LEXI - AI Legal Assistant
Sorry, there was an error communicating with our API.
Try refreshing the page, and if the error persists, please try again in a few minutes.
CASE OF RYZHOVA AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA
Doc ref: 79729/13, 26673/14, 68813/14, 24845/15, 34454/15, 4043/16, 13326/16, 38831/16, 63556/16, 63614/16, 6... • ECHR ID: 001-223977
Document date: April 6, 2023
- Inbound citations: 0
- •
- Cited paragraphs: 0
- •
- Outbound citations: 0
CASE OF RYZHOVA AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA
Doc ref: 79729/13, 26673/14, 68813/14, 24845/15, 34454/15, 4043/16, 13326/16, 38831/16, 63556/16, 63614/16, 6... • ECHR ID: 001-223977
Document date: April 6, 2023
Cited paragraphs only
THIRD SECTION
CASE OF RYZHOVA AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA
(Applications nos. 79729/13 and 21 others –
see appended list)
JUDGMENT
STRASBOURG
6 April 2023
This judgment is final but it may be subject to editorial revision.
In the case of Ryzhova and Others v. Russia,
The European Court of Human Rights (Third Section), sitting as a Committee composed of:
Peeter Roosma , President , Ioannis Ktistakis, Andreas Zünd , judges ,
and Viktoriya Maradudina, Acting Deputy Section Registrar,
Having deliberated in private on 16 March 2023,
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 Conventionâ€) on the various dates indicated in the appended table.
2. The Russian Government (“the Governmentâ€) 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 and/or participants of public assemblies. Some applicants also raised other complaints under the provisions of the Convention.
THE LAW
5. Having regard to the similar subject matter of the applications, the Court finds it appropriate to examine them jointly in a single judgment.
6. The applicants complained principally of disproportionate measures taken against them as organisers and/or participants of public assemblies, namely the dispersal of these assemblies, as well as the applicants’ arrest followed by their conviction for an administrative offence. They relied, expressly or in substance, on Article 11 of the Convention.
7. The Court refers to the principles established in its case-law regarding freedom of assembly (see KudreviÄius 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).
8. 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.
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 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 societyâ€.
10. These complaints are therefore admissible and disclose a breach of Article 11 of the Convention.
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 well ‑ established case-law (see Tsvetkova and Others v. Russia , nos. 54381/08 and 5 others, §§ 84-138, 10 April 2018, as regards unlawful administrative arrest, and Karelin v. Russia , no. 926/08, 20 September 2016, concerning examination of criminal cases in the absence of a prosecuting party in the judicial proceedings governed by the Federal Code of Administrative Offences(CAO)).
12. In view of its findings above, the Court considers that there is no need to deal separately with the remaining complaints under Article 6 of the Convention raised by some of the applicants in relation to other aspects of the fairness of the proceedings.
13. Article 41 of the Convention provides:
“If the Court finds that there has been a violation of the Convention or the Protocols thereto, and if the internal law of the High Contracting Party concerned allows only partial reparation to be made, the Court shall, if necessary, afford just satisfaction to the injured party.â€
14. 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,
(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 6 April 2023, pursuant to Rule 77 §§ 2 and 3 of the Rules of Court.
