THIRD SECTION
CASE OF ZOLOTUKHIN AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA
(Applications nos. 48034/21 and 19 others –
see appended list)
JUDGMENT
STRASBOURG
18 July 2024
This judgment is final but it may be subject to editorial revision.
In the case of Zolotukhin and Others v. Russia,
The European Court of Human Rights (Third Section), sitting as a Committee composed of:
Ioannis Ktistakis, President,
Oddný Mjöll Arnardóttir,
Diana Kovatcheva, judges,
and Viktoriya Maradudina, Acting Deputy Section Registrar,
Having deliberated in private on 27 June 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 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 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. In view of the above findings, the Court considers that there is no need to deal separately with the remaining complaints under Article 6 of the Convention lodged by some of the applicants and concerning the fairness of the proceedings and the alleged restrictions on the right to examine witnesses.
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 and the Protocols thereto as regards the other complaints raised under the well-established case-law of the Court (see the 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 18 July 2024, pursuant to Rule 77 §§ 2 and 3 of the Rules of Court.
Viktoriya Maradudina Ioannis Ktistakis
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]
48034/21
09/09/2021
Roman Alekseyevich ZOLOTUKHIN
2001
Bochilo Anna Yevgenyevna
Barnaul
Manifestation in support of A. Navalnyy
Lenin street, Kursk
31/01/2021
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
30 hours’ community service
Kursk Regional Court
27/04/2021
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings
3,500
57130/21
06/11/2021
Maksim Andreyevich YURASOV
2001
Zboroshenko Nikolay Sergeyevich
Moscow
Manifestation in support of A. Navalnyy
Moscow
23/01/2021
Manifestation against the war in Ukraine
Moscow
24/02/2022
article 20.2 § 6.1 of CAO,
and
article 19.3 § 1 of CAO
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
10 days’ administrative arrest;
and
10 days’ administrative arrest
fine of RUB 15,000
Moscow City Court
01/06/2021
(two decisions)
Moscow City Court
05/09/2022
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings - In respect of all sets of the proceedings,
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 23/01/2021 and 24/02/2022 - Applicant taken to the police station as an administrative suspect: no evidence/assessment that it was impracticable, on the spot, to compile the offence record (Art. 27.2 § 1 CAO) and achieve the objectives set out in Art. 27.1 CAO, e.g. to establish the suspect’s identity (raised in the administrative proceedings)
5,000
46431/22
12/09/2022
Svetlana Viktorovna KAVERZINA
1969
Nechayeva Olga Yuryevna
Novosibirsk
Public event "Immortal Regiment"
Novosibirsk
08/05/2022
article 20.2 § 2 of CAO
7 days’ administrative arrest
Novosibirsk Regional Court
12/05/2022
Prot. 7 Art. 2 - delayed review of conviction by a higher tribunal - the sentence imposed on the applicant by the trial court was executed immediately, on account of the lack of suspensive effect of an appeal under the CAO,
Art. 10 (1) - various restrictions on the right to freedom of expression - Conviction under Article 20.3.3 § 1 of CAO for publishing of and anti-war post in social network Vkontakte on 23/04/2022/ administrative fine of RUB 30,000/ Novosibirsk Regional Court on 04/10/2022 (appeal)
5,000
50663/22
15/10/2022
Aleksandr Pavlovich ZHODZISHSKIY
2001
Baranova Natalya Andreyevna
Moscow
Manifestation against the war in Ukraine
Moscow
06/03/2022
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
fine of RUB 20,000
Moscow City Court
15/06/2022
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 06/03/2022 - applicant taken to the police station as an administrative suspect: no evidence/assessment that it was impracticable, on the spot, to compile the offence record (Art. 27.2 § 1 CAO) and achieve the objectives set out in Art. 27.1 CAO, e.g. to establish the suspect’s identity; Detention as an administrative suspect: beyond the three-hour statutory period (Art. 27.5(1)-(4) CAO) ((raised in the administrative proceedings),
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings
4,000
50914/22
14/10/2022
Mikhail Aleksandrovich OSINTSEV
1997
Mangileva Vera Borisovna
Yekaterinburg
Manifestation against the war In Ukraine
Yekaterinburg
06/03/2022
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
fine of RUB 15,000
Sverdlovsk Regional Court
22/06/2022
3,500
50916/22
15/10/2022
Guzaliya Galimovna KHAMIDULLINA
2002
Lapuzin Aleksey Sergeyevich
Samara
Manifestation against the war in Ukraine
Samara
27/02/2022
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
fine of RUB 10,000
Samara Regional Court
16/06/2022
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 27/02/2022 - Applicant taken to the police station as an administrative suspect: no evidence/assessment that it was impracticable, on the spot, to compile the offence record (Art. 27.2 § 1 CAO) and achieve the objectives set out in Art. 27.1 CAO, e.g. to establish the suspect’s identity; Detention as an administrative suspect: beyond the three-hour statutory period (Art. 27.5(1)-(4) CAO) (raised in the administrative proceedings),
