42166/21;957/22;1731/22;1745/22;5350/22;5356/22;11180/22;12057/22;12092/22;12097/22;12103/22;12108/22;14056/22;14334/22;14352/22;14552/22;22583/22;23107/22;23134/22;31253/22;36602/22;40279/22;44866/22;45077/22;45133/22;45185/22;45278/22;45451/22;45940/22;50644/22;53611/22

WyrokETPCz2024-06-13ECLI:CE:ECHR:2024:0613JUD004216621

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 tym aresztowania i skazania za wykroczenia administracyjne, były proporcjonalne i zgodne z prawem do wolności zgromadzeń (art. 11 Konwencji), czy doszło do bezprawnego pozbawienia wolności (art. 5 ust. 1 Konwencji) oraz czy postępowania administracyjne były rzetelne, w szczególności w kontekście braku strony oskarżającej (art. 6 ust. 1 Konwencji)?
Ratio decidendi
Trybunał zastosował swoje ugruntowane orzecznictwo dotyczące wolności zgromadzeń i proporcjonalności ingerencji w nią, stwierdzając, że środki podjęte przeciwko skarżącym nie były „niezbędne w społeczeństwie demokratycznym”. Odwołał się do wcześniejszych wyroków, w których stwierdzono naruszenia w podobnych sprawach. W odniesieniu do innych skarg, Trybunał oparł się na ugruntowanym orzecznictwie dotyczącym bezprawnego pozbawienia wolności oraz braku bezstronności sądu z powodu braku strony oskarżającej w postępowaniach o wykroczenia administracyjne. Trybunał nie znalazł żadnych faktów ani argumentów, które skłoniłyby go do odmiennego wniosku.
Stan faktyczny
Skarżący byli organizatorami lub uczestnikami zgromadzeń publicznych w Rosji. W związku z tymi zgromadzeniami zostali poddani nieproporcjonalnym środkom, takim jak aresztowania i skazania za wykroczenia administracyjne. Niektórzy skarżący zgłosili również skargi dotyczące bezprawnego pozbawienia wolności oraz braku bezstronności w postępowaniach administracyjnych, które doprowadziły do ich skazania. Wszystkie te zdarzenia miały miejsce przed 16 września 2022 r.
Rozstrzygnięcie
Trybunał jednogłośnie: - Postanawia połączyć skargi. - Uznaje, 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 badania pozostałych skarg na podstawie art. 6 Konwencji. - Stwierdza, że skargi te ujawniają naruszenie art. 11 Konwencji. - Stwierdza, że doszło do naruszenia Konwencji 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, wraz z odsetkami od upływu tego terminu.

Pełny tekst orzeczenia

SECOND SECTION CASE OF LOYKO AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA (Applications nos. 42166/21 and 30 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 Loyko 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, 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 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; and 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). 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 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 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]     42166/21 05/08/2021 Anna Yevgenyevna LOYKO Peredruk Aleksandr Dmitriyevich St Petersburg Rally in front of a court to support 2 convicts   St Petersburg   22/06/2020 article 20.2 § 5 of CAO fine of RUB 10,000 St Peterburg City Court 09/02/2021 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty, including unrecorded detention and detention without a judicial order and any other legal basis - escorting to and detention at the police station after compiling an offence report from 3.01 p.m. until 7.23 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     957/22 07/12/2021 Yaroslav Konstantinovich KUKSIN Pershakova Yelena Yuryevna Moscow Rally "Free Navalnyy"   Moscow   31/01/2021 article 20.2 § 6.1 of CAO fine of RUB 20,000 Moscow City Court 09/06/2021 Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings.   3,500     1731/22 16/12/2021 Yuliya Pavlovna SAMOFEYEVA Mezak Ernest Aleksandrovich Saint-Barthélemy-d’Anjou Rally "Free Navalnyy"   Ukhta   31/01/2021 article 20.2 § 5 of CAO fine of RUB 10,000 Supreme Court of the Komi Republic 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. 3,500     1745/22 16/12/2021 Irina Gennadyevna SHCHUKINA Mezak Ernest Aleksandrovich Saint-Barthélemy-d’Anjou Rally "Free Navalnyy"   Ukhta   31/01/2021 article 20.2 § 5 of CAO fine of RUB 10,000 Supreme Court of the Komi Republic 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. 