Viktoriya Maradudina Peeter Roosma 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 charges
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]
79729/13
28/11/2013
Yekaterina Nikolayevna RYZHOVA
1976Bukvareva Aleksandra Alekseyevna
Moscow
Anti-government manifestation
Moscow
09/05/2013
Article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
fine of RUB 5,000
Moscow City Court
30/09/2013
3,500
26673/14
28/03/2014
Ivan Vasilyevich ANOSHKIN
1980Golichenko Mikhail Mikhaylovich
Balashikha
Manifestation in support of AIDS patients
Tolyatti
19/05/2013
Article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
fine of RUB 10,000
Samara Regional Court
30/09/2013
3,500
68813/14
08/10/2014
Askhat Minnikhanovich NAZMUTDINOV
1948Manifestation
Perm
12/06/2013
Article 20.2 § 2 of CAO
fine of RUB 15,000
Perm Regional Court
09/04/2014
3,500
24845/15
17/04/2015
Mikhail Mikhaylovich NAZARENKO
1981Public gathering
Mineralnye Vody
24/01/2015
Article 20.2 § 6.1 of CAO
administrative detention of 5 days
Stavropol Regional Court
18/03/2015
5,000
34454/15
18/06/2015
Ilmira Mansurovna SHAYKHRAZNOVA
1991Mezak Ernest Aleksandrovich
Saint-Barthélemy d’Anjou
LGBT manifestation
Lipetsk
26/10/2014
Article 20.2 § 2 of CAO
fine of RUB 20,000
Lipetsk Regional Court
18/12/2014
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of tribunal - lack of a prosecuting party in the administrative-offence proceedings. Final decision: Lipetsk Regional Court on 18/12/2014
3,500
4043/16
30/12/2015
Irina Vladimirovna PAYKACHEVA
1953Mezak Ernest Aleksandrovich
Saint-Barthélemy d’Anjou
Manifestation to commemorate Boris Nemtsov
Murmansk, Five Corners Square
01/03/2015
Article 20.2 § 2 of CAO
fine of RUB 20,000
Murmansk Regional Court
05/08/2015
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of tribunal - absence of the prosecuting party in the administrative offence proceedings: Final decision: Murmansk Regional Court on 05/08/2015
3,500
13326/16
27/02/2016
Yuriy Ilyich IZOTOV
1996Kachanov Roman Yevgenyevich
Yekaterinburg
Piquet against human rights violations
Yekaterinburg
30/05/2015
Article 20.2 §1 of CAO
fine of RUB 10,500
Sverdlovsk Regional Court
27/08/2015
3,500
38831/16
22/06/2016
Andrey Viktorovich KOROLEVSKIY
1988Flash mob
Moscow
18/08/2015
Stroll for peace
Moscow
13/03/2016
Article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
Article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
fine of RUB 10,000
fine of RUB 10,000
Moscow City Court
22/01/2016
Moscow City Court
06/07/2016
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty, including unrecorded detention and detention without a judicial order and any other legal basis - arrest and detention on 13/03/2016 and on 18/08/2015 for the sole purpose of drawing up a record of administrative offence; on 18/08/2015 detained for 14 hours; raised on appeal,
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of tribunal - absence of a prosecuting party in both sets of the administrative-offence proceedings: Final decisions: Moscow City Court on 22/01/2016 and 06/07/2016
5,000
63556/16
17/10/2016
Piter Leonid Karl MARS
1993March for change
Moscow
12/12/2015
Article 19.3 § 1 of CAO
fine of RUB 1,000
Moscow City Court
20/04/2016
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of tribunal - lack of a prosecuting party in the administrative-offence proceedings. Final decision: Moscow City Court on 20/04/2016
3,500
63614/16
26/10/2016
Aleksandr Sergeyevich PUCHKOV
1988Zboroshenko Nikolay Sergeyevich
Mytishchi
Peace Protest ("Марш мира")
Moscow
27/09/2015
Article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
fine of RUB 15,000
Moscow City Court
26/04/2016
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty, including unrecorded detention and detention without a judicial order and any other legal basis - unrecorded arrest and detention for 5 hours for the sole purpose of drawing up a record of administrative offence on 27/09/2015, raised on appeal,
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of tribunal - in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in the administrative-offence proceedings. Final decision: Moscow City Court on 26/04/2016
4,000
64477/16
25/10/2016
Aleksandr Veniaminovich SHCHERBAKOV
1977Zboroshenko Nikolay Sergeyevich
Mytishchi
Stroll to protest the policy towards Ukraine
Moscow
18/08/2015
Article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
fine RUB 10,000
Moscow City Court
26/04/2016
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty, including unrecorded detention and detention without a judicial order and any other legal basis - arrest and detention on 18/08/2015 in excess of 3 hours for the sole purpose of drawing up a record of administrative offence, raised on appeal,
