Published on 27 March 2023
SECOND SECTION
Application no. 52077/22
Sofya Igorevna NAZAREDSKAYA against Russia
and 24 other applications
(see list appended)
PROCEDURAL INFORMATION
Following a preliminary examination of the admissibility of the applications on 2 March 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 the complaints raised under Article 11 of the Convention relating to the disproportionate measures against organisers and participants of public assemblies which are the subject of well-established case law of the Court (see 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).
APPENDIX – STATEMENT OF FACTS
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
52077/22*
21/10/2022
Sofya Igorevna NAZAREDSKAYA
2000
Manifestation against the war in Ukraine
Moscow
26/02/2022
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
administrative fine of RUB 10,000
Moscow City Court
21/06/2022
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings (see Karelin v. Russia, no. 926/08, §§ 69-84, 20 September 2016);
Art. 6 (1) - and Art. 6 (3) (d) - unfair trial in view of restrictions on the right to examine witnesses - the applicant complained of the inability to cross-examine in the first-instance trial two police officers on whose written statements his conviction was based.
52436/22
21/10/2022
Sergey Georgiyevich KOLESNIKOV
1970
Manifestation against the war in Ukraine
Moscow
06/03/2022
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
administrative fine of RUB 20,000
Moscow City Court
29/06/2022
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention – on 06/03/2022 the applicant was 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). The applicant also complained that he remained in detention for more than three hours after the offence record was drawn up without any justification (Tsvetkova and Others v. Russia, nos. 54381/08 and 5 others, §§ 121-22, 10 April 2018): he was detained at 4.25 p.m. and released at 11.50 p.m.;
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings (see Karelin v. Russia, no. 926/08, §§ 69-84, 20 September 2016);
Art. 6 (1) - and Art. 6 (3) (d) - unfair criminal proceedings - the applicant complained of the impossibility to adduce evidence in his defence (video recordings, photos) and to cross-examine police officers on whose statements his conviction was based.
54282/22*
02/11/2022
Kori MALTS
2002
Manifestation against the war in Ukraine
Moscow
24/02/2022
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
administrative fine of RUB 20,000
Moscow City Court
05/07/2022
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - on 24/02/2022 the applicant was 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: 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): he was detained from 9.00 p.m. 24/02/2022 to 6.00 a.m. 25/02/2022;
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings (see Karelin v. Russia, no. 926/08, §§ 69-84, 20 September 2016);
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 officers on whose written statements the applicant’s conviction was based.
54431/22*
29/10/2022
Anastasiya Stanislavovna YAKUBA
2001
Manifestation against the war in Ukraine
Moscow
06/03/2022
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
administrative fine of RUB 20,000
Moscow City Court
29/06/2022
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - on 06/03/2022 the applicant was 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 (see Karelin v. Russia, no. 926/08, §§ 69-84, 20 September 2016);
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 officers on whose written statements the applicant’s conviction was based.
56096/22*
10/11/2022
Vladimir Yevgenyevich KONSHIN
1981
Manifestation against the war in Ukraine
Moscow
27/02/2022
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
administrative fine of RUB 15,000
Moscow City Court
25/07/2022
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings (see Karelin v. Russia, no. 926/08, §§ 69-84, 20 September 2016);
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - the applicant was arrested at 4.30 p.m. on 27/02/2022, escorted to the police station and detained there until 1.35 a.m. on 28/02/2022, that is more than three hours after the offence record was drawn up without any justification (Tsvetkova and Others v. Russia, nos. 54381/08 and 5 others, §§ 121-22, 10 April 2018);
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 officers on whose written statements the applicant’s conviction was based.
56112/22*
20/11/2022
Nadezhda Viktorovna UTKINA
1986
Natalya Andreyevna Baranova
Moscow
Manifestation against the war in Ukraine
Moscow
24/02/2022
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
administrative fine of RUB 20,000
Moscow City Court
21/07/2022
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - on 24/02/2022 the applicant was 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 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): arrested at 7.40 p.m. on 24/02/2022 and released at 2 a.m. on 25/02/2022;
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings (see Karelin v. Russia, no. 926/08, §§ 69-84, 20 September 2016);
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 officers on whose written statements the applicant’s conviction was based.
