21782/21;31152/21;34911/21;43664/21;48085/21;49873/21;50845/21;51556/21;54357/21;27/22;6368/22;14423/22;16210/22;25328/22;28106/22;38898/22;38906/22;40591/22;40595/22
WyrokETPCz2024-03-28ECLI:CE:ECHR:2024:0328JUD002178221
Analiza orzeczenia
Sekcja wygenerowana przez AI na podstawie treści orzeczenia — nie stanowi cytatu.
Zagadnienie prawne
Czy środki podjęte przeciwko organizatorom i uczestnikom zgromadzeń publicznych w Rosji, w tym aresztowania i skazania administracyjne, stanowiły nieproporcjonalną ingerencję w prawo do wolności zgromadzeń, a także naruszały inne prawa konwencyjne, takie jak prawo do wolności i bezpieczeństwa osobistego oraz prawo do rzetelnego procesu?Ratio decidendi
Trybunał, odwołując się do swojego ugruntowanego orzecznictwa dotyczącego wolności zgromadzeń i proporcjonalności ingerencji, uznał, że środki podjęte przeciwko skarżącym nie były „konieczne w społeczeństwie demokratycznym”. W odniesieniu do innych skarg, takich jak bezprawne pozbawienie wolności, brak bezstronności trybunału w postępowaniach administracyjnych, nieproporcjonalne środki wobec pojedynczych demonstrantów oraz brak skutku zawieszającego odwołania od aresztu administracyjnego, Trybunał również stwierdził naruszenia, powołując się na wcześniejsze wyroki w podobnych sprawach. Trybunał potwierdził swoją jurysdykcję, ponieważ fakty miały miejsce przed 16 września 2022 r., kiedy to Federacja Rosyjska przestała być stroną Konwencji.Stan faktyczny
Skarżący byli organizatorami lub uczestnikami zgromadzeń publicznych w Rosji, w tym wieców "Wolny Nawalny" oraz protestów antywojennych. W związku z tymi wydarzeniami zostali aresztowani i skazani za wykroczenia administracyjne, co skutkowało nałożeniem grzywien, aresztu administracyjnego lub prac społecznych. Wielu skarżących doświadczyło również bezprawnego zatrzymania na posterunkach policji. Skargi dotyczyły nieproporcjonalnych środków, bezprawnego pozbawienia wolności oraz braku rzetelnego procesu w postępowaniach administracyjnych.Rozstrzygnięcie
Trybunał jednogłośnie:
- Postanawia połączyć skargi.
- Stwierdza, że ma jurysdykcję do rozpatrzenia tych 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, zgodnie z załączoną tabelą, za dopuszczalne i stwierdza, że nie ma potrzeby odrębnego rozpatrywania pozostałych skarg na podstawie art. 6 Konwencji.
- Stwierdza, że niniejsze skargi ujawniają naruszenie art. 11 Konwencji.
- Stwierdza, że doszło do naruszenia Konwencji i Protokołów do niej w odniesieniu do innych skarg podniesionych na podstawie ugruntowanego orzecznictwa Trybunału (zob. załączona tabela).
- Orzeka, że państwo pozwane ma zapłacić skarżącym, w terminie trzech miesięcy, kwoty wskazane w załączonej tabeli, które zostaną przeliczone na walutę państwa pozwanego według kursu obowiązującego w dniu rozliczenia, powiększone o odsetki proste od upływu trzech miesięcy do dnia uregulowania płatności.Pełny tekst orzeczenia
FOURTH SECTION
CASE OF ZHUKOVETS AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA
(Applications nos. 21782/21 and 18 others –
see appended list)
JUDGMENT
STRASBOURG
28 March 2024
This judgment is final but it may be subject to editorial revision.
