1027/19;1032/19;45059/21;45062/21;45064/21;45067/21;47070/21;47523/21;47817/21;48222/21;49373/21;50514/21;51061/21;53901/21;54242/21;55561/21;57852/21;58960/21;59092/21;59268/21;57/22;3982/22;35287/22;37335/22;39969/22;43086/22
WyrokETPCz2024-06-13ECLI:CE:ECHR:2024:0613JUD000102719
Analiza orzeczenia
Sekcja wygenerowana przez AI na podstawie treści orzeczenia — nie stanowi cytatu.
Zagadnienie prawne
Czy środki podjęte przez władze rosyjskie przeciwko organizatorom i uczestnikom zgromadzeń publicznych, w tym aresztowania i skazania za wykroczenia administracyjne, stanowiły nieproporcjonalną ingerencję w prawo do wolności zgromadzeń (art. 11 Konwencji) oraz czy naruszały inne prawa konwencyjne, takie jak prawo do wolności i bezpieczeństwa osobistego (art. 5 ust. 1), prawo do rzetelnego procesu (art. 6 ust. 1) i prawo do niebycia sądzonym lub karanym dwukrotnie (art. 4 Protokołu nr 7)?Ratio decidendi
Trybunał stwierdził, że środki podjęte przeciwko skarżącym, polegające na aresztowaniach i skazaniach za wykroczenia administracyjne w związku z ich udziałem w zgromadzeniach publicznych, stanowiły nieproporcjonalną ingerencję w ich prawo do wolności zgromadzeń, ponieważ nie były one „konieczne w społeczeństwie demokratycznym”. Trybunał oparł się na swojej ugruntowanej linii orzeczniczej, w której już wcześniej stwierdzał naruszenia w podobnych sprawach dotyczących wolności zgromadzeń w Rosji. W odniesieniu do innych skarg, Trybunał również uznał naruszenia Konwencji i jej Protokołów, odwołując się do konkretnych precedensów dotyczących bezprawnego pozbawienia wolności, braku strony oskarżającej w postępowaniach administracyjnych oraz zasady ne bis in idem.Stan faktyczny
Skarżący byli organizatorami lub uczestnikami zgromadzeń publicznych w Rosji, w tym wieców opozycyjnych i protestów wspierających Aleksieja Nawalnego lub przeciwko wojnie w Ukrainie. Władze rosyjskie podjęły wobec nich środki, takie jak aresztowania i skazania za wykroczenia administracyjne, w związku z ich udziałem w tych zgromadzeniach. Skarżący zostali ukarani grzywnami, pracami społecznymi lub zatrzymaniem administracyjnym, a ich skargi dotyczyły nieproporcjonalności tych działań oraz innych naruszeń praw konwencyjnych.Rozstrzygnięcie
Trybunał jednogłośnie: łączy skargi; stwierdza, że ma jurysdykcję do rozpatrzenia skarg, ponieważ dotyczą one faktów, które miały miejsce przed 16 września 2022 r.; uznaje skargi na podstawie art. 11 Konwencji oraz inne skargi na podstawie ugruntowanego orzecznictwa Trybunału za dopuszczalne; stwierdza, że nie ma potrzeby odrębnego rozpatrywania pozostałych skarg na podstawie art. 6 Konwencji; stwierdza naruszenie art. 11 Konwencji; stwierdza naruszenie Konwencji i Protokołów do niej w odniesieniu do innych skarg podniesionych na podstawie ugruntowanego orzecznictwa Trybunału; zasądza od pozwanego państwa na rzecz skarżących kwoty wskazane w załączonej tabeli tytułem zadośćuczynienia za szkodę majątkową i niemajątkową oraz kosztów i wydatków, powiększone o odsetki.Pełny tekst orzeczenia
SECOND SECTION
CASE OF MALETIN AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA
(Applications nos. 1027/19 and 25 others –
see appended list)
JUDGMENT
STRASBOURG
13 June 2024
This judgment is final but it may be subject to editorial revision.
In the case of Maletin and Others v. Russia,
The European Court of Human Rights (Second Section), sitting as a Committee composed of:
Lorraine Schembri Orland, President,
Frédéric Krenc,
Davor Derenčinović, judges,
and Viktoriya Maradudina, Acting Deputy Section Registrar,
Having deliberated in private on 23 May 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. Some applicants also raised other complaints under the provisions of the Convention.
