21113/21;42307/21;49175/21;49365/21;53975/21;55645/21;55655/21;56500/21;59266/21;2069/22;2138/22;4500/22;6203/22;7515/22;8027/22;8265/22;12281/22;13885/22;39911/22;39914/22;39977/22;40528/22;40705/22;41668/22;41674/22;41677/22;46302/22;46328/22
WyrokETPCz2025-09-18ECLI:CE:ECHR:2025:0918JUD002111321
Analiza orzeczenia
Sekcja wygenerowana przez AI na podstawie treści orzeczenia — nie stanowi cytatu.
Zagadnienie prawne
Czy środki podjęte przeciwko uczestnikom zgromadzeń publicznych w Rosji, w tym aresztowania i skazania administracyjne, były proporcjonalne i zgodne z prawem do wolności zgromadzeń oraz innymi prawami konwencyjnymi, zwłaszcza w kontekście ograniczeń związanych z COVID-19?Ratio decidendi
Trybunał stwierdził, że środki podjęte przeciwko skarżącym za udział w zgromadzeniach publicznych, w tym aresztowania i skazania administracyjne, stanowiły nieproporcjonalną ingerencję w ich prawo do wolności zgromadzeń (art. 11). Opierał się na swojej ugruntowanej linii orzeczniczej, w której już wcześniej stwierdzał naruszenia w podobnych sprawach dotyczących wolności zgromadzeń, proporcjonalności ingerencji oraz stosowania ograniczeń COVID-19. Trybunał uznał, że nie przedstawiono żadnych faktów ani argumentów, które mogłyby skłonić go do odmiennego wniosku, co oznacza, że ingerencje nie były „konieczne w społeczeństwie demokratycznym”. Dodatkowo, Trybunał stwierdził naruszenia innych artykułów Konwencji i Protokołów, takich jak art. 5 ust. 1 (bezprawne pozbawienie wolności), art. 6 ust. 1 (brak bezstronności sądu), art. 8 (użycie technologii rozpoznawania twarzy) i art. 2 Protokołu nr 7 (brak efektu zawieszającego odwołania od aresztu administracyjnego), również odwołując się do ugruntowanego orzecznictwa.Stan faktyczny
Skarżący byli organizatorami lub uczestnikami zgromadzeń publicznych w Rosji, w tym wieców poparcia dla A. Nawalnego, wieców antywojennych oraz innych wydarzeń, często odbywających się wbrew ograniczeniom związanym z COVID-19. W wyniku udziału w tych zgromadzeniach zostali aresztowani, zatrzymani i skazani za wykroczenia administracyjne, otrzymując kary grzywny lub aresztu. Niektórzy skarżyli się również na użycie technologii rozpoznawania twarzy do ich identyfikacji.Rozstrzygnięcie
Trybunał jednogłośnie: decyduje o połączeniu skarg; uznaje, że ma jurysdykcję do rozpatrzenia skarg; uznaje skargi na podstawie art. 11 Konwencji oraz inne skargi na podstawie ugruntowanego orzecznictwa za dopuszczalne i stwierdza, że nie ma potrzeby oddzielnego rozpatrywania pozostałych skarg; 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 państwa pozwanego na rzecz skarżących kwoty wskazane w załączonej tabeli tytułem szkody majątkowej i niemajątkowej oraz kosztów i wydatków.Pełny tekst orzeczenia
THIRD SECTION
CASE OF LEKIASHVILLI AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA
(Applications nos. 21113/21 and 27 others –
see appended list)
JUDGMENT
STRASBOURG
18 September 2025
This judgment is final but it may be subject to editorial revision.
In the case of Lekiashvilli and Others v. Russia,
The European Court of Human Rights (Third Section), sitting as a Committee composed of:
Diana Kovatcheva, President,
Canòlic Mingorance Cairat,
Vasilka Sancin, judges,
and Viktoriya Maradudina, Acting Deputy Section Registrar,
Having deliberated in private on 28 August 2025,
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, notably in connection with their participation in various public events in breach of COVID-19-related restrictions. They 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 in connection with their participation in various public events in breach of COVID-19-related restrictions, 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). It further refers to Nemytov and Others, no. 1257/21 and 2 Others, 27 May 2025, in so far as the application by the authorities of the COVID-19-related restrictions to assemblies are concerned.
9. In the leading cases of Nemytov and Others, cited above, 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 Glukhin v. Russia, no. 11519/20, §§ 64-91, 4 July 2023, concerning processing of applicants’ personal biometric data by using highly intrusive facial recognition technology in administrative-offence proceedings in order to identify, locate and arrest them; 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), Martynyuk v. Russia, no. 13764/15, §§ 38-42, 8 October 2019, concerning the lack of suspensive effect of an appeal against the sentence of administrative detention.