In the case of Zhukovets and Others v. Russia,
The European Court of Human Rights (Fourth Section), sitting as a Committee composed of:
Branko Lubarda, President,
Armen Harutyunyan,
Ana Maria Guerra Martins, judges,
and Viktoriya Maradudina, Acting Deputy Section Registrar,
Having deliberated in private on 7 March 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); Novikova and Others v. Russia, nos. 25501/07 and 4 others, 26 April 2016, concerning disproportionate measures against solo demonstrators; and Martynyuk v. Russia, no. 13764/15, §§ 38-42, 8 October 2019, relating to the lack of suspensive effect of an appeal against the sentence of administrative detention.
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 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 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 28 March 2024, pursuant to Rule 77 §§ 2 and 3 of the Rules of Court.
Viktoriya Maradudina Branko Lubarda
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]
21782/21
02/04/2021
Anton Alekseyevich ZHUKOVETS Ivanets Vyacheslav Sergeyevich
Tbilisi, Georgia
Rally "Free Navalnyy"
Irkutsk
23/01/2021
article 20.2 § 2 of CAO
detention for 10 days
Irkutsk Regional Court
28/01/2021
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings
5,000
31152/21
23/05/2021
Arkadiy Vasilyevich TRIFONOV Bochilo Anna Yevgenyevna
Barnaul
Rally "Free Navalnyy"
Barnaul
23/01/2021
Rally "Free Navalnyy"
Barnaul
21/04/2021
article 20.2 § 6.1 of CAO
article 20.2 § 6.1 of CAO
fine of RUB 10,000
40 hours of community work
Altai Regional Court
17/03/2021
Altay Regional Court
10/06/2021
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty - escorting to and detention at the police station for compiling an offence record between 3:00 p.m. on 23/01/2021 and the afternoon of 24/01/2021; escorting to the police station for compiling an offence record 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 - in both sets of administrative proceedings (concerning the events of 23/01/2021 and 21/04/2021)
5,000
34911/21
20/06/2021
Maksimilian Vitalyevich FEDYUNIN Bochilo Anna Yevgenyevna
Barnaul
Rally "Free Navalnyy"
Lipetsk
23/01/2021
Rally "Free Navalnyy"
Lipetsk
21/04/2021
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
fine of RUB 10,000
fine of RUB 75,000
Lipetsk Regional Court
11/03/2021
Lipetsk Regional Court
27/05/2021
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - escorting to and detention at the police station for compiling an offence record on 23/01/2021; escorting to and detention at the police station for compiling an offence record between 8:05 p.m. on 21/04/2021 and 1:45 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 - in both sets of administrative proceedings (concerning the events of 23/01/2021 and 21/04/2021)
5,000
43664/21
12/08/2021
Valeriya Dmitriyevna DELINA Glukhov Aleksey Vladimirovich
Novocheboksarsk
Rally "Free Navalnyy"
Cheboksary
23/01/2021
Rally "Free Navalnyy"
Cheboksary
21/04/2021
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
article 20.2 § 8 of CAO
fine of RUB 10,000
40 hours of community work
Supreme Court of the Republic of Chuvashia
25/03/2021
Supreme Court of the Republic of Chuvashia
24/06/2021
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - escorting to the police station for compiling an offence record on 04/06/2021;
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings - in both sets of administrative proceedings
5,000
48085/21
07/09/2021
Irina Kimovna OGANESYAN Aksenova Darya Dmitriyevna
Kolomna
Rally "Free Navalnyy"
Moscow
23/01/2021
article 20.2 § 6.1 of CAO
fine of RUB 15,000
Moscow City Court
10/03/2021
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - escorting to the police station for compiling an offence record 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
49873/21
22/09/2021
Anton Sergeyevich FILIPPOV Bochilo Anna Yevgenyevna
Barnaul
Rally "Free Navalnyy"
Moscow
31/01/2021
Anti-war rally
Moscow
24/02/2022