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings. Final decision: Moscow City Court on 26/04/2016
4,000
73182/16
22/11/2016
Olga Pavlovna ILYICHEVA
1976March for change
Moscow
12/12/2015
Article 19.3 § 1 of CAO
fine of RUB 1,000
Moscow City Court
24/05/2016
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty, including unrecorded detention and detention without a judicial order and any other legal basis - unreasoned arrest on 12/12/2015; detention in excess of 3 hours; raised on appeal,
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings. Final decision: Moscow City Court on 24/05/2016
4,000
74418/16
22/11/2016
Sergey Vladimirovich CHINENOV
1972Zboroshenko Nikolay Sergeyevich
Mytishchi
March for change
Moscow
12/12/2015
Article 19.3 § 1 of CAO
fine of RUB 1,000
Moscow City Court
24/05/2016
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings. Final decision: Moscow City Court on 24/05/2016
3,500
78177/16
28/11/2016
Vasiliy Ivanovich NEDOPEKIN
1997Zboroshenko Nikolay Sergeyevich
Mytishchi
Manifestation
Moscow
08/03/2016
Manifestation
Moscow
25/03/2016
Manifestation near the United Russia Headquarters
Moscow
04/07/2016
Article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
Article 19.3 § 1 of CAO
Article 20.2 § 2 of CAO
fine of RUB 10,000
fine of RUB 1,000
fine of RUB 10,000
Moscow City Court
30/05/2016
Moscow City Court
02/08/2016
Moscow City Court
16/11/2016
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of tribunal - absence of the prosecuting party in all sets of the administrative proceedings: Final decisions: Moscow City Court on 30/05/2016, 02/08/2016 and 16/11/2016
4,000
3997/17
27/12/2016
Anna Anatolyevna BOKLER
1994Procession for peace
Moscow
13/03/2016
Article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
fine of RUB 10,000
Moscow City Court
06/07/2016
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings - Final decision: Moscow City Court on 06/07/2016
3,500
35326/17
06/05/2017
Olga Vitalyevna ISHLINSKAYA
1990Zboroshenko Nikolay Sergeyevich
Mytishchi
Manifestation the United Russia Headquarters (at 12.30 p.m.)
Moscow
01/07/2016
Manifestation near the United Russia Headquarters (at 7 p.m.)
Moscow
01/07/2016
Manifestation near the United Russia Headquarters
Moscow
02/07/2016
Article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
Article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
Article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
fine of RUB 10,000
fine of RUB 10,000
fine of RUB 10,000
Moscow City Court
16/11/2016
Moscow City Court
16/11/2016
Moscow City Court
26/05/2017
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty, including unrecorded detention and detention without a judicial order and any other legal basis - arrest and detention in excess of 3 hours on 01/07/2016 at 12.30 p.m. and then at 7 p.m., following the applicant’s return to take part in the evening manifestation, and on 02/07/2016 for the sole purpose of drawing up a record of administrative offence; raised on appeal;
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings (all sets of the proceedings). Final decisions: Moscow City Court on 16/11/2016 (two decisions) and 26/05/2017
5,000
35460/17
06/05/2017
Nadezhda Vladimirovna SOBOLKOVA
1966Zboroshenko Nikolay Sergeyevich
Mytishchi
Manifestation near the United Russia Headquarters (at 12.30 p.m.)
Moscow
01/07/2016
Manifestation near the United Russia Headquarters (at 7 p.m.)
Moscow
01/07/2016
Manifestation near the United Russia Headquarters
Moscow
02/07/2016
Article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
Article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
Article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
fine of RUB 10,000
fine of RUB 10,000
fine of RUB 10,000
Moscow City Court
16/11/2016
Moscow City Court
16/11/2016
Moscow City Court
26/05/2017
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty, including unrecorded detention and detention without a judicial order and any other legal basis - arrest and detention on 01/07/2016 around 12.30 p.m. and then after 7 p.m., following the applicant’s return to take part in the evening manifestation, and on 02/07/2016 in excess of 3 hours for the sole purpose of drawing up a record of administrative offence; raised on appeal;
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings (all sets of the proceedings). Final decisions: Moscow City Court on 16/11/2016 (two decisions) and 26/05/2017
5,000
35583/17
06/05/2017
Svetlana Vladimirovna DEMINA
1977Zboroshenko Nikolay Sergeyevich
Mytishchi
Manifestation near the United Russia Headquarters (at 12.30 p.m.)
Moscow
01/07/2016
Manifestation near the United Russia Headquarters (at 7 p.m.)
Moscow
01/07/2016
Manifestation near the United Russia Headquarters (at 12.30 p.m.)