REMAINING COMPLAINTS
14. Some applicants raised further additional complaints under the Convention concerning other aspects of fairness of the administrative-offence proceedings. In view of the findings in paragraphs 11 and 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 remainder of the applications;
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;
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 18 September 2025, pursuant to Rule 77 §§ 2 and 3 of the Rules of Court.
Viktoriya Maradudina Diana Kovatcheva
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]
21113/21
06/04/2021
Yelena Nikolayevna LEKIASHVILLI
Pomazuyev Aleksandr Yevgenyevich
Vilnius
Rally in support of A. Navalnyy
Yaroslavl
23/01/2021
article 20.2 § 2 of CAO
detention for 10 days
Yaroslavl Regional Court
28/01/2021
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - escorting to and detention at the police station after compiling an offence report between 7 p.m. on 23/01/2021 and 11 a.m. on 25/01/2021.
5,000
42307/21
04/08/2021
Yegor Timofeyevich NECHAYEV
Memorial Human Rights Centre
Moscow
Anti-war rally
St Petersburg
27/02/2022
article 20.2.2. § 1 of CAO
detention for 3 days
St Petersburg City Court
12/04/2022
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - escorting to and detention at the police station after compiling an offence report between 10.50 p.m. on 27/02/2022 and 4 a.m. on 28/02/2022,
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings.
5,000
49175/21
28/09/2021
Yelena Olegovna SAVELYEVA
Memorial Human Rights Centre
Moscow
Rally "Free Navalnyy"
St Petersburg
31/01/2021
article 20.2 § 2 of CAO
fine of RUB 10,000
St Petersburg Regional Court
13/04/2021
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings,
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - escorting to and detention at the police station after compiling an offence report from 12.50 p.m. on 31/01/2021 until 00.10 a.m. on 01/02/2021.
4,000
49365/21
22/09/2021
Anna Alekseyevna KRASILNIKOVA
Memorial Human Rights Centre
Moscow
Rally "Free Navalnyy"
St Petersburg
31/01/2021
article 20.2 § 2 of CAO
fine of RUB 10,000
St Petersburg City Court
08/06/2021
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - escorting to and detention at the police station after compiling an offence report from 2.50 p.m. on 31/01/2021 until 01 a.m. on 01/02/2021,
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceeding.
4,000
53975/21
17/10/2021
Maksim Vyacheslavovich SAMOYLOV
Memorial Human Rights Centre
Moscow
Rally "Free Navalnyy"
St Petersburg
31/01/2021
article 20.2 § 2 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 after compiling an offence report between 3.10 p.m. on 31/01/2021 and 1 a.m. on 01/02/2021,
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings.
4,000
55645/21
22/10/2021
Leonid Igorevich KOVALEV
MOO MEMORIAL Human Rights Centre
St Petersburg
Rally "Free Navalnyy"
St Petersburg
21/04/2021
article 20.2 § 2 of CAO
detention for 8 days
St Petersburg City Court
28/04/2021
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - escorting to and detention at the police station after compiling an offence report from 10.10 p.m. on 21/04/2021 until 6 p.m. on 22/04/2021,
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings
Prot. 7 Art. 2 - delayed review of conviction by a higher tribunal - the sentence of administrative detention imposed on the applicant was executed immediately, on account of the lack of suspensive effect of an appeal under the CAO.
5,000
55655/21
22/10/2021
Mikhail Nikolayevich ALEKSEYEV
MOO MEMORIAL Human Rights Centre
St Petersburg
Rally "Free Navalnyy"
St Petersburg
21/04/2021
article 20.2 § 2 of CAO
detention for 5 days
St Petersburg City Court
06/07/2021
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings,
Prot. 7 Art. 2 - delayed review of conviction by a higher tribunal - the sentence of administrative detention imposed on the applicant was executed immediately, on account of the lack of suspensive effect of an appeal under the CAO,
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - escorting to and detention at the police station after compiling an offence report from 7.30 p.m. on 21/04/2021 until 4.05 p.m. on 22/04/2021.
5,000
56500/21
27/10/2021
Aleksandr Mikhaylovich SUKHANOV
MOO MEMORIAL Human Rights Centre
St Petersburg
Rally "Free Navalnyy"
St Petersburg
21/04/2021
article 20.2 § 2 of CAO
detention for 7 days
St Petersburg City Court
27/04/2021
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - escorting to and detention at the police station after compiling an offence report from 7.30 p.m. on 21/04/2021 until 2.30 p.m. on 22/04/2021,
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings.
