FIRST SECTION
CASE OF ZHMYREV AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA
(Applications nos. 69927/17 and 12 others –
see appended list)
JUDGMENT
STRASBOURG
12 September 2024
This judgment is final but it may be subject to editorial revision.
In the case of Zhmyrev and Others v. Russia,
The European Court of Human Rights (First Section), sitting as a Committee composed of:
Péter Paczolay, President,
Gilberto Felici,
Raffaele Sabato, judges,
and Viktoriya Maradudina, Acting Deputy Section Registrar,
Having deliberated in private on 11 July 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, 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 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 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 (CAO); Tomov and Others v. Russia, nos. 18255/10 and 5 others, §§ 114-56, 9 April 2019, as regards the conditions of transport of detainees and the lack of effective domestic remedies thereof; Lashmankin and Others v. Russia, nos. 57818/09 and 14 others, §§ 402-78, 7 February 2017, regarding restrictions on location or time of public events; 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 COMPLAINTS14. Some applicants raised further additional complaints. In view of the findings in paragraphs 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 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 12 September 2024, pursuant to Rule 77 §§ 2 and 3 of the Rules of Court.
Viktoriya Maradudina Péter Paczolay
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]
69927/17
07/09/2017
Dmitriy Vladimirovich ZHMYREV
1989
Anti-corruption rally
Moscow
26/03/2017
Rally in support of A. Navalnyy’s Presidential Candidacy
Moscow
08/07/2017
article 19.3 § 1 of CAO
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
detention for 10 days
fine of RUB 10,000
Moscow City Court
03/04/2017
Moscow City Court
28/08/2018
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - (1) escorting to and detention at the police station for compiling an offence report from 6.40 p.m. on 26/03/2017 until 28/03/2017, when the applicant was taken to the court; (2) escorting to the police station for compiling an offence report from 4.10 p.m. until 6.20 p.m. on 08/07/2017;
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in both sets of the administrative-offence proceedings;
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
73551/17
02/09/2017
(8 applicants)
Mark Izrailevich GALPERIN
1968
Elin Malikovich CHICHLINSKIY
1989
Igor Alekseyevich KLOCHKOV
1972
Sofya Yuryevna KUZMINA
1994
Mariya Aleksandrovna RYABIKOVA
1974
Maksim Sergeyevich SOLDATOV
1987
Gafira Vladimirovna STEKLOVA
1997
Zboroshenko Nikolay Sergeyevich
Moscow
Anti-corruption rally
(Mr Galperin)
Moscow
26/03/2017
Anti-corruption rally
(Mr Klochkov)
Moscow
26/03/2017
Anti-corruption rally
(Ms Kuzmina)
Moscow
26/03/2017
Anti-corruption rally
(Ms Ryabikova)
Moscow
26/03/2017
Anti-corruption rally
(Mr Soldatov)
Moscow
26/03/2017
Anti-corruption rally
(Ms Steklova)
Moscow
26/03/2017
Anti-corruption rally (Mr Chichlinskiy)
Moscow
26/03/2017
Rally to call for fair elections to Mosgorduma (Mr Galperin)
Moscow
31/08/2019
article 19.3 § 1 of CAO
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
article 20.2
§ 6.1 of CAO
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
article 19.3 § 1 of CAO
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
article 20.2 § 8 of CAO
detention for 15 days
fine of RUB 15,000
detention for 10 days
fine of RUB 20,000
detention for 10 days
fine of RUB 10,000
fine of RUB 15,000
detention for 30 days
Moscow City Court
06/04/2017
Moscow City Court
28/06/2017
Moscow City Court
29/03/2017
Moscow City Court
14/07/2017
Moscow City Court
18/04/2017
Moscow City Court
30/06/2017
