Manifestation for fair elections to Mosgorduma
Moscow
27/07/2019
Article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
fine of
RUB 17,000
Moscow City Court
12/09/2019
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty - arrest and escorting to the police office on 27/07/2019 for the purpose of drawing up a record of administrative offence; detention in excess of 3 hours;
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of tribunal - absence of a prosecuting party in the administrative offence proceedings.
4,000
19899/20
20/03/2020
Nikolay Vasilyevich KOZIN
1978
Mikhaylichenko Kseniya Alekseyevna
Moscow
Manifestation for fair elections to Mosgorduma
Moscow
27/07/2019
Article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
fine of
RUB 15,000
Moscow City Court
30/09/2019
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty - arrest and escorting to the police office on 27/07/2019 for the purpose of drawing up a record of administrative offence; detention in excess of 3 hours
(until 29/07/2017).
4,000
[1] Plus any tax that may be chargeable to the applicants.