5,000
59266/21
12/11/2021
Aliya Ramilevna ILYASOVA
Mikhaylova Varvara Dmitriyevna
St Petersburg
Rally in support of A. Navalnyy
St Petersburg
23/01/2021
St Petersburg Government Decree of 13/03/2020 related to anti-COVID-19 measures
fine of
RUB 4,000
Kuybyshevskiy District Court of St Petersburg
13/05/2021
3,500
2069/22
15/12/2021
Stanislav Yuryevich YAVORSKIY
Memorial Human Rights Centre
Moscow
Rally "Free Navalnyy"
St Petersburg
31/01/2021
article 20.2.2 § 1 of CAO
fine of RUB 10,000
St Petersburg City Court
22/06/2021
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings.
3,500
2138/22
15/12/2021
Viktoriya Aleksandrovna POPUGAYEVA
Memorial Human Rights Centre
Moscow
Rally “Free Navalnyy”
St Petersburg
21/04/2021
article 20.2.2. § 1 of CAO
detention for 2 days
St Petersburg City Court
17/06/2021
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings.
3,500
4500/22
24/12/2021
Sergey Savelyevich FEDEYEV
Memorial Human Rights Centre
Moscow
Rally " Free Navalnyy"
St Petersburg
31/01/2021
article 20.2.2 § 1 of CAO
fine of RUB 10,000
St Petersburg City Court
29/06/2021
3,500
6203/22
30/12/2021
Aleksandr Vitalyevich BLINOV
Sutormina Yekaterina Leonidovna
St Petersburg
Rally "Free Navalnyy"
St Petersburg
31/01/2021
article 20.2 § 2 of CAO
fine of RUB 10,000
St Petersburg City Court
02/09/2021
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - escorting to and detention at the police station after compiling an offence report from 1.28 p.m. on 31/01/2021 until 7 p.m. on 01/02/2021,
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings.
4,000
7515/22
27/01/2022
Anita Aleksandrovna FRANTSKEVICH
Rally "Free Navalnyy"
Voronezh
21/04/2021
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
fine of RUB 10,000
Voronezh Regional Court
27/07/2021
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - escorting to and detention at the police station for compiling an offence report from 7.35 p.m. until 11.40 p.m. on 21/04/2021,
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings.
4,000
8027/22
26/01/2022
Maksim Sergeyevich AGAFONOV
Kochenkov Viktor Valeryevich
Izhevsk
Rally “Free Navalnyy”
Izhevsk
21/04/2021
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
fine of 10,000 RUB
Supreme Court of the Udmurt Republic
26/07/2021
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - escorting to and detention at the police station for compiling an offence report from 8 p.m. until 11.40 p.m. on 21/04/2021,
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings.
4,000
8265/22
02/02/2022
Yuliya Yevgenyevna CHAPURINA
Kuroptev Aleksey Mikhaylovich
Balashikha
Rally "Free Navalnyy"
Arkhangelsk
21/04/2021
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
fine of RUB 11,000
Arkhangelsk Regional Court
03/08/2021
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings,
Art. 8 (2) - restrictions on the right to private life of participants in public assemblies - use of facial recognition technology for the identification of the applicant as a participant of a rally and her subsequent conviction.
4,000
12281/22
24/02/2022
Ramunas Gintaro RIMIDIS
Maltsev Konstantin Aleksandrovich
Moscow
Rally "Free Navalnyy"
St Petersburg
31/01/2021
article 20.2.2. § 1 of CAO
fine of RUB 10,000
St Petersburg City Court
31/08/2021
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - escorting to and detention at the police station after compiling an offence report between 12.40 p.m. on 31/01/2021 and 3.00 a.m. on 01/02/2021,
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings.
4,000
13885/22
28/02/2022
Arina Vladimirovna MIKHEYEVA
Prosvirkina Kseniya Dmitriyevna
Moscow
Rally "Free Navalnyy"
St Petersburg
31/01/2021
article 20.2 § 2 of CAO
fine of RUB 10,000
St Petersburg City Court
31/08/2021
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings,
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - escorting to and detention at the police station after compiling an offence report from 3.10 p.m. on 31/01/2021 until 04.30 a.m. on 01/02/2021.