56387/22
21/11/2022
Daniil Sergeyevich BOROZDIN
1996
Manifestation against the war in Ukraine
Moscow
27/02/2022
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
administrative fine of RUB 20,000
Moscow City Court
21/07/2022
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - on 27/02/2022 at 6.05 p.m. the applicant was taken to the police station as an administrative suspect and released at 12.30 a.m. on 28/02/2022: 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 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 (see Karelin v. Russia, no. 926/08, §§ 69-84, 20 September 2016);
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 officers on whose written statements the applicant’s conviction was based.
56818/22
09/11/2022
Arina Igorevna MAKAROVA
1999
Manifestation against the war in Ukraine
Moscow
06/03/2022
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
administrative fine of RUB 20,000
Moscow City Court
13/07/2022
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention – the applicant was taken to the police station on 06/03/2022 at 4 p.m. 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 (see Karelin v. Russia, no. 926/08, §§ 69-84, 20 September 2016);
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 officers on whose written statements the applicant’s conviction was based.
56891/22*
08/12/2022
Igor Gennadyevich SYCHEV
2000
Timofey Borisovich Ushakov
Kokoshkino
Manifestation against the war in Ukraine
Moscow
27/02/2022
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
administrative fine of RUB 15,000
Moscow City Court
15/08/2022
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings (see Karelin v. Russia, no. 926/08, §§ 69-84, 20 September 2016);
Art. 6 (1) and Art. 6 (3) (d) - unfair criminal proceedings - the applicant complained of various deficiencies in the administrative offence proceedings (denial of domestic courts to adduce evidence supporting his version of events, impossibility to cross-examine police officers on whose statements the conviction was based).
56904/22
19/11/2022
Mariya Yulyevna VERTKINA
1996
Anastasiya Vladimirovna Pilipenko
St Petersburg
Manifestation against the war in Ukraine
St. Petersburg
27/02/2022
article 20.2.2 § 1 of CAO
administrative fine of RUB 10,000
St. Petersburg City Court
13/09/2022
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention – the applicant was taken to the police station at 6.15 p.m. on 27/02/2022 as an administrative suspect and released at 10 p.m.: 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). The applicant also complained that she remained in detention more than three hours after the offence record was drawn up without any justification (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 (see Karelin v. Russia, no. 926/08, §§ 69-84, 20 September 2016);
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 officers on whose written statements the applicant’s conviction was based.
56907/22*
19/11/2022
Angelina Sergeyevna BULONAKOVA
1995
Anastasiya Vladimirovna Pilipenko
St Petersburg
Manifestation against the war in Ukraine
St Petersburg
27/02/2022
article 20.2.2 § 1 of CAO
administrative fine of RUB 10,000
St Petersburg City Court
19/07/2022
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings (see Karelin v. Russia, no. 926/08, §§ 69-84, 20 September 2016);
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - the applicant was taken to a police station as an administrative suspect: there is no evidence/assessment that it was impossible to draw up an offence record on the spot (Article 27.2 § 1 of the CAO) and to achieve the goals set by Art. 27.1 of CAO, e.g., to identify the suspect (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). The applicant also complained that she remained in detention more than three hours after the offence record was drawn up without any justification (Tsvetkova and Others v. Russia, nos. 54381/08 and 5 others, §§ 121-22, 10 April 2018): she was detained at 6.15 p.m. on 27/02/2022 and released at 12.40 a.m. on 28/02/2022;
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 officers on whose written statements the applicant’s conviction was based.
56909/22
01/12/2022
Maksim Glebovich MELENCHENKO
2001
Varvara Dmitriyevna Mikhaylova
St Petersburg
Manifestation against the war in Ukraine
Moscow
03/03/2022
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
administrative fine of RUB 15,000
Moscow City Court
03/08/2022
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings (see Karelin v. Russia, no. 926/08, §§ 69-84, 20 September 2016);
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention – on 03/03/2022 the applicant was taken to a police station as an administrative suspect: there is no evidence/assessment that it was impossible to draw up an offence record on the spot (Article 27.2 § 1 of the CAO) and to achieve the goals set by Art. 27.1 of CAO, e.g., to identify the suspect (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).
56917/22*
18/11/2022
Varvara Andreyevna POPOVA
2001
Manifestation against the war in Ukraine
Moscow
03/03/2022
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
administrative fine of RUB 15,000
Moscow City Court
19/07/2022
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings (see Karelin v. Russia, no. 926/08, §§ 69-84, 20 September 2016);
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention – on 03/03/2022 the applicant was taken to a police station as an administrative suspect: there is no evidence/assessment that it was impossible to draw up an offence record on the spot (Article 27.2 § 1 of the CAO) and to achieve the goals set by Art. 27.1 of CAO, e.g., to identify the suspect (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) - 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 officers on whose written statements the applicant’s conviction was based.
