Lexploria - Legal research enhanced by smart algorithms
Lexploria beta Legal research enhanced by smart algorithms
Menu
Browsing history:

LEVADA CENTRE v. RUSSIA and 14 other applications

Doc ref: 16094/17, 18995/17, 27215/17, 29482/17, 34499/17, 53490/17, 60569/17, 61111/17, 62848/17, 64181/17, ... • ECHR ID: 001-184685

Document date: June 19, 2018

  • Inbound citations: 0
  • Cited paragraphs: 0
  • Outbound citations: 4

LEVADA CENTRE v. RUSSIA and 14 other applications

Doc ref: 16094/17, 18995/17, 27215/17, 29482/17, 34499/17, 53490/17, 60569/17, 61111/17, 62848/17, 64181/17, ... • ECHR ID: 001-184685

Document date: June 19, 2018

Cited paragraphs only

Communicated on 19 June 2018

THIRD SECTION

Application no. 16094/17 LEVADA CENTRE against Russia and 14 other applications (see list appended)

SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE S

The cases concern the Russian Foreign Agents Act, according to which every Russian NGO engaged in political activity and receiving grants from foreign donors was declared to be a “foreign agent” and subjected to various restrictions (see Ecodefence and Others v. Russia , no. 9988/13 and 48 other applications).

Application no. 27215/17 also concerns the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative offence proceedings (see Karelin v. Russia , no. 926/08, §§ 69-85, 20 September 2016).

QUESTIONS tO THE PARTIES

1. In respect of all the applicants, was there a violation of Articles 10 and 11 of the Convention? In particular:

(a) Do the provisions of the Foreign Agents Act meet the “quality of law” requirements contained in Article 10 § 2 and Article 11 § 2 of the Convention? In particular:

( i ) Is the definition of the term “foreign agent” sufficiently clear and foreseeable?

(ii) Are the provisions on foreign financing foreseeable? Does Russian law establish any specific amount, period or form of foreign financing in order for an entity to be recognised a foreign agent?

(iii) Is the definition of “political activity” sufficiently clear and foreseeable in its application?

(iv) Are the labelling requirements formulated with sufficient clarity? Does the national law prescribe with sufficient clarity what material requires labelling or from where the material should originate? Do the domestic courts draw a distinction between publications on behalf of an organisation and those made by a private individual?

(v) Is the amount of the fine for violation of the Foreign Agents Act sufficiently foreseeable?

(b) Was the interference “necessary in a democratic society”? Were the reasons for the interference “relevant” and “sufficient”? In particular:

( i ) Were the negative connotations of the term “foreign agents” considered when choosing a name for organisations receiving foreign funding? Was such branding “necessary in a democratic society”?

(ii) Was the restriction of applicants ’ access to foreign funding “necessary in a democratic society”? What were the consequences of such restriction in terms of the availability of alternative funding? The Government are requested to illustrate their response with specific examples.

(iii) Did registration as a foreign agent have an impact on the applicants ’ ability to freely express their ideas and carry out political activity? Was the suppression of the applicant organisations ’ free debate and political activities necessary in a democratic society?

(iv) Are the additional reporting requirements applicable to the applicant organisations – such as labelling publications, keeping separate records of income or expenses obtained from foreign sources, submitting reports on activities and the composition of their management bodies, and auditing – proportionate to the aim pursued, and do they impose an excessive burden on the applicants?

(v) Are the sanctions for violation of the Foreign Agents Act proportionate to the gravity of the imputed offences? Did the domestic courts weigh the amount of a fine against the financial standing of an applicant and the potential impact of the fine on the applicant ’ s sustainability?

2. As regards the applicants who rely on Article 14, have they suffered discrimination in the enjoyment of their Convention rights on account of their being labelled as foreign agents, contrary to Article 14 of the Convention, read in conjunction with Articles 10 and 11?

3. As regards the applicants who rely on Article 18, were the restrictions imposed by the State on the applicant organisations, ostensibly pursuant to Articles 10 and 11 of the Convention, applied for purposes other than those envisaged by these provisions, contrary to Article 18 of the Convention?

4. As regards application no. 27215/17, did the absence of the prosecuting party in the administrative proceedings result in a breach of the impartiality requirement under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention (see Karelin v. Russia , no. 926/08, §§ 69-85, 20 September 2016)?

APPENDIX

No.

Application no.

Lodged on

Applicant

Date of birth

Place of residence

Represented by

16094/17

21/02/2017

LEVADA CENTRE

18/09/2002

Moscow

Ilnur Ilgizovich SHARAPOV

18995/17

28/02/2017

MAN AND LAW

24/11/1999

Yoshkar-Ola

Darya Sergeyevna PIGOLEVA

27215/17

21/03/2017

Irina Nikolayevna DUBOVITSKAYA

13/05/1966

Krasnodar

Darya Sergeyevna PIGOLEVA

29482/17

23/03/2017

SAKHALIN ENVIRONMENT WATCH

30/09/1997

Yuzhno-Sakhalinsk

Maksim Vladimirovich OLENICHEV

34499/17

02/05/2017

HUMAN RIGHTS ACADEMY

13/06/1997

Yekaterinburg

Anton BURKOV

53490/17

19/07/2017

SOUTH HUMAN RIGHTS CENTRE

24/03/2004

Sochi

Irina Vladimirovna KHRUNOVA

60569/17

06/08/2017

CHAPAYEVSK MEDICAL ASSOCIATION

29/09/1999

Chapayevsk

Yelena Yuryevna

PERSHAKOVA

61111/17

24/07/2017

CENTRE FOR SOCIAL AND LABOUR RIGHTS

18/03/1999

Moscow

62848/17

01/08/2017

LEGAL MISSION

18/03/2009

Chelyabinsk

Maksim Vladimirovich OLENICHEV

64181/17

21/08/2017

Oleg Vladimirovich SERGEYEV

21/07/1972

Syktyvkar

Irina Anatolyevna BIRYUKOVA

69157/17

15/08/2017

SCHOOL OF THE RECRUIT

11/07/2014

Chelyabinsk

Maksim Vladimirovich OLENICHEV

81560/17

18/11/2017

WOMAN ’ S WORLD

30/11/2011

Kaliningrad

Maksim Vladimirovich OLENICHEV

81751/17

18/11/2017

SOVA CENTRE

21/10/2002

Moscow

Yelena Yuryevna

PERSHAKOVA

130/18

11/12/2017

Viktor Pavlovich YUKECHEV

06/11/1984

Novosibirsk

TAK-TAK-TAK

19/06/2013

Novosibirsk

Ilnur Ilgizovich SHARAPOV

15813/18

29/03/2018

RYAZAN MEMORIAL

30/06/1999

Ryazan

Karinna Akopovna MOSKALENKO

© European Union, https://eur-lex.europa.eu, 1998 - 2026

LEXI

Lexploria AI Legal Assistant

Active Products: EUCJ + ECHR Data Package + Citation Analytics • Documents in DB: 401132 • Paragraphs parsed: 45279850 • Citations processed 3468846