Moscow
02/07/2016
Article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
Article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
Article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
fine of RUB 10,000
fine of RUB 10,000
fine of RUB 10,000
Moscow City Court
30/05/2017
Moscow City Court
16/11/2016
Moscow City Court
24/05/2017
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty, including unrecorded detention and detention without a judicial order and any other legal basis - arrest and detention on 01/07/2016 around 12.30 p.m. and then after 7 p.m., following the applicant’s return to take part in the evening manifestation, and on 02/07/2016, in excess of 3 hours for the sole purpose of drawing up a record of administrative offence; raised on appeal,
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings (in all sets of the proceedings). Final decisions: Moscow City Court on 16/11/2016, 24/05/2017 and 30/05/2017
5,000
35611/17
06/05/2017
Timur Vladimirovich ANISIMOV
1986Zboroshenko Nikolay Sergeyevich
Mytishchi
Manifestation near the United Russia Headquarters (at 12.30 p.m.)
Moscow, Bannyy Pereulok
01/07/2016
Manifestation near the United Russia Headquarters (at 7 p.m.)
Moscow, Bannyy Pereulok
01/07/2016
Article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
Article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
fine of RUB 10,000
fine of RUB 10,000
Moscow City Court
16/11/2016
Moscow City Court
16/11/2016
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty, including unrecorded detention and detention without a judicial order and any other legal basis - arrest and detention on 01/07/2016 around 12.30 p.m. and then after 7 p.m., following the applicant’s return to take part in the evening manifestation, both times detention in excess of 3 hours for the sole purpose of drawing up a record of administrative offence; raised on appeal,
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of tribunal - absence of a prosecuting party in administrative proceedings (in both sets): Final decisions: Moscow City Court on 16/11/2016 (two decisions)
4,000
35852/17
06/05/2017
Svetlana Vasilyevna VDOVINA
1962Zboroshenko Nikolay Sergeyevich
Mytishchi
Manifestation near the United Russia Headquarters (12.30 p.m.)
Moscow, Bannyy Pereulok
01/07/2016
Manifestation near the United Russia Headquarters (at 7 p.m.)
Moscwow, Bannyy Pereulok
01/07/2016
Article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
Article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
fine of RUB 10,000
fine of RUB 10,000
Moscow City Court
26/05/2017
Moscow City Court
16/11/2016
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty, including unrecorded detention and detention without a judicial order and any other legal basis - arrest and detention on 01/07/2016 around 12.30 p.m. and then after 7 p.m., following the applicant’s return to take part in the evening manifestation, both times in excess of 3 hours, for the sole purpose of drawing up a record of administrative offence; raised on appeal,
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. Final decisions: Moscow City Court on 16/11/2016 and 26/05/2017
4,000
37599/17
06/05/2017
Elmira Ansarovna GUBEROVA
1980Zboroshenko Nikolay Sergeyevich
Mytishchi
Manifestation near the United Russia Headquarters
(at 12.30 p.m.)
Moscow
01/07/2016
Article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
fine of RUB 10,000
Moscow City Court
16/11/2016
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty, including unrecorded detention and detention without a judicial order and any other legal basis - unrecorded detention following the apprehension by the police on 01/07/2016; raised on appeal,
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings. Final decision: Moscow City Court on 16/11/2016
4,000
37728/17
05/05/2017
Luiza Aleksandrovna MARTYANOVA
1988Zboroshenko Nikolay Sergeyevich
Mytishchi
Manifestation near the United Russia Headquarters (at 12.30 p.m.)
Moscow
01/07/2016
Manifestation near the United Russia Headquarters (at 7 p.m.)
Moscow
01/07/2016
Article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
Article 20.2 § 2 of CAO
fine of RUB 10,000
fine of RUB 10,000
Moscow City Court
22/05/2017
Moscow City Court
22/05/2017
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty, including unrecorded detention and detention without a judicial order and any other legal basis - arrest and detention on 01/07/2016 around 12.30 p.m. and then after 7 p.m., following the applicant’s return to take part in the evening manifestation, both times in excess of 3 hours for the sole purpose of drawing up a record of administrative offence; raised on appeal,
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings - in respect of both sets of the proceedings. Final decisions: Moscow City Court on 22/05/2017 (two decisions)
4,000
[1] Plus any tax that may be chargeable to the applicants.
© European Union,
https://eur-lex.europa.eu, 1998 - 2026