Moscow City Court
18/08/2017
Moscow City Court
05/09/2019
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - (1) escorting to and detention at the police station of Mr Galperin after compiling an offence report from 2 p.m. on 01/04/2017 until 10 a.m. on 03/04/2017;
(2) escorting to and detention at the police station of Ms Kuzmina after compiling an offence report from 6.50 p.m. on 26/03/2017 until the court hearing on 27/03/2017;
(3) escorting to the police station of Mr Klochkov, Ms Ryabikova, Mr Soldatov, Ms Steklova, Mr Chichlinskiy for compiling an offence report on 26/03/2017;
(4) escorting to the police station of Mr Galperin for compiling an offence report at 1.25 p.m. on 03/09/2019;
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in all sets of administrative-offence proceedings in respect of the applicants, except for Mr Chichlinskiy
3,000
(Mr Galperin)
5,000
(Mr Chichlinskiy)
5,000
(Mr Klochkov)
3,000
(Ms Kuzmina)
5,000
(Ms Ryabikova)
5,000
(Mr Soldatov)
5,000
(Ms Steklova)
291/18
07/12/2017
and
28958/19
13/05/2019
Yevgeniy Olegovich GOLIGOROV
1993
Glukhov Aleksey Vladimirovich
Novocheboksarsk
Karavayev Aleksandr Yevgenyevich
Nizhniy Novgorod
Anti-corruption rally
Nizhniy Novgorod
26/03/2017
Protest against retirement age hike
Nizhniy Novgorod
09/09/2018
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
article 20.2 § 6.1 of CAO
fine of RUB 10,000
detention for 14 days
Nizhniy Novgorod Regional Court
15/06/2017
Nizhniy Novgorod Regional Court
14/11/2018
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - escorting to the police station for compiling an offence report on 26/03/2017;
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in both sets of the administrative-offence proceedings.
5,000
49968/18
10/10/2018
and
29671/20
13/07/2020
Nikolay Yuryevich DYACHKOV
1991
Zhdanov Ivan Yuryevich
Vilnius
Memorial Human Rights Centre
Moscow
Opposition rally
Ivanovo
05/05/2018
Rally against retirement age hike
Ivanovo
09/09/2018
Rally to call for fair elections to Mosgorduma
Moscow
27/07/2019
article 20.2 § 1 CAO
article 20.2 § 8 of CAO
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
fine of RUB 15,000
100 hours of community work
fine of RUB 10,000
Ivanovo Regional Court
28/08/2018
Ivanovo Regional Court
15/01/2019
Moscow City Court
02/12/2019
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - escorting to the police station for compiling an offence report on 14/09/2018 and 27/07/2019;
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in all sets of administrative-offence proceedings;
Art. 11 (1) - restrictions on location, time or manner of conduct of public events - refusal by the Ivanovo Town administration to approve the location and date of the Voters’ strike as part of nationwide protest action on 28/01/2018 (final decision was taken by the Supreme Court of Russia on 17/09/2018).
4,000
13561/19
27/02/2019
Leonid Sergeyevich YARYGIN
1989
Opposition rally
Tambov
05/05/2018
article 20.2 § 8 of CAO
fine of RUB 300,000
Tambov Regional Court
10/10/2018
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - escorting to and detention at the police station for compiling an offence report from 4.10 p.m. on 09/09/2018 until 8.30 a.m. on 10/09/2018;
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings.
7,000
30657/19
28/05/2019
Oleg Olegovich STEPANOV
1992
Pomazuyev Aleksandr Yevgenyevich
Vilnius
Political rally
Moscow
29/07/2018
Protest against retirement age hike
Moscow
09/09/2018
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
article 20.2 § 2 of CAO
fine of RUB 10,000
fine of RUB 20,000
Moscow City Court
12/12/2018
Moscow City Court
14/03/2019
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in both sets of the administrative-offence proceedings.
3,500
43813/19
04/08/2019
Dmitriy Aleksandrovich IVANOV
1999
Yelanchik Oleg Aleksandrovich
Moscow
Opposition rally
Moscow
05/05/2018
Rally to protest the Novoye Velichiye case
Moscow
28/10/2018
Rally in support of Lev Ponomarev
Moscow
16/12/2018
Political rally
Moscow
06/01/2019
Rally to support Azat Miftakhov
Moscow
02/03/2019
Rally to support Ivan Golunov
Moscow
12/06/2019
article 19.3 § 1 of CAO
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
article 20.2 § 8 of CAO
fine of RUB 1,000
fine of RUB 10,000
fine of RUB 10,000
fine of RUB 10,000
fine of RUB 15,000
fine of RUB 150,000
Moscow City Court
04/02/2019
Moscow City Court
06/02/2019
Moscow City Court
14/03/2019
Moscow City Court
22/05/2019
Moscow City Court
04/04/2019
Moscow City Court
16/09/2019
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - (1) escorting to the police station for compiling an offence report on 05/05/2018, 28/10/2018 and 16/12/2018;
(2) escorting to and detention at the police station after compiling an offence report from 4.40 p.m. on 02/03/2019 until 4 p.m. on 04/03/2019, and from 5 p.m. on 12/06/2019 until 10.35 a.m. on 14/06/2019;
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in all sets of administrative-offence proceedings.
6,000
57852/19
17/08/2015
Mark Izrailevich GALPERIN
1968
Zboroshenko Nikolay Sergeyevich
Moscow
Political rally
Moscow
16/08/2014
Political rally
Moscow
17/07/2019
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
article 20.2 § 8 of CAO
fine of RUB 10,000
detention for 30 days
Moscow City Court
18/03/2015
Moscow City Court
02/08/2019
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - escorting to and detention at the police station after compiling an offence report from 11.20 a.m. until the court hearing on 24/07/2019;
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in both sets of the administrative-offence proceedings.
-
13165/20
26/02/2020
Marina Alekseyevna LITVINOVICH
1974
Zakhar Yuryevich KHASANOV
1992
Mezak Ernest Aleksandrovich
Saint-Barthélemy-d’Anjou
Rally to support Ivan Golunov (both applicants)
Moscow
12/06/2019
article 20.2 § 6.1 of CAO
fine of RUB 10.000 (both applicants)
Moscow City Court 26/08/2019
(both applicants)
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - escorting to the police station for compiling an offence report on 12/06/2019 (both applicants);
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings (both applicants).
4,000
(Ms Litvinovich)
4,000
(Mr Khasanov)
13768/20
24/02/2020
Yulia Dmitriyevna BARINOVA
1982
Lyaysan Rafatovna ZAMALETDINOVA
1988
Mezak Ernest Aleksandrovich
Saint-Barthélemy-d’Anjou
Rally to support Ivan Golunov
(Ms Barinova)
Moscow
12/06/2019
Rally to support Ivan Golunov
(Ms Zamaletdinova)
Moscow
12/06/2019
article 20.2 § 6.1 of CAO
article 20.2 § 6.1 of CAO
fine of RUB 10,000
fine of RUB 10,000
Moscow City Court
20/11/2019
Moscow City Court
14/11/2019
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - escorting to and detention at the police station for compiling an offence report from 3 p.m. until 10.45 p.m. (Ms Barinova) and from 3 p.m. until 11.20 p.m. (Ms Zamaletdinova) on 12/06/2019;
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings (both applicants).
4,000
(Ms Barinova)
4,000
(Ms Zamaletdinova)
14046/20
05/03/2020
Vladimir Nikolayevich ALESHKIN
1989
Ilya Vyacheslavovich LVOV
1998
Eysmont Mariya Olegovna
Moscow
Rally to support Ivan Golunov
(Mr Aleshkin)
Moscow
12/06/2019
Rally to support Ivan Golunov
(Mr Lvov)
Moscow
12/06/2019
article 20.2 § 6.1 of CAO
article 20.2 § 8 of CAO
fine of RUB 20,000
fine of RUB 200,000
Moscow City Court
06/09/2019
Moscow City Court
06/09/2019
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - escorting to the police station for compiling an offence report on 12/06/2019 (both applicants);
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings (both applicants)
4,000
(Mr Aleshkin)
6,000
(Mr Lvov)
[1] Plus any tax that may be chargeable to the applicants.