Information Note on the Court’s case-law 207

May 2017

Navalnyy v. Russia (referral) - 29580/12, 36847/12, 11252/13 et al.

Judgment 2.2.2017 [Section III]

Article 11

Article 11-1

Freedom of peaceful assembly

Repeated arrest and prosecution for administrative offences of political activist: case referred to the Grand Chamber

Article 18

Restrictions for unauthorised purposes

Repeated arrest and prosecution for administrative offences of political activist: case referred to the Grand Chamber

The applicant – a Russian opposition leader and anti-corruption campaigner – was arrested on seven occasions at different public gatherings and prosecuted for administrative offences. In his application to the European Court, he complained that the measures had been politically motivated and had violated his rights under Articles 5 (right to liberty and security), 6 (right to a fair hearing) and 11 (freedom of assembly and as sociation) of the Convention. He also complained of breaches of Articles 14 (prohibition of discrimination) and 18 (limitation on use of restrictions on rights).

In a judgment of 2 February 2017, a Chamber of the Court, following its previous case-law in s imilar cases against Russia,* held unanimously that:

(i) the arrests, which appeared to be part of a practice whereby police would interrupt unnotified but peaceful gatherings and arrest the participants as a matter of routine, had been disproportionate reactions in breach of the applicant’s right to freedo m of assembly under Article 11;

(ii) the seven occasions when the applicant was arrested and the two occasions he was also held in pre-trial detention had all been arbitrary deprivations of his liberty in breach of Article 5 § 1 in the absence of reasons explaining why they were necessary in the circumstances; and

(iii) six of the seven sets of proceedings for administrative offences had been conducted in violation of the applicant’s right to a fair hearing under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention.

In view o f its findings of a violation of Articles 5 and 11, the Court also held that it was not necessary to examine whether there had been a violation of Article 18 of the Convention in conjunction with Articles 5 or 11 (by four votes to three), or of Article 14 of the Convention (unanimously).

On 29 May 2017 the case was referred to the Grand Chamber at the request of both the applicant and the Government.

* See, for example, Kasparov and Others v. Russia , 21613/07, 3 October 2013, Information Note 167 ; Navalnyy and Yashin v. Russia , 76204/11, 4 December 2014, Information Note 180 ; Frumkin v. Russia , 74568/12, 5 January 20 16, Information Note 192 ; and Novikova and Others v. Russia , 25501/07 et al., 26 April 2016, Information Note 195 .

© Council of Europe/Euro pean Court of Human Rights This summary by the Registry does not bind the Court.

Click here for the Case-Law Information Notes