56927/22
28/11/2022
Ivan Nikolayevich LOZHKIN
1985
Manifestation against the war in Ukraine
Moscow
06/03/2022
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
administrative fine of RUB 10,000
Moscow City Court
29/07/2022
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - the applicant was taken to the police station at 3.35 p.m. on 06/03/2022 as an administrative suspect and released at 9.40 p.m. on the same day: 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). The applicant also complained that he remained in detention for more than three hours after the offence record was drawn up without any justification (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 (see Karelin v. Russia, no. 926/08, §§ 69-84, 20 September 2016);
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 officers on whose written statements the applicant’s conviction was based.
56928/22*
25/11/2022
Polina Aleksandrovna LEMESHEVA
1994
Olga Vladimirovna Timireva
Moscow
Manifestation against the war in Ukraine
Moscow
06/03/2022
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
administrative fine of RUB 20,000
Moscow City Court
25/08/2022
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings (see Karelin v. Russia, no. 926/08, §§ 69-84, 20 September 2016).
57020/22
13/11/2022
Sergey Igorevich KRAUKLISH
1969
Mariya Sergeyevna Zyryanova
St Petersburg
Manifestation against the war in Ukraine
St Petersburg
06/03/2022
article 20.2 § 6.1 of CAO
administrative fine of RUB 10,000
St Petersburg City Court
14/07/2022
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - on 06/03/2022 at 2.50 p.m. the applicant was taken to the police station as an administrative suspect and released at 9.15 p.m. on the same day: 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 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 (see Karelin v. Russia, no. 926/08, §§ 69-84, 20 September 2016);
Art. 6 (1) - and Art. 6 (3) (d) - unfair trial in view of restrictions on the right to examine witnesses - the applicant complained of the inability to cross-examine in the first-instance trial two police officers on whose written statements his conviction was based. He explained that their testimony was decisive for the outcome of the case.
57033/22*
15/11/2022
Anna Mikhaylovna MUKHOYAN
1999
Manifestation against the war in Ukraine
Moscow
06/03/2022
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
administrative fine of RUB 20,000
Moscow City Court
15/07/2022
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention – on 06/03/2022 the applicant was taken to a police station as an administrative suspect: there is no evidence/assessment that it was impossible to draw up an offence record on the spot (Article 27.2 § 1 of the CAO) and to achieve the goals set by Art. 27.1 of CAO, e.g., to identify the suspect (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 (see Karelin v. Russia, no. 926/08, §§ 69-84, 20 September 2016);
Art. 6 (1) - and Art. 6 (3) (d) - unfair trial in view of restrictions on the right to examine witnesses - the applicant complained that she had been unable to cross-examine during the court proceedings the police officers on whose written statements her conviction was based. She duly provided the officers’ names in her motions to domestic courts and explained why it was important to call and examine them.
57339/22*
19/11/2022
Ivan Dmitriyevich MITRAKOV
1993
Manifestation against the war in Ukraine
Moscow
03/03/2022
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
administrative fine of RUB 20,000
Moscow City Court
19/07/2022
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention – on 03/03/2022 the applicant was taken to a police station as an administrative suspect: there is no evidence/assessment that it was impossible to draw up an offence record on the spot (Article 27.2 § 1 of the CAO) and to achieve the goals set by Art. 27.1 of CAO, e.g., to identify the suspect (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 (see Karelin v. Russia, no. 926/08, §§ 69-84, 20 September 2016).
57396/22*
17/11/2022
Olga Dmitriyevna SLUZHBINA
2002
Manifestation against the war in Ukraine
Moscow
06/03/2022
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
administrative fine of RUB 15,000
Moscow City Court
29/07/2022
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings (see Karelin v. Russia, no. 926/08, §§ 69-84, 20 September 2016);
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention – on 06/03/2022 the applicant was taken to a police station as an administrative suspect: there is no evidence/assessment that it was impossible to draw up an offence record on the spot (Article 27.2 § 1 of the CAO) and to achieve the goals set by Art. 27.1 of CAO, e.g., to identify the suspect (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) - and Art. 6 (3) (d) - unfair trial in view of restrictions on the right to examine witnesses - the applicant complained that she had been unable to cross-examine during the court proceedings the police officers on whose written statements her conviction was based. She duly provided the officers’ names in her motions to the domestic courts and explained why it was important to call and examine them.