4,000
39911/22
19/07/2022
Nikolay Yuryevich RABOVSKIY
Magomedova Luiza Magomedovna
St Petersburg
Anti-war protest (against war in Ukraine)
St Petersburg
24/02/2022
article 20.2.2. § 1 of CAO
fine of RUB 10,000
St Petersburg City Court
19/04/2022
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - escorting to and detention at the police station after compiling an offence report between 8.40 p.m. on 24/02/2022 and 02.39 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.
4,000
39914/22
29/07/2022
Darya Vladimirovna ULBASHEVA
Magomedova Luiza Magomedovna
St Petersburg
Anti-war protest (against war in Ukraine)
St Petersburg
24/02/2022
article 20.2.2. § 1 of CAO
fine of RUB 10,000
St Petersburg City Court
19/04/2022
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - escorting to and detention at the police station after compiling an offence report between 8 p.m. on 24/02/2022 and 02.08 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.
4,000
39977/22
05/08/2022
Artem Andreyevich UGRYUMOV
Nepovinnova Yana Andreyevna
St Petersburg
Anti-war protest (against war in Ukraine)
St Petersburg
26/02/2022
article 20.2.2 § 1 of CAO
fine of RUB 10,000
St Petersburg
21/04/2022
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - escorting to and detention at the police station after compiling an offence report between 8.50 p.m. on 26/02/2022 and 02.29 a.m. on 27/02/2022,
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings.
4,000
40528/22
08/08/2022
Marat Faizovich NUREYEV
Nepovinnova Yana Andreyevna
St Petersburg
Anti-war protest (against war in Ukraine)
St Petersburg
26/02/2022
article 20.2.2 § 1 of CAO
detention for 8 days
St Petersburg City Court
21/04/2022
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - escorting to and detention at the police station after compiling an offence report between 8.50 p.m. on 26/02/2022 and 4.20 a.m. on 27/02/2022,
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings.
5,000
40705/22
10/08/2022
German Aleksandrovich VERSILOV
Nepovinnova Yana Andreyevna
St Petersburg
Anti-war protest (against war in Ukraine)
St Petersburg
28/02/2022
article 20.2.2. § 1 of CAO
fine of RUB 10,000
St Petersburg City Court
24/05/2022
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - escorting to and detention at the police station after compiling an offence report between 11.15 p.m. on 28/02/2022 and 04.20 a.m. on 01/03/2022,
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings.
4,000
41668/22
09/08/2022
Yekaterina Sergeyevna BROSALINA
Magomedova Luiza Magomedovna
St Petersburg
Anti-war protest (against war in Ukraine)
St Petersburg
06/03/2022
article 20.2 § 6.1 of CAO
detention for 10 days
St Petersburg City Court
14/04/2022
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - escorting to and detention at the police station after compiling an offence report between 6 p.m. on 06/03/2022 and 4.34 a.m. on 07/03/2022,
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings,
Prot. 7 Art. 2 - delayed review of conviction by a higher tribunal - the sentence of administrative detention imposed on the applicant was executed immediately, on account of the lack of suspensive effect of an appeal under the CAO.
5,000
41674/22
09/08/2022
Mariya Igorevna ASTASHINA
Magomedova Luiza Magomedovna
St Petersburg
Anti-war protest (against war in Ukraine)
St Petersburg
06/03/2022
article 20.2 § 6.1 of CAO
detention for 1 day
St Petersburg City Court
12/05/2022
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - escorting to and detention at the police station after compiling an offence report between 7 p.m. and 11.30 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
41677/22
09/08/2022
Anton Aleksandrovich FEDOROV
Magomedova Luiza Magomedovna
St Petersburg
Anti-war protest (against war in Ukraine)
St Petersburg
27/02/2022
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
fine of RUB 10,000
St Petersburg City Court
19/04/2022
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - escorting to and detention at the police station after compiling an offence report between 00.06 a.m. and 07.46 a.m. on 28/02/2022,
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings.
4,000
46302/22
03/09/2022
Anastasiya Olegovna KHLYUBTSEVA
Shiolashvili Mikhail Germanovich
St Petersburg
Anti-war protest (against war in Ukraine)
St Petersburg
27/02/2022
article 20.2 § 2 of CAO
fine of RUB 10,000
St Petersburg City Court
05/05/2022
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - escorting to the police station on 27/02/2022 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
46328/22
03/09/2022
Leonid Vladimirovich NIKOLAYEV
Shiolashvili Mikhail Germanovich
St Petersburg
Anti-war protest (against war in Ukraine)
St Petersburg
24/02/2022
article 20.2 § 2 of CAO
fine of RUB 10,000
St Petersburg City Court
17/05/2022
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - escorting to the police station on 24/02/2022 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
[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