article 20.2 § 6.1 of CAO
article 20.2 § 8 of CAO
fine of RUB 10,000
detention for 30 days
Moscow City Court
26/03/2021
Moscow City Court
14/03/2022
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - escorting to and detention at the police station for compiling an offence record between 3:30 p.m. on 31/01/2021 and 4:00 p.m. on 01/02/2021; escorting to and detention at the police station for compiling an offence record between 8:30 p.m. on 24/02/2022 and 7:10 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 - in both sets of administrative proceedings (concerning the events of 31/01/2021 and 24/02/2022)
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 / Tushinskiy District Court of Moscow 25/02/2022
5,000
50845/21
24/09/2021
Andrey Anatolyevich ISAKOV Kosnyrev Vladislav Vladimirovich
Syktyvkar
Rally "Free Navalnyy"
Syktyvkar
31/01/2021
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
fine of RUB 10,000
Supreme Court of the Komi Republic
24/03/2021
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - escorting to and detention at the police station for compiling an offence record between 1:30 p.m. and 9:30 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
51556/21
29/09/2021
Olga Alekseyevna ZENINA 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 10,000
Rostov Regional Court
30/03/2021
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty - escorting to and detention at the police station for compiling an offence record between 1:00 p.m. and 6:00 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
54357/21
20/10/2021
Yevgeniy Vladimirovich NEVECHERYA Dimitriyev Dmitriy Sergeyevich
Orenburg
Rally "Free Navalnyy"
Orenburg
31/01/2021
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
fine for RUB 10,000
Orenburg Regional Court
20/04/2021
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - escorting to and detention at the police station for compiling an offence record between 1:45 p.m. and 5:30 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
27/22
26/11/2021
Konstantin Viktorovich KISELEV Bushmakov Aleksey Vladimirovich
Yekaterinburg
Rally "Free Navalnyy"
Yekaterinburg
23/01/2021
Rally "Free Navalnyy"
Yekaterinburg
31/01/2021
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
fine of RUB 15,000
fine of RUB 15,000
Sverdlovsk Regional Court
24/06/2021
Sverdlovsk Regional Court
16/06/2021
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings - in both sets of administrative proceedings (concerning the events of 23/01/2021 and 31/01/2021)
3,500
6368/22
15/01/2022
Darya Aleksandrovna BELYAYEVA Kachanov Roman Yevgenyevich
Yekaterinburg
Rally against police abuse
Yekaterinburg
23/01/2021
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
fine of RUB 10,000
Sverdlovsk Regional Court
18/08/2021
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings
3,500
14423/22
16/02/2022
Konstantin Leonidovich MIKHAYLOV Kochenkov Viktor Valeryevich
Izhevsk
Rally "Free Navalnyy"
Izhevsk
31/01/2021
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
fine of RUB 10,000
Supreme Court of the Republic of Udmurtia
16/08/2021
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - escorting to and detention at the police station for compiling an offence record between 08:00 p.m. and 11:40 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
16210/22
18/01/2022
Aleksey Sergeyevich STERKHOV Kochenkov Viktor Valeryevich
Izhevsk
Rally "Free Navalnyy"
Izhevsk
31/01/2021
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
fine of RUB 10,000
Supreme Court of the Republic of Udmurtia
19/07/2021
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - escorting to and detention at the police station for compiling an offence record between 12:30 p.m. and 5:10 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
25328/22
(8 applicants)
Vladislav Vitalyevich ARINICHEV Aleksandr Denisovich BEZRUCHKIN
Timofey Aleksandrovich DANILOV
Pavel Alekseyevich GLAZKOV
Stanislav Yuryevich KARMAKSKIKH