THE LAW
JOINDER OF THE APPLICATIONS
5. Having regard to the similar subject matter of the applications, the Court finds it appropriate to examine them jointly in a single judgment.
JURISDICTION
6. 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 CONVENTION
7. 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-LAW
12. 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 Butkevich v. Russia, no. 5865/07, §§ 63-65, 13 February 2018, 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 Korneyeva, cited above, §§ 62-65 as to the right of the organisers or participants of public assemblies not to be tried and punished twice for the same offence.
REMAINING COMPLAINTS
14. Some applicants raised further additional complaints under Article 6 of the Convention concerning other aspects of fairness of the administrative‑offence proceedings. In view of the findings in paragraph 13 above, the Court considers that there is no need to deal separately with these remaining complaints.
APPLICATION OF ARTICLE 41 OF THE CONVENTION
15. 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 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 13 June 2024, pursuant to Rule 77 §§ 2 and 3 of the Rules of Court.
Viktoriya Maradudina Lorraine Schembri Orland
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]
1027/19
14/12/2018
Ivan
Yuryevich MALETIN Glukhov
Aleksey Vladimirovich
Novocheboksarsk
Opposition rally/gathering
Cheboksary
05/05/2018
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
and
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
fine of
RUB 10,000
and
fine of RUB 10,000
Supreme Court of the Chuvash Republic
06/09/2018 (two separate decisions)
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in both sets of the administrative‑offence proceedings,
Prot. 7 Art. 4 - right not to be tried or punished twice in criminal proceedings - the applicant was convicted in two separate sets of administrative proceedings (Art. 20.2 § 5 of CAO) for participation in a rally which was qualified by the domestic authorities as two separate events (a rally and a gathering).
3,500
1032/19
14/12/2018
Aleksandr Sergeyevich MIKHANKOV Glukhov
Aleksey Vladimirovich
Novocheboksarsk
Opposition rally/gathering
Cheboksary
05/05/2018
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
article 19.3 § 1 of CAO
20 hours of community work
and
20 hours of community work
and
fine of RUB 1,000
Supreme Court of the Chuvash Republic
05/07/2018 (three separate decisions)
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in all sets of the administrative‑offence proceedings,
Prot. 7 Art. 4 - right not to be tried or punished twice in criminal proceedings - the applicant was convicted in two separate sets of administrative proceedings (Art. 20.2 § 5 of CAO) for participation in a rally which was qualified by the domestic authorities as two separate events (a rally and a gathering). He was also convicted in the third set of administrative proceeding (Art.19.3 §1 of CAO) for the facts which constituted the basis of the first two convictions.
4,000
45059/21
09/08/2021
Lev
Vsevolodovich LUKHOVITSKIY Karavayev Aleksandr Yevgenyevich
Nizhniy Novgorod
Rally “Free Navalnyy”
Moscow
02/02/2021
article 20.2 § 6.1 of CAO
detention for 10 days
Moscow City Court
10/02/2021
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings.
5,000
45062/21
09/08/2021
Pavel
Grigoryevich DOLGOV Karavayev Aleksandr Yevgenyevich
Nizhniy Novgorod
Rally “Free Navalnyy”
Moscow
02/02/2021
article 20.2 § 6.1 of CAO
detention for 10 days
Moscow City Court
10/02/2021
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings.
5,000
45064/21
09/08/2021
Ilya
Mikhaylovich GOLOVLEV Karavayev Aleksandr Yevgenyevich
Nizhniy Novgorod
Rally “Free Navalnyy”
Moscow
02/02/2021
article 20.2 § 6.1 of CAO
detention for 10 days
Moscow City Court
10/02/2021
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings.
5,000
45067/21
09/08/2021
Grigoriy Denisovich MIKHAYLOV Karavayev Aleksandr Yevgenyevich
Nizhniy Novgorod
Rally “Free Navalnyy”
Moscow
02/02/2021
article 20.2 § 6.1 of CAO
detention for 10 days
Moscow City Court
10/02/2021
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings.
5,000
47070/21
12/09/2021
Yevgeniy Viktorovich STUPIN
Rally “Free Navalnyy”
Moscow
23/01/2021
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
fine of RUB 20,000
Moscow City Court
27/05/2021
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings.
3,500
47523/21
05/09/2021
Petr
Sersheyevich GRIGORYEV Bubon
Konstantin Vladimirovich
Khabarovsk
Rally to support Furgal and Navalny
Khabarovsk
31/01/2021
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
fine of RUB 10,000
Khabarovsk Regional Court
05/03/2021
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - escorting to and detention at the police station for compiling an offence report from 1.30 p.m. until 3.15 p.m. on 31/01/2021.
4,000
47817/21
10/09/2021
Ilya
Genrikhovich SHKVARIN Chernova Nataliya Nikolayevna
Petrozavodsk
Rally “Free Navalnyy”
Petrozavodsk
23/01/2021
article 20.2 § 2 of CAO
detention for 2 days
Supreme Court of the Republic of Karelia
10/03/2021
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - escorting to and detention at the police station for compiling an offence report from 1.40 p.m. on 23/01/2021 until the hearing in the first-instance court on 24/01/2021,
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings.
5,000
48222/21
19/08/2021
Gleb Vladimirovich ZVONOVSKIY Krasikov Vladimir Vladimirovich
Samara
Rally “Free Navalnyy”
Samara
31/01/2021
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
fine of RUB 15,000
Samara Regional Court
13/05/2021
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - escorting to the police station on 31/01/2021 for compiling an offence report,
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings.
4,000
49373/21
16/09/2021
Agata Aleksandrovna MARAMBEY Lepekhin
Andrey Gennadyevich
Chelyabinsk
Rally “Free Navalnyy”
Chelyabinsk
23/01/2021
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
fine of RUB 15,000
Chelyabinsk Regional Court
18/03/2021
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - escorting to the police station for compiling an offence report on 23/01/2021,
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings.
4,000
50514/21
27/09/2021
Ilya
Vladimirovich KRYUCHKOV Gilmanov
Mansur
Idrisovich
Podolsk
Opposition rally
Moscow
04/11/2020
article 20.2 § 6.1 of CAO
fine of RUB 20,000
Moscow City Court
20/04/2021
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - escorting to and detention at the police station for compiling an offence report from 2.25 p.m. until 9.00 p.m. on 04/11/2020,
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings.
4,000
51061/21
30/09/2021
Lidiya
Borisovna OLSHANSKAYA Gak
Irina Vladimirovna
Rostov-on-Don
Rally “Free Navalnyy”
Rostov-on-Don
31/01/2021
article 20.2 § 6.1 of CAO
fine of RUB 11,000
Rostov Regional Court
01/04/2021
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - escorting to and detention at the police station for compiling an offence report from 12.30 p.m. until 9.00 p.m. on 31/01/2021,
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings.
4,000
53901/21
18/10/2021
Zhirayr Karoyevich KAROYAN Gilmanov
Mansur
Idrisovich
Podolsk
Opposition rally
Moscow
22/06/2020
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
fine of RUB 10,000
Moscow City Court
29/06/2021
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - escorting to and detention at the police station for compiling an offence report from 6.00 p.m. until 10.10 p.m. on 22/06/2020,
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings.
4,000
54242/21
20/10/2021
Mikael
Valeryevich VARDANYAN
Rally “Free Navalnyy”
St Petersburg
23/01/2021
article 20.2.2 § 1 of CAO
fine of RUB 10,000
St Petersburg City Court
20/04/2021
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - escorting to and detention at the police station for compiling an offence report from 7.30 p.m. on 23/01/2021 until 2.00 p.m. on 24/01/2021,
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings.
4,000
55561/21
15/11/2021
Aleksandra Aleksandrovna SMIRNOVA
Rally “Free Navalnyy”
Moscow
02/02/2021
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
fine of RUB 10,000
Moscow City Court
17/05/2021
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - escorting to and detention at the police station for compiling an offence report from 11.50 p.m. on 02/02/2021 until 6.59 a.m. on 03/02/2021,
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings.
