Communicated on 7 November 2016
THIRD SECTION
Application no. 27863/12
Aleksey Vladilenovich SHKITSKIY
against Russia
lodged on 31 March 2012
STATEMENT OF FACTS
The applicant, Mr Aleksey Vladilenovich Shkitskiy, is a Russian national, who was born in 1975 and lives in Irkutsk.
A. The circumstances of the case
The facts of the case, as submitted by the applicant, may be summarised as follows.
On 20 February 2009, the applicant, an advocate at the time, was elected to be a member of the Council of the Regional Bar Association.
On 24 October 2010 the members of the Council conducted the elections of the President of the Regional Bar Association. Five members of the Council voted for S. and the other five voted for V.
On an unspecified date S. successfully applied to the Commercial Court of the Irkutsk Region to enjoin V. from fulfilling the functions of the acting President of the Bar Association.
A number of lawyers, including the applicant, complained to the Supreme Judicial Qualifications Board and the President of the Supreme Commercial Court of the Irkutsk Region about S.’s actions. In particular, the complaint alleged that: (1) S. announced in public that his opponents in the Council of the Bar Association would be disbarred and that he would organise “red terror” in response to the “orange revolution”; (2) S.’s ultimate goal was to get rid of his opponents in the Council of the Bar Association through rotation and disbarment; (3) S. had extra professional relationship with the Deputy President of the Commercial Court of the Irkutsk Region lawyer S. who was instrumental in ensuring a favourable outcome for the proceedings instituted by S.; (4) through his personal connections with the Deputy President of the Commercial Court, S. obtained an injunction against V and ensured that a group of bailiffs be present at the Bar Association’s conference in order to put pressure on the participants and his opponents.
On 18 July 2011 the First Deputy of the President of the Commercial Court informed the complainants that their allegations had not been confirmed by the conducted inquiry.
On 27 July 2011 the President of the Commercial Court of the Irkustk Region forwarded a copy of the lawyers’ complaint to the Bar Association and the First Vice-President of the Bar Association instituted disciplinary proceedings against the applicant.
On 31 October 2011 the Council of the Bar Association disbarred the applicant. The Council considered that (1) the letters sent by a group of the lawyers to the judicial qualifications board and the president of the commercial court had not been a correct or permissible conduct in response to the actions of the judges of the commercial court; (2) the complaints had contained untrue allegations damaging to the reputation and goodwill of the judges B. and R. and lawyer S.; (3) the applicant had been disrespectful towards them. The Council concluded that (1) the applicant had violated the legislation and the Advocate’s Code of Professional Conduct; (2) the dissemination of information damaging reputation and goodwill of judges and advocates was incompatible with the status of a member of the bar; (3) the applicant’s conduct had disparaged the bar association and its members.
On 8 December 2011 the Kirovskiy District Court of Irkutsk dismissed the applicant’s complaint against the decision of 31 October 2011.
On 11 March 2012 the Irkutsk Regional Court upheld the judgment of 8 December 2011 on appeal.
B. Relevant domestic law
Advocate’s disciplinary liability
1. The Advocate’s Code of Professional Conduct (Article 18 § 1) establishes that an advocate may be subject to disciplinary proceedings for a failure to abide by legislation concerning advocates’ activities and advocacy and for failure to abide by the Code itself. Any impropriety discrediting an advocate’s professional integrity or the legal profession, a breach of the care of duty vis-à-vis his or her client, or a failure to abide by the decisions of the qualifications committee and council of the advocates’ chamber gives rise to disciplinary liability (Article 19 § 1).
2. The disciplinary sanctions available are: reprimand; warning; disbarment; or other sanctions as determined by the conference of the advocates’ chamber (Article 18 § 2).
COMPLAINT
The applicant complains under Article 10 of the Convention that he was disbarred for having expressed his opinion.
QUESTION TO THE PARTIES
As regards the applicant’s disbarment, was the interference with his right to freedom of expression, in particular his right to impart information, justified under Article 10 § 2 of the Convention?
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy