10618/19

THIRD SECTION CASE OF LOGINOV AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA (Application no. 10618/19)             JUDGMENT   STRASBOURG 6 March 2025   This judgment is final but it may be subject to editorial revision. In the case of Loginov and Others v. Russia, The European Court of Human Rights (Third Section), sitting as a Committee composed of:  Diana Kovatcheva, President,  Úna Ní Raifeartaigh,  Mateja Đurović, judges, and Viktoriya Maradudina, Acting Deputy Section Registrar, Having deliberated in private on 13 February 2025, Delivers the following judgment, which was adopted on that date: PROCEDURE 1.  The case originated in an application against Russia lodged with the Court under Article 34 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (“the Convention”) on 25 February 2019. 2.  The applicants were represented by Mr P. Muzny, a lawyer practising in Geneva. 3.  The Russian Government (“the Government”) were given notice of the application. THE FACTS 4.  The list of applicants and the relevant details of the application are set out in the appended table. 5.  The applicants complained of their criminal prosecution for pursuing the activities of a religious organisation of Jehovah’s Witnesses. They also raised other complaints under the provisions of the Convention. THE LAW 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 application (see Fedotova and Others v. Russia [GC], nos. 40792/10 and 2 others, §§ 68‑73, 17 January 2023). ALLEGED VIOLATION OF ARTICLE 9 of the Convention 7.  The applicants complained principally of their criminal prosecution as members of the Jehovah’s Witnesses religious organisation. They relied on Article 9 of the Convention. 8.  In the leading case of Taganrog LRO and Others v. Russia (nos. 32401/10 and 19 others, §§ 256-73, 7 June 2022), the Court held that, since the authorities had failed to demonstrate that the applicants have been involved in any socially dangerous activities of an extremist nature, the applicants’ prosecution and conviction for peacefully practising the religion of Jehovah’s Witnesses in community with others had been based on the impermissibly broad formulation and application of the extremism legislation and also did not pursue any legitimate aim or “pressing social need”. It concluded that there has therefore been a violation of Article 9 of the Convention on account of the criminal prosecution of the applicants. 9.  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 on the admissibility and merits of these complaints. 10.  These complaints are therefore admissible and disclose a breach of Article 9 of the Convention. OTHER ALLEGED VIOLATIONS UNDER WELL-ESTABLISHED CASE-LAW 11.  The applicants submitted other complaints which also raised issues under the Convention, 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. Having examined all the material before it, the Court concludes that they also disclose violations of the Convention in the light of its findings in Taganrog LRO and Others, cited above, concerning the unlawfulness of pretrial detention within the criminal procedure tainted with arbitrariness as a whole, and Fortalnov and Others v. Russia, nos. 7077/06 and 12 others, §§ 76-79, 26 June 2018, related to unlawful detention in general, and Dirdizov v. Russia, no. 41461/10, §§ 101-111, 27 November 2012, concerning unreasonably lengthy detention on remand. APPLICATION OF ARTICLE 41 OF THE CONVENTION 12.  Regard being had to the documents in its possession and to its case‑law (see, in particular, Taganrog LRO and Others, cited above, § 300), the Court considers it reasonable to award the sums indicated in the appended table. FOR THESE REASONS, THE COURT, UNANIMOUSLY, Holds that it has jurisdiction to deal with this application as it relates to facts that took place before 16 September 2022; Declares the application admissible; Holds that this application discloses a breach of Article 9 of the Convention on account of the applicants’ criminal prosecution for pursuing the activities of the religious organisation of Jehovah’s Witnesses by organising services of worship and peacefully practicing their religion in community with others; Holds that there has been a violation of the Convention 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 amount 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 amount 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 6 March 2025, pursuant to Rule 77 §§ 2 and 3 of the Rules of Court.    Viktoriya Maradudina Diana Kovatcheva  Acting Deputy Registrar President   APPENDIX Application raising complaints under Article 9 of the Convention (prohibition of the religious organisation of Jehovah’s Witnesses for “extremism”, and criminal prosecution of its followers)   Application no. Date of introduction Applicant’s name Year of birth   Representative’s name and location Substance of the complaint 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 (in euros)[1] 10618/19 25/02/2019 (9 applicants) Sergey Pavlovich LOGINOV     Vyacheslav Pavlovich BORONOS     Yevgeniy Anatolyevich FEDIN     Yevgeniy Nikolayevich KAYRYAK     Artem Stanislavovich KIM     Aleksey Nikolayevich PLEKHOV     Artur Vasilyevich SEVERINCHIK   Kirill Arturovich SEVERINCHIK     Sergey Vladimirovich VOLOSNIKOV Muzny Petr Geneva criminal prosecution, arrest and detention of the applicants on the ground of their religious beliefs as Jehovah Witnesses, proceedings possibly ongoing as of 16/09/2022 proceedings pending, at least as of the date of lodging the application Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - between 15/02/2019, 6.30 a.m., and 15/02/2019, 11 p.m. or later (Mr Kim, Mr Volosnikov, Mr Boronos, Mr Kayryak, Mr Plekhov, Mr K. Severinchik), detention (criminal) for more than three hours without any written record; no reference to any evidence proving the existence of a reasonable suspicion of the applicants’ having committed a crime,   Art. 5 (3) - excessive length of pre-trial detention - Mr Loginov and Mr Fedin, since 15/02/2019 and possibly ongoing as of 16/09/2022, Surgut Town Court, Khanty-Mansi Regional Court, fragility of the reasons employed by the courts, use of assumptions, in the absence of any evidentiary basis, of the risks of absconding or obstructing justice, failure to assess the applicant’s personal situation reducing the risks of re-offending, colluding or absconding 7,500, to each of the applicants   [1] Plus any tax that may be chargeable to the applicants.