Communicated on 15 December 2020
Published on 11 January 2021
FIFTH SECTION
Application no. 32960/13
Bogdan Andreyevich TSIMEYKO
against Ukraine
lodged on 17 May 2013
SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE
The application concerns an alleged interference with the applicant’s freedom of peaceful assembly on account of bans imposed by the domestic courts on 27, 29 October and 5 December 2012 and on 28 February 2013 on holding manifestations at certain places for a certain period of time. As a result, the police dispersed peaceful demonstrations held by the applicant and his supporters on 29 October, 1 and 8 November 2012 and on unspecified dates between 6 December 2012 and 31 March 2013. The police also charged him with administrative offences which, eventually, were dismissed by the courts.
While the applicant relied on different Articles of the Convention in his application form, his complaints fall to be examined under Articles 11 and 13 of the Convention which are the appropriate provisions in the specific circumstances of the case.
QUESTIONS TO THE PARTIES
1. Has there been an interference with the applicant’s freedom of peaceful assembly, within the meaning of Article 11 § 1 of the Convention?
If so, was that interference prescribed by law and necessary in terms of Article 11 § 2 (see Vyerentsov v. Ukraine, no. 20372/11, 11 April 2013)?
2. Did the applicant have at his disposal an effective domestic remedy for his complaint under Article 11 as required by Article 13 of the Convention?
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy