Přehled

Text rozhodnutí
Datum rozhodnutí
12.9.2024
Rozhodovací formace
Významnost
3
Číslo stížnosti / sp. zn.

Rozsudek

FIFTH SECTION

CASE OF AYNBINDER AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA

(Applications nos. 49839/17 and 13 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 Aynbinder and Others v. Russia,

The European Court of Human Rights (Fifth Section), sitting as a Committee composed of:

María Elósegui, President,
Kateřina Šimáčková,
Stéphane Pisani, 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 against solo demonstrators. Some applicants also raised other complaints under the provisions of the Convention.

THE LAW

  1. 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.

  1. 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, §§ 6873, 17 January 2023).

  1. ALLEGED VIOLATION OF ARTICLE 10 of the Convention

7. The applicants complained principally of the disproportionate measures taken against them as participants 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 v. Russia (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, and Glukhin v. Russia, no. 11519/20, §§ 49-57, 4 July 2023).

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.

  1. 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, 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 (CAO).

  1. REMAINING COMPLAINTS

12. Some applicants raised further additional complaints under Article 6 of the Convention. In view of the findings in paragraphs 9-11 above, the Court considers that there is no need to deal separately with these remaining complaints.

  1. APPLICATION OF ARTICLE 41 OF THE CONVENTION

13. Regard being had to the documents in its possession and to its caselaw (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,

  1. Decides to join the applications;
  2. Holds that it has jurisdiction to deal with these applications as they relate to facts that took place before 16 September 2022;
  3. 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 applicants;
  4. Holds that these applications disclose a breach of Article 10 of the Convention concerning the disproportionate measures against solo demonstrators;
  5. 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);
  6. 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 María Elósegui
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

Name of the court

Date

Other relevant information

Other complaints under well-established caselaw

Amount awarded for pecuniary and nonpecuniary damage and costs and expenses per applicant (in euros)[1]

49839/17

03/07/2017

Sergey Leonidovich AYNBINDER

1973

Zboroshenko Nikolay Sergeyevich

Moscow

Moscow

11/11/2016

Protest against the toll collection system ‘PLATON’

article 19.3 § 1 of CAO

fine of RUB 1,000

13/01/2017, Moscow City Court

Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - arrest, escorting to a police station, detention between 11/11/2016 and 13/11/2016 as an administrative suspect, pending trial and after the offence report had been compiled,

Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings

4,000

1600/18

26/12/2017

Olga Arkadyevna KARAMYSHEVA

1958

Memorial Human Rights Centre

Moscow

Moscow

26/03/2017

Taking pictures of the applicant’s son’s solo demonstration against construction fraud

article 20.2 § 5 of CAO

fine of RUB 10,000

Moscow City Court

28/07/2017

Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - arrest, escorting to a police station, detention on 26/03/2017 for the sole purpose of drawing up an administrative 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

1605/18

26/12/2017

Ivan Sergeyevich KARAMYSHEV

1986

Memorial Human Rights Centre

Moscow

Moscow

26/03/2017

Protest of a defrauded shareholder against housing construction fraud

article 20.2 § 5 of CAO

fine of RUB 10,000

Moscow City Court

26/06/2017

Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - arrest, escorting to a police station, detention on 26/03/2017 for the sole purpose of drawing up an administrative 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

5629/18

20/11/2017

Yan Nikolayevich KATELEVSKIY

1981

Kurakin Yevgeniy Nikolayevich

Reutov

Moscow

09/08/2016

Protest against unlawful actions of a local judge and the police

article 20.2 § 5 of CAO

fine of RUB 15,000

Moscow City Court

22/05/2017

Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings

3,500

25651/19

30/04/2019

Dmitriy Aleksandrovich YEGOROV

1995

Nisanbekova Elza Rinatovna

Kazan

(i) Kazan

25/10/2018

Picket against attack on political and economic liberties in Russia

(use of cardboard mock-up tombstones)

(ii) Kazan

12/12/2018

Protest against the

authorities’ failure to respect the Constitution

(i) article 20.2 § 2 of CAO, administrative detention of 7 days,

(ii) article 20.2 § 8 of CAO

administrative detention of 12 days

(i) Supreme Court of the Tatarstan Republic

31/10/2018

(ii) Supreme Court of the Tatarstan Republic

29/12/2018

conviction for staging solo demonstrations with recourse to quickly (de)assembled objects (see Glukhin v. Russia, no. 11519/20, §§ 51-57, 4 July 2023)- both sets of proceedings

Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - arrest, escorting to a police station, detention:

(i) between 29/10/2018 and 30/10/2018 as administrative suspect, pending trial and after the offence report in respect of the events of 25/10/2018 had been compiled, and

(ii) between 27/10/2018 and 28/10/2018 as administrative suspect, pending trial and after the offence report in respect of the events of 12/12/2018 had been compiled,

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 proceedings

5,000

20674/21

27/03/2021

Mariya Andreyevna STARIKOVA

1988

Gilmanov Mansur Idrisovich

Podolsk

Moscow

07/07/2020

Support of journalist I. Safronov,

article 20.2 § 5 of CAO, administrative fine of

RUB 15,000

Moscow City Court

16/10/2020

Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention – arrest, delayed escorting to a police station, detention on 07/07/2020 for the sole purpose of drawing up an administrative 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

40679/21

25/07/2021

Valeriy Sergeyevich SEMENISHCHEV

1974

Mikhaylova Varvara Dmitriyevna

St Petersburg

Kirov

17/11/2020

Drawing attention to environmental problems in Kirov

article 20.2 § 2 of CAO

administrative fine of RUB 10,000

Kirov Regional Court

03/02/2021

Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings

3,500

41315/21

02/08/2021

Darya Sergeyevna BOLSHAKOVA

1989

Bochilo Anna Yevgenyevna

Barnaul

Kaliningrad

10/10/2020

Political protest

article 20.2 § 8 of CAO

fine of RUB 150,000

Kaliningrad Regional Court

23/03/2021

5,000

17991/22

13/03/2022

Anna Valeryevna KRECHETOVA

1970

Aksenova Darya Dmitriyevna

Kolomna

Moscow

06/09/2021

Support of Crimean Tatars

article 20.2 § 8 of CAO

administrative detention of 16 days

Moscow City Court

13/09/2021

Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - arrest, escorting to and detention in the police station between 06/09/2021 and 08/09/2021 as administrative suspect, pending trial, and after the administrative offence report had been compiled,

Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings

5,000

34712/22

11/07/2022

Darya Sergeyevna TSYBINA

1999

Bochilo Anna Yevgenyevna

Barnaul

Volgogda

24/02/2022

Anti-war protest

article 20.2 § 2 of CAO

fine of RUB 20,000

Volgograd Regional Court

31/03/2022

distance requirement - event classified as assembly post facto

Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - escorting to and detention at the police station between 24/02/2022 and 25/02/2022 as administrative suspect, pending trial and after the administrative offence report had been compiled,

Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings

4,000

35080/22

04/07/2022

Anton Sergeyevich NEKHAYEV

1998

Kulikov Sergey Sergeyevich

Nizhniy Novgorod

Nizhniy Novgorod

24/02/2022

Anti-war protest

article 20.2. § 6.1 of CAO

administrative detention of 6 days

Nizhniy Novgorod Regional Court

05/03/2022

Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - arrest, escorting to a police station, detention between 24/02/2022 and 25/02/2022 as administrative suspect, pending trial and after the administrative offence report had been compiled,

Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings

5,000

48088/22

15/09/2022

Anastasiya Vyacheslavovna ZHDANOVA

1994

Nemanov Vladimir Sergeyevich

Moscow

Moscow

08/03/2022

Anti-war protest

article 20.2 § 5 of CAO

fine of RUB 20,000

Moscow City Court

01/07/2022

Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention – arrest, escorting to a police station, detention on 08/03/2022 for the sole purpose of drawing up an administrative 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

1697/23

26/11/2022

Alena Igorevna PAVLOVA

1992

Moscow

26/02/2022

Anti-war protest

article 20.2 § 5 of CAO

fine of RUB 15,000

Moscow City Court

25/08/2022

Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - arrest, escorting to a police station, detention on 26/02/2022 for the sole purpose of drawing up an administrative 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

2250/23

29/12/2022

Svetlana Valeryevna GETIYA

1955

Moscow

27/02/2022

Anti-war protest

article 20.2 § 5 of CAO

fine of RUB 20,000

Moscow City Court

05/09/2022

Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - arrest, escorting to a police station, detention on 27/02/2022 for the sole purpose of drawing up an administrative 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.