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings
4,000
51227/22
06/10/2022
Marat Alikovich GILMANOV
1984
Baranova Natalya Andreyevna
Moscow
Manifestation against the war in Ukraine
Moscow
24/02/2022
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
fine of RUB 20,000
Moscow City Court
27/07/2022
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 24/02/2022 - Applicant taken to the police station as an administrative suspect: no evidence/assessment that it was impracticable, on the spot, to compile the offence record (Art. 27.2 § 1 CAO) and achieve the objectives set out in Art. 27.1 CAO, e.g. to establish the suspect’s identity; Detention as an administrative suspect: beyond the three-hour statutory period (Art. 27.5(1)-(4) CAO) (raised in the administrative proceedings),
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings -
4,000
51272/22
22/10/2022
Yuliya Yuryevna GRENKOVA
1965
Sabirov Rim Faridovich
Kazan
Manifestation against the war in Ukraine
Kazan
27/02/2022
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
fine of RUB 5,000
Supreme Court of the Republic of Tatarstan
22/06/2022
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 27/02/2022 - Applicant taken to the police station as an administrative suspect: no evidence/assessment that it was impracticable, on the spot, to compile the offence record (Art. 27.2 § 1 CAO) and achieve the objectives set out in Art. 27.1 CAO, e.g. to establish the suspect’s identity (raised in the administrative proceedings)
4,000
51298/22
23/10/2022
Sergey Aleksandrovich TETERKIN
1992
Manifestation against the war in Ukraine
Moscow
02/03/2022
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
fine of RUB 20,000
Moscow City Court
23/06/2022
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty, including unrecorded detention and detention without a judicial order and any other legal basis - Arrest and detention from 7.40 p.m. on 02/03/2022 to 2 a.m. on 03/03/2022 - applicant taken to the police station as an administrative suspect: no evidence/assessment that it was impracticable, on the spot, to compile the offence record (Art. 27.2 § 1 CAO) and achieve the objectives set out in Art. 27.1 CAO, e.g. to establish the suspect’s identity; Detention as an administrative suspect: beyond the three-hour statutory period (Art. 27.5(1)-(4) CAO) (raised in the administrative proceedings),
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings
4,000
51511/22
05/10/2022
Galina Yuryevna MOSKALENKO
1992
Baranova Natalya Andreyevna
Moscow
Manifestation against the war in Ukraine
Moscow
01/03/2022
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
fine of RUB 15,000
Moscow City Court
21/06/2022
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 01/03/2022 - Applicant taken to the police station as an administrative suspect: no evidence/assessment that it was impracticable, on the spot, to compile the offence record (Art. 27.2 § 1 CAO) and achieve the objectives set out in Art. 27.1 CAO, e.g. to establish the suspect’s identity (raised in the administrative proceedings),
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings
4,000
51736/22
26/10/2022
Larisa Vladimirovna LEONOVA
1966
Manifestation against the war in Ukraine
Moscow
27/02/2022
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
fine of RUB 10,000
Moscow City Court
27/06/2022
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty, including unrecorded detention and detention without a judicial order and any other legal basis - Arrest and detention from 5.17 p.m. to 10.38 p.m. on 27/02/2022 - applicant taken to the police station as an administrative suspect: no evidence/assessment that it was impracticable, on the spot, to compile the offence record (Art. 27.2 § 1 CAO) and achieve the objectives set out in Art. 27.1 CAO, e.g. to establish the suspect’s identity; Detention as an administrative suspect: beyond the three-hour statutory period (Art. 27.5(1)-(4) CAO) (raised in the administrative proceedings),
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings -
4,000
52368/22
02/11/2022
Polina Andreyevna DOBROTSVETOVA
2000
Manifestation against the war in Ukraine
Moscow
06/03/2022
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
fine of RUB 20,000
Moscow City Court
05/07/2022
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 06/03/2022 - Applicant taken to the police station as an administrative suspect: no evidence/assessment that it was impracticable, on the spot, to compile the offence record (Art. 27.2 § 1 CAO) and achieve the objectives set out in Art. 27.1 CAO, e.g. to establish the suspect’s identity (raised in the administrative proceedings),
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings
4,000
54435/22
02/11/2022
Yekaterina Grachevna DYAKONENKO
1987
Markin Konstantin Aleksandrovich
Velikiy Novgorod
Manifestation against the war in Ukraine
Moscow
06/03/2022
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
fine of RUB 15,000
Moscow City Court
21/07/2022
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 06/03/2022 - applicant taken to the police station as an administrative suspect: no evidence/assessment that it was impracticable, on the spot, to compile the offence record (Art. 27.2 § 1 CAO) and achieve the objectives set out in Art. 27.1 CAO, e.g. to establish the suspect’s identity ( (raised in the administrative proceedings),