57514/22*
17/11/2022
Galina Vladimirovna BOBROVA
1968
Manifestation against the war in Ukraine
Moscow
06/03/2022
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
administrative fine of RUB 20,000
Moscow City Court
25/07/2022
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings - (see Karelin v. Russia, no. 926/08, §§ 69-84, 20 September 2016);
Art. 6 (1) - and Art. 6 (3) (d) - unfair trial in view of restrictions on the right to examine witnesses - the applicant complained that she had been unable to cross-examine during the court proceedings the police officers on whose written statements her conviction was based. In her motions to the domestic courts, she duly explained why it was important to call and examine them;
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention – on 06/03/2022 the applicant was taken to a police station as an administrative suspect: there is no evidence/assessment that it was impossible to draw up an offence record on the spot (Article 27.2 § 1 of the CAO) and to achieve the goals set by Art. 27.1 of CAO, e.g., to identify the suspect (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).
57517/22
08/12/2022
Tatyana Valeryevna DAVIDIS
1969
Manifestation against the war in Ukraine
Moscow
27/02/2022
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
administrative fine of RUB 10,000
Moscow City Court
15/08/2022
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention – the applicant was 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). The applicant also complained that she remained in detention more than three hours after the offence record was drawn up without any justification (Tsvetkova and Others v. Russia, nos. 54381/08 and 5 others, §§ 121-22, 10 April 2018): she was detained at 4.50 p.m. on 27/02/2022 and released at 11 p.m. on the same day;
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings (see Karelin v. Russia, no. 926/08, §§ 69-84, 20 September 2016).
57546/22*
29/11/2022
Nataliya Aleksandrovna LAUVE
2000
Manifestation against the war in Ukraine
Moscow
06/03/2022
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
administrative fine of RUB 10,000
Moscow City Court
29/07/2022
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings (see Karelin v. Russia, no. 926/08, §§ 69-84, 20 September 2016);
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention and detention – on 06/03/2022 the applicant was taken to a police station as an administrative suspect: there is no evidence/assessment that it was impossible to draw up an offence record on the spot (Article 27.2 § 1 of the CAO) and to achieve the goals set by Art. 27.1 of CAO, e.g., to identify the suspect (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).
57583/22
19/11/2022
Mikhail Mikhaylovich STARIKOV
1983
Manifestation against the war in Ukraine
Moscow
03/03/2022
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
administrative fine of RUB 10,000
Moscow City Court
21/07/2022
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - on 03/03/2022 the applicant was 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 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): the applicant was arrested at 7.40 p.m. on 03/03/2022 and released at 1.30 a.m. on 04/03/2022;
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings (see Karelin v. Russia, no. 926/08, §§ 69-84, 20 September 2016);
Art. 6 (1) - and Art. 6 (3) (d) - unfair trial - inability to cross-examine in open court police officers on whose written statements the applicant’s conviction was based and to request evidence, including video recordings, in defence of the applicant’s version of events on an equal footing with the prosecution.
57714/22*
08/12/2022
Yelena Aleksandrovna DOBRIKOVA
1992
Timofey Borisovich Ushakov
Kokoshkino
Manifestation against the war in Ukraine
Moscow
27/02/2022
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
administrative fine of RUB 10,000
Moscow City Court
17/08/2022
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - the applicant was 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 (see Karelin v. Russia, no. 926/08, §§ 69-84, 20 September 2016);
Art. 6 (1) and Art. 6 (3) (d) - unfair criminal proceedings - courts’ failure to request video recording of the event from the police and the impossibility to cross-examine police officers who had witness status in the proceedings and on whose statements the conviction was based.
57852/22*
21/11/2022
Yevgeniy Yuryevich SIMONOV
1977
Manifestation against the war in Ukraine
Moscow
06/03/2022
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
administrative fine of RUB 20,000
Moscow City Court
21/07/2022
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings - (see Karelin v. Russia, no. 926/08, §§ 69-84, 20 September 2016);
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention – on 06/03/2022 the applicant was taken to a police station as an administrative suspect: there is no evidence/assessment that it was impossible to draw up an offence record on the spot (Article 27.2 § 1 of the CAO) and to achieve the goals set by Art. 27.1 of CAO, e.g., to identify the suspect (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) - and Art. 6 (3) (d) - unfair trial in view of restrictions on the right to examine witnesses - the applicant complained that she had been unable to cross-examine during the court proceedings the police officers on whose written statements his conviction was based.