Published on 30 October 2023
FIRST SECTION
Application no. 3001/18
Valeriy Aleksandrovich KADULIN against Russia
and 11 other applications
(see list appended)
PROCEDURAL INFORMATION
Following a preliminary examination of the admissibility of the applications on 5 October 2023, the Court decided, under Rule 54 § 2 (b) of the Rules of Court, that notice of the applications should be given to the Government of Russia.
In the applications marked by an asterisk, other complaints were raised. This part of the applications has been struck out of the Court’s list of cases or declared inadmissible by the Court, sitting in a single-judge formation, assisted by a rapporteur as provided for in Article 24 § 2 of the Convention.
In the enclosed list of applications, whenever an applicant is referred to using initials, this indicates that the Court has authorised anonymity for that person, whose identity will not be disclosed to the public (Rule 47 § 4).
For further information on the procedure following communication of an application brought against Russia, subject of well-established case law of the Court, please refer to the Court’s website.
SUBJECT MATTER
The applications concern complaints raised under Article 5 § 1 of the Convention relating to unlawful detention (deprivation of liberty) which are the subject of well-established case law of the Court (see Fortalnov and Others v. Russia, nos. 7077/06 and 12 others, 26 June 2018, Rozhkov v. Russia (no. 2), no. 38898/04, §§ 91-96, 31 January 2017, Butkevich v. Russia, no. 5865/07, § 67, 13 February 2018, Kuptsov and Kuptsova v. Russia, no. 6110/03, § 81, 3 March 2011 and Tsvetkova and Others v. Russia, nos. 54381/08 and 5 others, §§ 121-22, 10 April 2018).
APPENDIX – STATEMENT OF FACTS
List of applications raising complaints under Article 5 § 1 of the Convention
(unlawful detention (deprivation of liberty))
No.
Application no.
Date of introduction
Applicant’s name
Year of birth
Representative’s name and location
Start date of unauthorised detention
End date of unauthorised detention
Specific defects
Other complaints under well-established case-law
3001/18
19/12/2017
Valeriy Aleksandrovich KADULIN
1975
11/05/2016
11/05/2016
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 (see Korneyeva v. Russia, no. 72051/17, § 34, 8 October 2019; Ryabinina and Others v. Russia [Committee], nos. 50271/06 and 8 other applications, § 35, 2 July 2019), Detention as an administrative suspect: no evidence/assessment of “exceptional circumstances” under Art. 27.3 § 1 CAO (see Butkevich v. Russia, no. 5865/07, §§ 63-64, 13 February 2018; Tsvetkova and Others v. Russia, nos. 54381/08 and 5 others, §§ 121-22, 10 April 2018)
The final decision on the matter was taken by the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation on 19/06/2017.
32759/18*
04/07/2018
Dmitriy Anatolyevich LYSENKO
1969
Lyudmila Petrovna Antonova
Yekaterinburg
05/08/2016, 1 p.m.
06/08/2016, 9 a.m.
Detention (criminal) for more than three hours without any written record (see Fortalnov and Others v. Russia, nos. 7077/06 and 12 others, §§ 76-79, 26 June 2018)
35471/18*
27/08/2018
Andrey Yuryevich BACHURIN
1981
Valeriya Yuryevna Prikhodkina
Chelyabinsk
28/07/2018
31/07/2018
Delay of more than a few hours in releasing the applicant (see Butkevich v. Russia, no. 5865/07, § 67, 13 February 2018)
49366/18*
10/10/2018
Vadim Vilyevich KHAYRULLIN
1972
Ivan Yuryevich Zhdanov
Vilnius
12/03/2018, 9.50 a.m.
13/03/2018,
3.45 p.m.
Applicant taken to the police station as an administrative suspect for the purposes of compiling an offence record: no written record of the administrative escort (Art. 27.2 § 3 CAO) (see Timishev v. Russia [Committee], no. 47598/08, § 21, 28 November 2017)
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 the proceedings which ended on 26/04/2018, with the final decision of the Kaliningrad Regional Court
30270/20*
29/06/2020
Svetlana Petrovna NEVZOROVA
1970
03/03/2020
11/03/2020
Delay of more than a few hours in releasing the applicant (see Butkevich v. Russia, no. 5865/07, § 67, 13 February 2018)
33862/21*
24/06/2021
Kristina Nikolayevna SIDOROVA
2001
Aleksey Aleksandrovich Pryanishnikov
Tomsk
13/03/2021
10.30 a.m.
13/03/2021
6.23 p.m.
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 (see Korneyeva v. Russia, no. 72051/17, § 34, 8 October 2019; Ryabinina and Others v. Russia [Committee], nos. 50271/06 and 8 other applications, § 35, 2 July 2019)
Art. 11 (2) – disproportionate measures against organisers and participants of public manifestations – the applicant was arrested during her participation in a public event, Open Russia Civic Movement on 13/03/2021, convicted under Art. 20.33 of CAO, and sentenced to an administrative fine of RUB 15,000; final decision of the Izmaylovskiy District Court of Moscow on 20/05/2021
34922/21
20/06/2021
Vladislav Yuryevich ZLOBIN
1992
Anna Yevgenyevna Bochilo
Barnaul
22/01/2021
7.05 p.m.
