DIANOVA v. RUSSIA and 1 other application
Doc ref: 21286/15;26805/15 • ECHR ID: 001-212655
Document date: September 30, 2021
- Inbound citations: 0
- •
- Cited paragraphs: 0
- •
- Outbound citations: 5
Published on 18 October 2021
THIRD SECTION
Applications nos. 21286/15 and 26805/15 Olga Ivanovna DIANOVA against Russia and Larisa Viktorovna ZAKHAROVA against Russia lodged on 21 April 2015 and 12 May 2015 respectively communicated on 30 September 2021
SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE
The applications concern an allegedly unjustified interference with the applicants’ freedom of expression and freedom of peaceful assembly.
The applicants held a hunger strike in the open air in front of the Yekaterinburg Office of the State Service for Execution of Sentences, which lasted five days. On the sixth day their protest action was terminated by the police. The applicants were subsequently fined under Article 20.2 § 5 of the Code of Administrative Offences on the ground that they had failed to comply with the prior notification requirement provided by the Public Events Act for “static demonstrations”.
QUESTIONS TO THE PARTIES
Has there been a violation of the applicants’ rights to freedom of expression and peaceful assembly, contrary to Articles 10 and 11 of the Convention? In particular:
(a) Did the applicants’ protest action in form of a hunger strike in the open air fall under the definition of a “public event”, namely “static demonstration”, within the meaning of the Public Events Act?
If so, could the applicants foresee that their hunger strike would be qualified as an assembly rather than a form of expression (see Tatár and Fáber v. Hungary , nos. 26005/08 and 26160/08, §§ 36-42, 12 June 2012)?
(b) Was there a “pressing social need” for the termination of the applicants’ protest action and their subsequent conviction in the administrative-offence proceedings (see Kudrevičius and Others v. Lithuania [GC], no. 37553/05, § 143, ECHR 2015)?
(c) Were the reasons adduced by the national authorities to justify the interference “relevant and sufficient”? Was the measure taken “proportionate to the legitimate aims pursued” (see Obote v. Russia , no. 58954/09, §§ 40-45, 19 November 2019)?
APPENDIX
No.
Application no.
Applicant Year of Birth Place of Residence Nationality
Represented by
Public event
(name, date, location)
Administrative charges / penalty
Final decision
1.
21286/15
Olga Ivanovna DIANOVA 1953 Yekaterinburg Russian
TIMIREVA Olga Vladimirovna
Hunger strike in the open air in front of the Yekaterinburg Office of the State Service for Execution of Sentences held from 6 to 11 August 2014
Article 20.2 § 5 of the Code of Administrative Offences (failure to terminate participation in the “unauthorised static demonstration by a group of persons” ( групповое пикетирование, проводимое без подачи уведомления о проведении публичного мероприятия ))
Fine 10,000 Russian roubles (RUB) – about 190 euros (EUR)
Sverdlovsk Regional Court 22/10/2014
2.
26805/15
Larisa Viktorovna ZAKHAROVA
1967 Yekaterinburg Russian
KACHANOV Roman Yevgenyevich
Hunger strike in the open air in front of the Yekaterinburg Office of the State Service for Execution of Sentences held from 6 to 11 August 2014
Article 20.2 § 5 of the Code of Administrative Offences (failure to terminate participation in the “unauthorised static demonstration by a group of persons” ( групповое пикетирование, проводимое без подачи уведомления о проведении публичного мероприятия ))
Fine RUB 10,000 – about EUR 190
Sverdlovsk Regional Court 13/11/2014
LEXI - AI Legal Assistant
