4562/23;5446/23;6877/23;8507/23;9548/23;11234/23;12071/23;12357/23

THIRD SECTION CASE OF MALGAZHDAROV AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA (Applications nos. 4562/23 and 7 others – see appended list)             JUDGMENT   STRASBOURG 16 January 2025   This judgment is final but it may be subject to editorial revision. In the case of Malgazhdarov 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 5 December 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 against solo demonstrators. 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, and Pivkina and Others v. Russia (dec.), nos. 2134/23 and 6 others, § 46, 6 June 2023). ALLEGED VIOLATION OF ARTICLE 10 § 1 of the Convention 7.  The applicants complained principally of the disproportionate measures taken against them as participants or organisers of solo demonstrations, notably the termination of their demonstrations, arrest and conviction for administrative offences. They relied, expressly or in substance, on Articles 10 and 11 of the Convention. The Court will examine the complaints under Article 10 of the Convention taking into account, where appropriate, the general principles it has established in the context of Article 11 of the Convention (see Novikova and Others v. Russia, nos. 25501/07 and 4 others, § 91, 26 April 2016). 8.  In the leading case of Novikova and Others (cited above, §§ 112-225) the Court already found a violation in respect of issues similar to those in the present case (see also, mutatis mutandis, Lashmankin and Others v. Russia, nos. 57818/09 and 14 others, §§ 432-42, 7 February 2017). 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. Having regard to its case-law on the subject, the Court considers that in the instant case the interferences with the applicants’ freedom of expression were not “necessary in a democratic society”. 10.  These complaints are therefore admissible and disclose a breach of Article 10 of the Convention. OTHER ALLEGED VIOLATIONS UNDER WELL-ESTABLISHED CASE-LAW 11.  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. 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 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; and Navalnyy and Yashin v. Russia, no. 76204/11, §§ 51-75, 4 December 2014, and Kasparov and Others v. Russia, no. 21613/07,§§ 84-97, 3 October 2013, as regards disproportionate measures taken by the authorities against organisers and participants of public assemblies. Remaining complaints 12.  The applicant in application no. 4562/23 raised a further additional complaint under Article 6 of the Convention in respect of the first set of the proceedings, which ended with the final judgment of 15 September 2022 (see the appended table). In view of the findings in paragraphs 9-11 above, the Court considers that there is no need to deal separately with that remaining complaint. APPLICATION OF ARTICLE 41 OF THE CONVENTION 13.  Regard being had to the documents in its possession and to its case‑law (see, mutatis mutandis, Navalnyy and Others v. Russia [Committee], nos. 5809/17 and 14 others, § 22, 4 October 2022), the Court considers 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 in so far as they relate to facts that took place before 16 September 2022; Declares the complaints under Article 10 concerning disproportionate measures against solo demonstrators and the other complaints under the well-established case-law, as set out in the appended table, admissible, and finds that there is no need to examine separately the remaining complaints of the applicant in application no. 4562/23 under Article 6 of the Convention; Holds that these applications disclose a breach of Article 10 of the Convention concerning the disproportionate measures against solo demonstrators; 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 16 January 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 10 § 1 of the Convention (disproportionate measures against solo demonstrators) No. Application no. Date of introduction Applicant’s name Year of birth   Representative’s name and location Location Date Purpose of the demonstration Administrative charges Penalty Final domestic decision Date Name of the court Other relevant information Other complaints under well‑established case-law Amount awarded for pecuniary and non‑pecuniary damage and costs and expenses per applicant (in euros)[1]     4562/23 11/01/2023 Anton Aleksandrovich MALGAZHDAROV Belova Tatyana Aleksandrovna Moscow Moscow 05/01/2022 Support of protests in Kazakhstan article 20.2 § 5 of CAO fine of RUB 10,000 15/09/2022 Moscow City Court distance requirement - event classified as assembly post facto Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - arrest, escorting to a police station, detention (i) on 05/01/2022 and (ii) on 06/03/2022, each time for the sole purpose of drawing up an offence record,   Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings - first set of proceedings, final judgment of 15/09/2022, Moscow City Court,   Art. 11 (2) - disproportionate measures against organisers and participants of public assemblies - Rally against the war in Ukraine on 06/03/2022 in Moscow, arrest and conviction under article 20.2 § 5 CAO, fine of RUB 20,000, final judgment: 29/09/2022, Moscow City Court   4,000     5446/23 22/01/2023 Taisiya Yevgenyevna YAZRIKOVA     Moscow 26/02/2022 Anti-war protest article 20.2 § 5 of CAO fine of RUB 20,000 13/10/2022 Moscow City Court   Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - arrest, escorting to a police station, detention on 26/02/2022 for the sole purpose of drawing up a record of an administrative offence 4,000     6877/23 24/01/2023 Mikhail Aleksandrovich SALOMATIN     Moscow 05/03/2022 Anti-war protest article 20.2 § 5 of CAO fine of RUB 15,000 27/09/2022 Moscow City Court     3,500     8507/23 19/01/2023 Anna Vladimirovna DANILINA     Moscow 06/03/2022 Anti-war protest article 20.2 § 5 of CAO  fine of RUB 10,000 19/09/2022 Moscow City Court   Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - arrest, escorting to a police station, detention on 06/03/2022 for the sole purpose of drawing up a record of an administrative offence 4,000     9548/23 09/02/2023 Varvara Vladimirovna OBROSOVA     Moscow 27/02/2022 Anti-war protest article 20.2 § 5 of CAO  fine of RUB 20,000 11/10/2022 Moscow City Court   Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - arrest, escorting to a police station, detention on 27/02/2022 for the sole purpose of drawing up a record of an administrative offence 4,000     11234/23 11/02/2023 Natalya Viktorovna LADYGINA     Moscow 26/02/2022 Anti-war protest article 20.2 § 5 of CAO  fine of RUB 10,000 11/10/2022 Moscow City Court   Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - arrest, escorting to a police station, detention on 26/02/2022 for the sole purpose of drawing up a record of an administrative offence 4,000     12071/23 25/02/2023 Olga Gennadyevna NIKITINA Petrova Polina Artemovna Moscow Moscow 02/03/2022 Anti-war protest article 20.2 § 5 of CAO  fine of RUB 20,000 25/10/2022 Moscow City Court   Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - arrest, escorting to a police station, detention on 02/03/2022 for the sole purpose of drawing up a record of an administrative offence 4,000     12357/23 17/02/2023 Polina Valeryevna KUZAVLEVA Baranova Natalya Andreyevna Moscow Moscow 05/03/2022 anti-war protest article 20.2 § 5 of CAO  fine of RUB 20,000 17/10/2022 Moscow City Court   Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - arrest, escorting to a police station, detention on 05/03/2022 for the sole purpose of drawing up a record of an administrative offence 4,000   [1] Plus any tax that may be chargeable to the applicants.