4,000
57852/21
03/11/2021
Aleksandr Valeryevich POYARKOV Gilmanov
Mansur
Idrisovich
Podolsk
Opposition rally
Moscow
22/06/2020
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
fine of RUB 10,000
Moscow City Court
29/06/2021
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - escorting to and detention at the police station for compiling an offence report from 6.10 p.m. until 10.30 p.m. on 22/06/2020,
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings.
4,000
58960/21
12/11/2021
Ilya
Antonovich STARIKOV Glukhov
Aleksey Vladimirovich
Novocheboksarsk
Rally “Free Navalnyy”
Samara
23/01/2021
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
fine of RUB 10,000
Samara Regional Court
20/05/2021
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - escorting to and detention at the police station for compiling an offence report from 3.50 p.m. until 8.00 p.m. on 23/01/2021,
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings.
4,000
59092/21
21/10/2021
Murat
Rubinovich MUKASHEV Gilmanov
Mansur
Idrisovich
Podolsk
Opposition rally
Moscow
22/06/2020
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
fine of RUB 20,000
Moscow City Court
29/07/2021
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - escorting to and detention at the police station for compiling an offence report from 6.20 p.m. on 22/06/2020 until 2.00 a.m. on 23/06/2020;
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings.
4,000
59268/21
12/11/2021
Timofey
Igorevich OREKHOV Gilmanov
Mansur
Idrisovich
Podolsk
Opposition rally
Moscow
22/06/2020
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
fine of RUB 20,000
Moscow City Court
29/06/2021
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - Escorting to and detention at the police station for compiling an offence report from 6.00 p.m. on 22/06/2020 until 12.30 a.m. on 23/06/2020;
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings.
4,000
57/22
03/12/2021
Sergey Aleksandrovich YEREMIN Krasikov Vladimir Vladimirovich
Samara
Rally “Free Navalnyy”
Samara
23/01/2021
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
fine of RUB 10,000
Samara Regional Court
16/09/2021
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - escorting to and detention at the police station for compiling an offence report from 3.30 p.m. until 4.26 p.m. on 23/01/2021;
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings.
4,000
3982/22
03/01/2022
Darya
Anatolyevna ARSENEVA Antokhin Yevgeniy Vyacheslavovich
Moscow
Rally “Free Navalnyy”
Moscow
31/01/2021
article 20.2 § 6.1 of CAO
fine of RUB 10,000
Moscow City Court
13/08/2021
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - escorting to the police station on 31/01/2021 for compiling an offence report,
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings.
4,000
35287/22
02/07/2022
Valeriya Andreyevna ALEKSEYEVA Zyryanova
Mariya Sergeyevna
St Petersburg
Protest against war in Ukraine
St Petersburg
24/02/2022
article 20.2 § 6.1 of CAO
detention for 10 days
St Petersburg City Court
03/03/2022
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - escorting to and detention at the police station for compiling an offence report from 7.00 p.m. on 24/02/2022 until 26/02/2022.
5,000
37335/22
16/07/2022
Andrey Aleksandrovich DUZHIK Markin Konstantin Aleksandrovich
Velikiy Novgorod
Protest against war in Ukraine
Novgorod
06/03/2022
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
20 hours of community work
Novgorod Regional Court
04/04/2022
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - escorting to and detention at the police station for compiling an offence report from 2.20 p.m. until 8.30 p.m. on 06/03/2022,
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings.
4,000
39969/22
04/08/2022
Yekaterina Stanislavovna VASILYEVA Podolskiy
Sergey Viktorovich
St Petersburg
Protest against war in Ukraine
St Petersburg
26/03/2022
article 20.3.3 § 1 of CAO
fine of RUB 30,000
St Petersburg City Court
26/05/2022
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - escorting to and detention at the police station for compiling an offence report from 2.50 p.m. until 7.30 p.m. on 26/03/2022,
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings.
4,000
43086/22
20/08/2022
Yekaterina Andreyevna USOLKINA Pershakova Yelena
Yuryevna
Moscow
Protest against war in Ukraine
Perm
24/02/2022
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
fine of RUB 10,000
Perm Regional Court
21/04/2022
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings.
3,500
[1] Plus any tax that may be chargeable to the applicants.
© Rada Europy / Europejski Trybunał Praw Człowieka, źródło: HUDOC (hudoc.echr.coe.int), pozyskano 29.07.2026. · Źródło