69927/17;73551/17;291/18;49968/18;13561/19;28958/19;30657/19;43813/19;57852/19;13165/20;13768/20;14046/20;29671/20

FIRST SECTION CASE OF ZHMYREV AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA (Applications nos. 69927/17 and 12 others – see appended list)             JUDGMENT   STRASBOURG 12 September 2024   This judgment is final but it may be subject to editorial revision. In the case of Zhmyrev and Others v. Russia, The European Court of Human Rights (First Section), sitting as a Committee composed of:  Péter Paczolay, President,  Gilberto Felici,  Raffaele Sabato, judges, and Viktoriya Maradudina, Acting Deputy Section Registrar, Having deliberated in private on 11 July 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. 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, 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, and having taken into account the issue of compliance with the six-month time-limit under Article 35 § 1 of the Convention (see Saakashvili v. Georgia (dec.), nos. 6232/20 and 22394/20, §§ 46-59, 1 March 2022, in which the Court addressed the COVID-related extension of the period in question), 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.  The 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 (CAO); Tomov and Others v. Russia, nos. 18255/10 and 5 others, §§ 114-56, 9 April 2019, as regards the conditions of transport of detainees and the lack of effective domestic remedies thereof; Lashmankin and Others v. Russia, nos. 57818/09 and 14 others, §§ 402-78, 7 February 2017, regarding restrictions on location or time of public events; 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. 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 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 12 September 2024, pursuant to Rule 77 §§ 2 and 3 of the Rules of Court.  Viktoriya Maradudina Péter Paczolay  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]     69927/17 07/09/2017 Dmitriy Vladimirovich ZHMYREV       Anti-corruption rally   Moscow   26/03/2017     Rally in support of A. Navalnyy’s Presidential Candidacy   Moscow   08/07/2017 article 19.3 § 1 of CAO             article 20.2 § 5 of CAO detention for 10 days             fine of RUB 10,000 Moscow City Court 03/04/2017           Moscow City Court 28/08/2018 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - (1) escorting to and detention at the police station for compiling an offence report from 6.40 p.m. on 26/03/2017 until 28/03/2017, when the applicant was taken to the court; (2) escorting to the police station for compiling an offence report from 4.10 p.m. until 6.20 p.m. on 08/07/2017;   Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in both sets of the 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     73551/17 02/09/2017 (8 applicants) Mark Izrailevich GALPERIN   Elin Malikovich CHICHLINSKIY   Igor Alekseyevich KLOCHKOV   Sofya Yuryevna KUZMINA   Mariya Aleksandrovna RYABIKOVA   Maksim Sergeyevich SOLDATOV   Gafira Vladimirovna STEKLOVA   Zboroshenko Nikolay Sergeyevich Moscow Anti-corruption rally (Mr Galperin)   Moscow   26/03/2017     Anti-corruption rally (Mr Klochkov)   Moscow   26/03/2017     Anti-corruption rally (Ms Kuzmina)   Moscow   26/03/2017     Anti-corruption rally (Ms Ryabikova)   Moscow   26/03/2017     Anti-corruption rally (Mr Soldatov)   Moscow   26/03/2017     Anti-corruption rally (Ms Steklova)   Moscow   26/03/2017     Anti-corruption rally (Mr Chichlinskiy)   Moscow   26/03/2017     Rally to call for fair elections to Mosgorduma (Mr Galperin)   Moscow   31/08/2019 article 19.3 § 1 of CAO               article 20.2 § 5 of CAO               article 20.2 § 6.1 of CAO               article 20.2 § 5 of CAO               article 19.3 § 1 of CAO               article 20.2 § 5 of CAO               article 20.2 § 5 of CAO               article 20.2 § 8 of CAO detention for 15 days               fine of RUB 15,000             detention for 10 days               fine of RUB 20,000             detention for 10 days               fine of RUB 10,000             fine of RUB 15,000             detention for 30 days Moscow City Court 06/04/2017             Moscow City Court 28/06/2017             Moscow City Court 29/03/2017             Moscow City Court 14/07/2017             Moscow City Court 18/04/2017             Moscow City Court 30/06/2017             Moscow City Court 18/08/2017             Moscow City Court 05/09/2019 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - (1) escorting to and detention at the police station of Mr Galperin after compiling an offence report from 2 p.m. on 01/04/2017 until 10 a.m. on 03/04/2017; (2) escorting to and detention at the police station of Ms Kuzmina after compiling an offence report from 6.50 p.m. on 26/03/2017 until the court hearing on 27/03/2017; (3) escorting to the police station of Mr Klochkov, Ms Ryabikova, Mr Soldatov, Ms Steklova, Mr Chichlinskiy for compiling an offence report on 26/03/2017; (4) escorting to the police station of Mr Galperin for compiling an offence report at 1.25 p.m. on 03/09/2019;   Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in all sets of administrative-offence proceedings in respect of the applicants, except for Mr Chichlinskiy     3,000 (Mr Galperin)   5,000 (Mr Chichlinskiy)   5,000 (Mr Klochkov)   3,000 (Ms Kuzmina)   5,000 (Ms Ryabikova)   5,000 (Mr Soldatov)   5,000 (Ms Steklova)     291/18 07/12/2017       and     28958/19 13/05/2019 Yevgeniy Olegovich GOLIGOROV   Glukhov Aleksey Vladimirovich Novocheboksarsk           Karavayev Aleksandr Yevgenyevich Nizhniy Novgorod Anti-corruption rally   Nizhniy Novgorod   26/03/2017   Protest against retirement age hike   Nizhniy Novgorod   09/09/2018 article 20.2 § 5 of CAO             article 20.2 § 6.1 of CAO fine of RUB 10,000           detention for 14 days Nizhniy Novgorod Regional Court 15/06/2017       Nizhniy Novgorod Regional Court 14/11/2018 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - escorting to the police station for compiling an offence report on 26/03/2017;   Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in both sets of the administrative-offence proceedings. 5,000     49968/18 10/10/2018                       and     29671/20 13/07/2020 Nikolay Yuryevich DYACHKOV   Zhdanov Ivan Yuryevich Vilnius                           Memorial Human Rights Centre Moscow Opposition rally   Ivanovo   05/05/2018     Rally against retirement age hike   Ivanovo   09/09/2018     Rally to call for fair elections to Mosgorduma   Moscow   27/07/2019 article 20.2 § 1 CAO           article 20.2 § 8 of CAO               article 20.2 § 5 of CAO fine of RUB 15,000         100 hours of community work           fine of RUB 10,000 Ivanovo Regional Court 28/08/2018       Ivanovo Regional Court 15/01/2019           Moscow City Court 02/12/2019 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - escorting to the police station for compiling an offence report on 14/09/2018 and 27/07/2019;   Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in all sets of administrative-offence proceedings;   Art. 11 (1) - restrictions on location, time or manner of conduct of public events - refusal by the Ivanovo Town administration to approve the location and date of the Voters’ strike as part of nationwide protest action on 28/01/2018 (final decision was taken by the Supreme Court of Russia on 17/09/2018). 4,000     13561/19 27/02/2019 Leonid Sergeyevich YARYGIN       Opposition rally   Tambov   05/05/2018 article 20.2 § 8 of CAO fine of RUB 300,000 Tambov Regional Court 10/10/2018 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - escorting to and detention at the police station for compiling an offence report from 4.10 p.m. on 09/09/2018 until 8.30 a.m. on 10/09/2018;   Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings. 7,000     30657/19 28/05/2019 Oleg Olegovich STEPANOV   Pomazuyev Aleksandr Yevgenyevich Vilnius Political rally   Moscow   29/07/2018     Protest against retirement age hike   Moscow   09/09/2018   article 20.2 § 5 of CAO           article 20.2 § 2 of CAO fine of RUB 10,000         fine of RUB 20,000 Moscow City Court 12/12/2018         Moscow City Court 14/03/2019 Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in both sets of the administrative-offence proceedings. 3,500     43813/19 04/08/2019 Dmitriy Aleksandrovich IVANOV   Yelanchik Oleg Aleksandrovich Moscow Opposition rally   Moscow   05/05/2018     Rally to protest the Novoye Velichiye case   Moscow   28/10/2018     Rally in support of Lev Ponomarev   Moscow   16/12/2018     Political rally   Moscow   06/01/2019       Rally to support Azat Miftakhov   Moscow   02/03/2019     Rally to support Ivan Golunov   Moscow   12/06/2019 article 19.3 § 1 of CAO           article 20.2 § 5 of CAO               article 20.2 § 5 of CAO               article 20.2 § 5 of CAO           article 20.2 § 5 of CAO             article 20.2 § 8 of CAO fine of RUB 1,000           fine of RUB 10,000             fine of RUB 10,000             fine of RUB 10,000         fine of RUB 15,000           fine of RUB 150,000 Moscow City Court 04/02/2019         Moscow City Court 06/02/2019             Moscow City Court 14/03/2019             Moscow City Court 22/05/2019         Moscow City Court 04/04/2019           Moscow City Court 16/09/2019 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - (1) escorting to the police station for compiling an offence report on 05/05/2018, 28/10/2018 and 16/12/2018; (2) escorting to and detention at the police station after compiling an offence report from 4.40 p.m. on 02/03/2019 until 4 p.m. on 04/03/2019, and from 5 p.m. on 12/06/2019 until 10.35 a.m. on 14/06/2019;   Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in all sets of administrative-offence proceedings. 6,000     57852/19 17/08/2015 Mark Izrailevich GALPERIN   Zboroshenko Nikolay Sergeyevich Moscow Political rally   Moscow   16/08/2014     Political rally   Moscow   17/07/2019         article 20.2 § 5 of CAO           article 20.2 § 8 of CAO fine of RUB 10,000         detention for 30 days Moscow City Court 18/03/2015         Moscow City Court 02/08/2019 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - escorting to and detention at the police station after compiling an offence report from 11.20 a.m. until the court hearing on 24/07/2019;   Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in both sets of the administrative-offence proceedings. -     13165/20 26/02/2020 Marina Alekseyevna LITVINOVICH   Zakhar Yuryevich KHASANOV   Mezak Ernest Aleksandrovich Saint-Barthélemy-d’Anjou Rally to support Ivan Golunov (both applicants)   Moscow   12/06/2019 article 20.2 § 6.1 of CAO fine of RUB 10.000 (both applicants) Moscow City Court 26/08/2019 (both applicants)   Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - escorting to the police station for compiling an offence report on 12/06/2019 (both applicants);   Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings (both applicants). 4,000 (Ms Litvinovich)   4,000 (Mr Khasanov)   13768/20 24/02/2020 Yulia Dmitriyevna BARINOVA   Lyaysan Rafatovna ZAMALETDINOVA   Mezak Ernest Aleksandrovich Saint-Barthélemy-d’Anjou Rally to support Ivan Golunov (Ms Barinova)   Moscow   12/06/2019     Rally to support Ivan Golunov (Ms Zamaletdinova)   Moscow   12/06/2019           article 20.2 § 6.1 of CAO               article 20.2 § 6.1 of CAO         fine of RUB 10,000             fine of RUB 10,000   Moscow City Court 20/11/2019             Moscow City Court 14/11/2019   Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - escorting to and detention at the police station for compiling an offence report from 3 p.m. until 10.45 p.m. (Ms Barinova) and from 3 p.m. until 11.20 p.m. (Ms Zamaletdinova) on 12/06/2019;   Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings (both applicants). 4,000 (Ms Barinova)   4,000 (Ms Zamaletdinova)       14046/20 05/03/2020 Vladimir Nikolayevich ALESHKIN   Ilya Vyacheslavovich LVOV   Eysmont Mariya Olegovna Moscow Rally to support Ivan Golunov (Mr Aleshkin)   Moscow   12/06/2019     Rally to support Ivan Golunov (Mr Lvov)   Moscow   12/06/2019 article 20.2 § 6.1 of CAO               article 20.2 § 8 of CAO fine of RUB 20,000             fine of RUB 200,000 Moscow City Court 06/09/2019             Moscow City Court 06/09/2019 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - escorting to the police station for compiling an offence report on 12/06/2019 (both applicants);   Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings (both applicants) 4,000 (Mr Aleshkin)   6,000 (Mr Lvov)     [1] Plus any tax that may be chargeable to the applicants.