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings -
4,000
54540/22
05/11/2022
Dmitriy Mikhaylovich BIZUN
1990
Baranova Natalya Andreyevna
Moscow
Manifestation against the war in Ukraine
Moscow
03/03/2022
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
fine of RUB 20,000
Moscow City Court
05/07/2022
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 03/03/2022 - Applicant taken to the police station as an administrative suspect: no evidence/assessment that it was impracticable, on the spot, to compile the offence record (Art. 27.2 § 1 CAO) and achieve the objectives set out in Art. 27.1 CAO, e.g. to establish the suspect’s identity (raised in the administrative proceedings),
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings -
4,000
55526/22
29/10/2022
Mariya Olegovna SILIVERSTOVA
2000
Manifestation against the war in Ukraine
Yekaterinburg
06/03/2022
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
fine of RUB 20,000
Sverdlovsk Regional Court
29/06/2022
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 06/03/2022 - Applicant taken to the police station as an administrative suspect: no evidence/assessment that it was impracticable, on the spot, to compile the offence record (Art. 27.2 § 1 CAO) and achieve the objectives set out in Art. 27.1 CAO, e.g. to establish the suspect’s (raised in the administrative proceedings),
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings
4,000
55553/22
10/11/2022
Aleksey Sergeyevich PRIMECHAYEV
1999
Manifestation against the war in Ukraine
Moscow
24/02/2022
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
fine of RUB 20,000
Moscow City Court
11/07/2022
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty, including unrecorded detention and detention without a judicial order and any other legal basis - Arrest and detention from 7.30 p.m. on 24/02/2022 to 12.02 a.m. on 25/02/2022 - Applicant taken to the police station as an administrative suspect: no evidence/assessment that it was impracticable, on the spot, to compile the offence record (Art. 27.2 § 1 CAO) and achieve the objectives set out in Art. 27.1 CAO, e.g. to establish the suspect’s identity; Detention as an administrative suspect: beyond the three-hour statutory period (Art. 27.5(1)-(4) CAO) (raised in the administrative proceedings),
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings
4,000
55705/22
22/11/2022
Veronika Valeryevna NARYKOVA
1998
Sergeyeva Irina Vadimovna
Moscow
Manifestation against the war in Ukraine
Moscow
26/02/2022
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
fine of RUB 20,000
Moscow City Court
07/10/2022
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty, including unrecorded detention and detention without a judicial order and any other legal basis - Arrest and detention from 4.40 p.m. to 9.16 p.m. on 26/02/2022 - Detention as an administrative suspect: beyond the three-hour statutory period (Art. 27.5(1)-(4) CAO) (raised in the administrative proceedings
4,000
55769/22
05/11/2022
Lyudmila Nikolayevna SVEZHENTSEVA
1982
Baranova Natalya Andreyevna
Moscow
Manifestation against the war in Ukraine
Moscow
24/02/2022
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
fine of RUB 15,000
Moscow City Court
05/07/2022
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 24/02/2022 - Applicant taken to the police station as an administrative suspect: no evidence/assessment that it was impracticable, on the spot, to compile the offence record (Art. 27.2 § 1 CAO) and achieve the objectives set out in Art. 27.1 CAO, e.g. to establish the suspect’s identity (raised in the administrative proceedings),
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings -
4,000
55772/22
18/11/2022
Anastasiya Sergeyevna RAZGULOVA
1990
Mikhaylova Varvara Dmitriyevna
St Petersburg
Manifestation against the war in Ukraine
Kazan
27/02/2022
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
fine of RUB 10,000
Supreme Court of the Republic of Tatarstan
20/07/2022
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 27/02/2022 - Applicant taken to the police station as an administrative suspect: no evidence/assessment that it was impracticable, on the spot, to compile the offence record (Art. 27.2 § 1 CAO) and achieve the objectives set out in Art. 27.1 CAO, e.g. to establish the suspect’s identity (raised in the administrative proceedings),
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings -
4,000
56490/22
16/11/2022
Yegor Borisovich DANICHEV
1990
Arshinova Valeriya Aleksandrovna
Moscow
Manifestation against the war in Ukraine
Moscow
27/02/2022
article 20.2 § 6.1 of CAO
fine of RUB 15,000
Moscow City Court
21/07/2022
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 27/02/2022 - Applicant taken to the police station as an administrative suspect: no evidence/assessment that it was impracticable, on the spot, to compile the offence record (Art. 27.2 § 1 CAO) and achieve the objectives set out in Art. 27.1 CAO, e.g. to establish the suspect’s identity (raised in the administrative proceedings),
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.