Petr Andreyevich SAMSONOV
Aleksandr Nikolayevich SHRAMKOV
Denis Sergeyevich SKUDAYEV
Baranova Natalya Andreyevna
Moscow
Mr Arinichev: anti-war protest
Moscow
08/03/2022
Mr Bezruchkin: anti-war protest
Moscow
11/03/2021
Mr Danilov:
anti-war protest
Yaroslavl
06/03/2022
Mr Glazkov: anti-war protest
Moscow
13/03/2022
Mr Karmakskikh: anti-war protest
Tomsk
06/03/2022
Mr Samsonov: anti-war protest
Tomsk
06/03/2022
Mr Shramkov: anti-war protest
Volokonovka
14/03/2022
Mr Skudayev: anti-war protest
Perm
06/03/2022
article 20.3.3 § 1 of CAO
article 20.3.3 § 1 of CAO
article 20.3.3 § 1 of CAO
article 20.3.3 § 1 of CAO
article 20.3.3 § 1 of CAO
article 20.3.3 § 1 of CAO
article 20.3.3 § 1 of CAO
article 20.3.3 § 1 of CAO
fine of RUB 50,000
fine of RUB 50,000
fine of RUB 30,000
fine of RUB 50,000
fine of RUB 45,000
fine of RUB 30,000
fine of RUB 40,000
fine of RUB 30,000
Moscow City Court
11/05/2022
Moscow City Court
17/05/2022
Yaroslavl Regional Court
19/05/2022
Moscow City Court
26/04/2022
Tomsk Regional Court
08/04/2022
Tomsk Regional Court
08/04/2022
Belgorod Regional Court
23/05/2022
Perm Regional Court
26/05/2022
4,000,
to each of the applicants
28106/22
17/05/2022
Marina Pal SINGKH Fazulyanov Oleg Borisovich
St Petersburg
Photo session to protest violence against women
St Petersburg
25/11/2021
Anti-war rally
St Petersburg
24/02/2022
article 20.2 § 2 of CAO
article 20.2.2 § 1 of CAO
fine of RUB 20,000
detention for 15 days
St Petersburg City Court
18/01/2022
St Petersburg City Court
05/04/2022
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - escorting to and detention at the police station for compiling an offence record between 8:50 p.m. on 25/11/2021 and 5:00 p.m. on 27/11/2021; between 9:50 p.m. on 24/02/2022 and 5:15 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 - in both sets of administrative proceedings (concerning the events of 25/11/2021 and 24/02/2022)
5,000
38898/22
22/07/2022
Konstantin Vitalyevich MIKHAYLOV Kosheleva Inna Viktorovna
Kirov
Opposition rally
Kirov
03/02/2022
article 20.2 § 2 of CAO
fine of RUB 20,000
Kirov Regional Court
06/04/2022
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings
3,500
38906/22
29/07/2022
Artem Aleksandrovich SHCHELOKOV Bannikov Ruslan Yuryevich
Voronezh
Anti-war protest
Voronezh
24/02/2022
article 20.2 § 8 of CAO
detention for 1 day
Voronezh Regional Court
07/04/2022
Art. 10 (1) - disproportionate measures against solo demonstrators – on 06/03/2022 in Voronezh / solo protest against war in Ukraine / article 20.3.3 § 1 of CAO / fine of RUB 30,000 / 06/07/2022 by the Voronezh Regional Court,
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - escorting to and detention at the police station for compiling an offence record between 8:00 p.m. on 24/02/2022 and his transfer to court next day, on 25/02/2022; escorting to the police station for compiling an offence record 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 – both sets of the proceedings
5,000
40591/22
10/08/2022
Vladislav Valeryevich BATALOV Dadayeva Yekaterina Viktorovna
St Petersburg
Anti-war protest
St Petersburg
02/04/2022
article 20.2 § 6.1 of CAO
detention for 10 days
St Petersburg City Court
11/04/2022
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - escorting to and detention at the police station for compiling an offence record between 2:30 p.m. and 11:02 p.m. on 02/04/2022,
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings
5,000
40595/22
10/08/2022
Aleksandr Sergeyevich OREKHOV Dadayeva Yekaterina Viktorovna
St Petersburg
Anti-war rally
St Petersburg
02/04/2022
article 20.2 § 6.1 of CAO
detention for 10 days
St Petersburg
City Court
11/04/2022
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - escorting to and detention at the police station for compiling an offence record between 2:40 p.m. and 11:43 p.m. on 02/04/2022,
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings
5,000
[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