3,500     5350/22 23/12/2021 Yelena Leonidovna BOZHENOVA Mezak  Ernest Aleksandrovich Saint-Barthélemy-d’Anjou Rally "Free Navalnyy"   Magadan   21/04/2021 article 20.2 § 6.1 of CAO 50 hours of community work Magadan Regional Court 25/06/2021 Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings.   3,500     5356/22 23/12/2021 Larisa Anatolyevna YELFIMOVA Mezak Ernest Aleksandrovich Saint-Barthélemy-d’Anjou Rally "Free Navalnyy"   Ukhta   31/01/2021 article 20.2 § 5 of CAO fine of RUB 10,000 Supreme Court of the Komi Republic 30/06/2021 Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings. 3,500     11180/22 11/02/2022 Aleksey Mikhaylovich SKOVORODNIKOV Mezak Ernest Aleksandrovich Saint-Barthélemy-d’Anjou Rally "Free Navalnyy"   Syktyvkar   31/01/2021 article 20.2 § 5 of CAO Fine of RUB 10,000 Supreme Court of the Komi Republic 22/09/2021   3,500     12057/22 08/02/2022 Konstantin Yevgenyevich MIRONOV Sharangiya Sofya Zurabovna Nizhniy Novgorod Rally "Free Navalnyy"   Nizhniy Novgorod   31/01/2021 article 20.2 § 5 of CAO fine of RUB 10,000 Nizhniy Novgorod Regional Court 11/08/2021 Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings. 3,500     12092/22 16/02/2022 Vasilisa Aleksandrovna DESHEVYKH Polyakov Daniil Alekseyevich Voronezh Rally "Free Navalnyy"   Voronezh   21/04/2021 article 20.2 § 5 of CAO fine of RUB 15,000 Voronezh Regional Court 17/08/2021 Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings. 3,500   12097/22 16/02/2022 Semen Aleksandrovich KRASOVSKIY Polyakov Daniil Alekseyevich Voronezh Rally "free Navalnyy"   Voronezh   21/04/2021 article 20.2 § 5 of CAO fine of RUB 10,000 Voronezh Regional Court 17/08/2021 Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings. 3,500   12103/22 16/02/2022 Nikita Igorevich MINAKOV Polyakov Daniil Alekseyevich Voronezh Rally "Free Navalnyy"   Voronezh   31/01/2021 article 20.2 § 5 of CAO fine of RUB 10,000 Voronezh Regional Court 20/08/2021 Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings. 3,500   12108/22 16/02/2022 Ivan Mikhaylovich BUNIN Polyakov Daniil Alekseyevich Voronezh Rally "Free Navalnyy"   Voronezh   31/01/2021 article 20.2 § 5 of CAO fine of RUB 10,000 Voronezh Regional Court 24/08/2021 Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings. 3,500   14056/22 12/02/2022 Aleksandr Olegovich KOREPIN Mezak Ernest Aleksandrovich Saint-Barthélemy-d’Anjou Rally "Free Navalnyy"   Syktyvkar   31/01/2021 article 20.2 § 5 of CAO fine of RUB 5,000 Supreme Court of the Komi Republic 18/08/2021   3,500   14334/22 08/02/2022 Mikhail Andreyevich TORGOVISHCHEV Sharangiya Sofya Zurabovna Nizhniy Novgorod Rally "Free Navalny"   Nizhniy Novgorod   31/01/2021 article 20.2 § 5 of CAO fine of RUB 10,000 Nizhniy Novgorod Regional Court 19/08/2021 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - escorting to and detention at the police station after compiling an offence report from 1.30 p.m. until 9.00 p.m. on 31/01/2021.   4,000   14352/22 10/02/2022 Vera Adamovna STROK Sharangiya Sofya Zurabovna Nizhniy Novgorod Rally "Free Navalnyy"   Moscow   31/01/2021 article 20.2 § 6.1 of CAO fine of RUB 10,000 Moscow City Court 11/08/2021 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - escorting to the police station after compiling an offence report from 5.40 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   14552/22 08/02/2022 Oleg Alekseyevich KHITRYUK Sharangiya Sofya Zurabovna Nizhniy Novgorod Rally "Free Navalnyy"   Nizhniy Novgorod   31/01/2021 article 20.2 § 6.1 of CAO fine of RUB 5,000 Nizhniy Novgorod Regional Court 11/08/2021 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 12.15 p.m. until 9.00 p.m. on 31/01/2021.   4,000   22583/22 24/03/2022 Pavel Ivanovich FOMIN Polyakov Daniil Sergeyevich Voronezh Rally "Free Navalnyy"   Voronezh   23/01/2021 article 20.2 § 5 of CAO fine of RUB 5,000 Voronezh Regional Court 19/10/2021 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 2.20 p.m. until 10.20 p.m. on 23/01/2021.   4,000   23107/22 24/03/2022 Sergey Aleksandrovich PERTSEV Polyakov Daniil Alekseyevich Voronezh Rally "Free Navalnyy"   Voronezh   21/04/2021 article 20.2 § 5 of CAO fine of RUB 10,000 Voronezh Regional Court 17/11/2021 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 7.30 p.m. on 21/04/2021 until 1.40 a.m. on 22/04/2021.   4,000   23134/22 21/03/2022 Lyubov Davidovna MOLDAVSKAYA Usanova Olimpiada Valentinovna Nizhniy Novgorod Rally "Free Navalnyy"   Nizhniy Novgorod   31/01/2021 article 20.2 § 5 of CAO fine of RUB 10,000 Nizhniy Novgorod Regional Court 23/09/2021 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 1.30 p.m. until 11.00 p.m. on 31/01/2021.   4,000   31253/22 10/06/2022 Pavel Ruslanovich KONYSHEV Polyakov Daniil Alekseyevich Voronezh Rally "Free Navalnyy"   Voronezh   31/01/2021     article 20.2 § 5 of CAO fine of RUB 10,000 Voronezh Regional Court 16/12/2021 Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings.     3,500   36602/22 01/07/2022 Alisa Vyacheslavovna ISAKOVA Kulikov Sergey Sergeyevich Nizhniy Novgorod Rally in memory of Nemtsov   Nizhniy Novgorod   27/02/2022 article 20.2 § 2 of CAO detention for 7 days Nizhniy Novgorod City Court 04/03/2022 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 4.55 p.m. on 27/02/2022 until 5.00 a.m. on 28/02/2022.   4,000   40279/22 04/08/2022 Daniil Dmitriyevich KORNILOV Podolskiy Sergey Viktorovich St Petersburg Anti-war protest   St Petersburg 24/02/2022 article 20.2 § 5 of CAO fine of RUB 10,000 St Petersburg City Court 17/05/2022 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 9.15 p.m. on 24/02/2022 until 10.00 p.m. on 25/02/2022.   4,000   44866/22 25/08/2022 Darya Sergeyevna STARTSEVA Kulikov Sergey Sergeyevich Nizhniy Novgorod Anti-war protests   Nizhniy Novgorod   07/03/2022 article 20.2 § 5 of CAO fine of RUB 10,000 Nizhniy Novgorod Regional Court 27/04/2022 Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings. 3,500   45077/22 24/08/2022 Stanislav Nikolayevich YELIZARENKOV Lapuzin Aleksey Sergeyevich Samara Anti-war protest   Samara   27/02/2022 article 20.2 § 5 of CAO fine of RUB 10,000 Samara Regional Court 28/04/2022 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 3.40 p.m. on 27/02/2022. Released on the same day.   4,000   45133/22 27/08/2022 Diana Romanovna YAVLENINA Tregubova Yuliya Mikhaylovna Balashikha Anti-war protests   Moscow 25/02/2022 article 20.2 § 5 of CAO fine of RUB 20,000 Moscow City Court 27/04/2022 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 10.00 p.m. on 25/02/2022 for more than 3 hours.   4,000   45185/22 25/08/2022 Ilya Vladislavovich ALEKSEYEV Kulikov Sergey Sergeyevich Nizhniy Novgorod Anti-war protests   Nizhniy Novgorod   06/03/2022 article 20.2 § 5 of CAO fine of RUB 10,000 Nizhniy Novgorod City Court 18/05/2022 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 6.05 p.m. on 06/03/2022 for 28 hours, until the court hearing held on 07/03/2022.   4,000   45278/22 31/08/2022 Anton Dmitriyevich SHAPKO Kulikov Sergey Sergeyevich Nizhniy Novgorod Anti-war protests   Nizhniy Novgorod   06/03/2022 article 20.2 § 5 of CAO fine of RUB 10,000 Nizhniy Novgorod City Court 18/05/2022 Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings. 3,500   45451/22 26/08/2022 Ilnur Zufarovich GALIULLIN Sabirov Rim Faridovich Kazan Anti-war protests   Kazan   24/02/2022 article 20.2 § 5 of CAO fine of RUB 10,000 Supreme Court of the Tatarstan Republic 27/04/2022 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 7.15 p.m. on 24/02/2022 until 11.15 a.m. on 25/02/2022.   4,000   45940/22 01/09/2022 Andrey Gennadyevich BUKAMIN Kulikov Sergey Sergeyevich Nizhniy Novgorod Anti-war protests   Nizhniy Novgorod   06/03/2022 article 20.2 § 5 of CAO fine of RUB 10,000 Nizhniy Novgorod Regional Court 18/05/2022 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 3.00 p.m. on 06/03/2022 until 4.30 p.m. on 07/03/2022.   4,000   50644/22 07/10/2022 Kseniya Valeryevna BELOVA Sozonov Ruslan Vladimirovich Nizhniy Novgorod Anti-war protests   Yekaterinburg   24/02/2022 article 20.2 § 5 of CAO fine of RUB 20,000 Sverdlovsk Regional Court 22/06/2022 Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings. 3,500   53611/22 08/11/2022 Yelena Aleksandrovna NESTEROVA Pershakova Yelena Yuryevna Moscow Anti-war protests   Moscow   06/03/2022 article 20.2 § 5 of CAO fine of RUB 20,000 Moscow City Court 11/07/2022 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 3.12 p.m. until 8.16 p.m. on 06/03/2022.   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