23/01/2021, hearings in the applicant’s administrative-offence case
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 (see Korneyeva v. Russia, no. 72051/17, § 34, 8 October 2019; Ryabinina and Others v. Russia [Committee], nos. 50271/06 and 8 other applications, § 35, 2 July 2019), Detention as an administrative suspect: the applicant remained in detention after the offence record had been compiled (see Korneyeva v. Russia, no. 72051/17, § 35, 8 October 2019) , Detention as an administrative suspect: beyond the three-hour statutory period (Art. 27.5(1)-(4) CAO) (see Tsvetkova and Others v. Russia, nos. 54381/08 and 5 others, §§ 121‑22, 10 April 2018)
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings - Final decision: Lipetsk Regional Court, 28/01/2021,
Art. 6 (1) - and Art. 6 (3) (d) - unfair trial in view of restrictions on the right to examine witnesses - inability to cross-examine in open court police officer and "members of the public" on whose written statements the applicant’s conviction was based - Final decision: Lipetsk Regional Court, 28/01/2021,
Prot. 7 Art. 2 - delayed review of conviction by a higher tribunal - The sentence of administrative detention imposed on the applicant on 23/01/2021 was executed immediately, on account of the lack of suspensive effect of an appeal under the CAO,
Art. 10 (1) - conviction for making calls to participate in public events - Administrative conviction under art. 20.2 § 2 of the CAO for calls to participate in an unauthorised public event (rally) in support to Mr A. Navalnyy on 23/01/2021. Administrative detention of 10 days. Final decision: Lipetsk Regional Court, 28/01/2021
45158/21*
21/08/2021
Vadim Igorevich ANTONOV
1980
Nikolay Sergeyevich Zboroshenko
Mytishchi
14/02/2021
14/02/2021
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 (see Korneyeva v. Russia, no. 72051/17, § 34, 8 October 2019; Ryabinina and Others v. Russia [Committee], nos. 50271/06 and 8 other applications, § 35, 2 July 2019)
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings – final decision taken by the Moscow City Court on 24/03/2021,
Art. 6 (1) - and Art. 6 (3) (d) - unfair trial in view of restrictions on the right to examine witnesses - inability to cross-examine in the trial the police officers on whose written statements the applicant’s conviction was basedЖ final decision taken by the Moscow City Court on 24/03/2021,
Art. 10 (1) - conviction for making calls to participate in public events - sticking posters with calls to participate in an opposition rally on 14/02/2021 / Art. 20.2.5 of CAO / Moscow City Court 24/03/2021
47242/21*
10/09/2021
Aleksey Dmitriyevich DOROZHKIN
1986
Tatyana Georgiyevna Martynova
Pskov
22/01/2021
4 p.m.
23/01/2021
2.30 p.m.
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 (see Korneyeva v. Russia, no. 72051/17, § 34, 8 October 2019; Ryabinina and Others v. Russia [Committee], nos. 50271/06 and 8 other applications, § 35, 2 July 2019)
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings - final decision by the Pskov Regional Court on 15/03/2021,
Art. 10 (1) - conviction for making calls to participate in public events - rally to support A. Navalnyy on 23/01/2021 in Pskov, Article 20.2 § 2 of CAO, detention for 5 days, final decision by the Pskov Regional Court on 15/03/2021.
2546/22*
20/12/2021
Aleksandr Nikolayevich NOSACHEV
1982
Yevgeniy Vyacheslavovich Antokhin
Moscow
27/02/2022
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 (see Korneyeva v. Russia, no. 72051/17, § 34, 8 October 2019; Ryabinina and Others v. Russia [Committee], nos. 50271/06 and 8 other applications, § 35, 2 July 2019)
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings – final decision on 17/06/2022, the Moscow City Court,
Prot. 7 Art. 2 - delayed review of conviction by a higher tribunal - Lack of suspensive effect of an appeal against the sentence of administrative arrest, immediate execution of that sentence after conviction by a trial court,
Art. 6 (1) - and Art. 6 (3) (d) - unfair trial in view of restrictions on the right to examine witnesses - Inability to cross-examine during the court proceedings the police officers on whose written statements the applicant’s conviction was based: final decision on 17/06/2022, Moscow City Court
3801/22*
24/12/2021
Eldar Aliyevich KURMAKAYEV
1989
Memorial Human Rights Centre
Moscow
21/04/2021
11:00 a.m.
21/04/2021
3 p.m.
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 (see Korneyeva v. Russia, no. 72051/17, § 34, 8 October 2019; Ryabinina and Others v. Russia [Committee], nos. 50271/06 and 8 other applications, § 35, 2 July 2019)
Art. 10 (1) - conviction for making calls to participate in public events - rally to support A. Navalnyy on 21/04/2021 in Volgograd, Article 20.2 § 2 of CAO, fine of RUB 10,000, final decision Volgograd Regional Court on 24/06/2021
25698/22
17/05/2022
Aleksey Olegovich KOLEGOV
1970
Ernest Aleksandrovich Mezak
Saint-Barthélemy-d’Anjou
21/04/2021
23/04/2021
Detention as an administrative suspect: no evidence/assessment of “exceptional circumstances” under Art. 27.3 § 1 CAO (see Butkevich v. Russia, no. 5865/07, §§ 63-64, 13 February 2018; Tsvetkova and Others v. Russia, nos. 54381/08 and 5 others, §§ 121-22, 10 April 2018) , Detention as an administrative suspect: the applicant remained in detention after the offence record had been compiled (see Korneyeva v. Russia, no. 72051/17, § 35, 8 October 2019)
Art. 10 (1) - conviction for making calls to participate in public events - rally to support A. Navalnyy on 21/04/2021 in Syktyvkar, Article 20.2 § 2 of CAO, fine of RUB 25,000, final decision taken by the Supreme Court of the Komi Republic 17/11/2021,
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings – see the proceedings above
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy