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 YEGOROV AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA
Doc ref: 64942/19, 64946/19, 65072/19, 65114/19, 65133/19, 65144/19, 65180/19, 65202/19, 65205/19, 65211/19, ... • ECHR ID: 001-223983
Document date: April 6, 2023
- Inbound citations: 6
- •
- Cited paragraphs: 0
- •
- Outbound citations: 0
CASE OF YEGOROV AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA
Doc ref: 64942/19, 64946/19, 65072/19, 65114/19, 65133/19, 65144/19, 65180/19, 65202/19, 65205/19, 65211/19, ... • ECHR ID: 001-223983
Document date: April 6, 2023
Cited paragraphs only
THIRD SECTION
CASE OF YEGOROV AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA
(Applications nos. 64942/19 and 25 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 Yegorov 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 applicants were represented by lawyers of former Memorial Human Rights Centre, Moscow.
3. The Russian Government (“the Governmentâ€) were given notice of the applications.
THE FACTS
4. The list of applicants and the relevant details of the applications are set out in the appended table.
5. The applicants complained of the disproportionate measures taken against them as participants of public assemblies. They also raised other complaints under the provisions of the Convention.
THE LAW
6. Having regard to the similar subject matter of the applications, the Court finds it appropriate to examine them jointly in a single judgment.
7. The applicants complained principally of disproportionate measures taken against them as participants of public assemblies, namely the dispersal of these assemblies, as well as the applicants’ arrest followed by their conviction for administrative offence. They relied, expressly or in substance, on Article 11 of the Convention.
8. 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).
9. 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.
10. 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€.
11. These complaints are therefore admissible and disclose a breach of Article 11 of the Convention.
12. The 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 the light of its well-established case-law (see Butkevich v. Russia , no. 5865/07, §§ 63-65, 13 February 2018, Kalyapin v. Russia , no. 6095/09, § 76, 23 July 2019, and Korneyeva v. Russia , no. 72051/17, §§ 34-36, 8 October 2019, concerning different aspects of unlawful deprivation of liberty of the organisers or participants of public events; 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)).
13. Some applicants further raised additional complaints under Articles 5 and 6 of the Convention concerning other aspects of their detention and fairness of the administrative-offence proceedings. In view of the above findings, the Court considers that there is no need to deal separately with these remaining complaints.
14. Lastly, the applicants in applications nos. 65114/19 and 670/20 also raised other complaints under various Articles of the Convention.
15. The Court has examined these complaints and considers that, in the light of all the material in its possession and in so far as the matters complained of are within its competence, these complaints either do not meet the admissibility criteria set out in Articles 34 and 35 of the Convention or do not disclose any appearance of a violation of the rights and freedoms enshrined in the Convention or the Protocols thereto.
It follows that this part of the applications must be rejected in accordance with Article 35 § 4 of the Convention.
16. 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€
17. 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
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]
64942/19
18/12/2019
Georgiy Vladimirovich YEGOROV
1997Manifestation for fair elections to Mosgorduma
Moscow
27/07/2019
Article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
compulsory works of
20 hours
Moscow City Court
04/09/2019
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty, including unrecorded detention and detention without a judicial order and any other legal basis - arrest and escorting to a police officer for the purpose of drawing up a record of administrative offence on 27/07/2019: no evidence/ assessment that it was impracticable, on the spot, to compile the offence record and to achieve the objectives set out in the CAO;
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings.
4,000
64946/19
18/12/2019
Grigor Levonovich GASPARYAN
1963Manifestation for fair elections to Mosgorduma
Moscow
27/07/2019
Article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
fine of
RUB 12,000
Moscow City Court
12/09/2019
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty - arrest and escorting to a police office on 27/07/2019 for the sole purpose of drawing up a record of administrative offence;
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings.
4,000
65072/19
18/12/2019
Timofey Valeryevich GAVRICHKOV
1989Manifestation for fair elections to Mosgorduma
Moscow
27/07/2019
Article 20.2 § 6.1 of CAO
fine of
RUB 10,000
Moscow City Court
04/09/2019
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty - arrest, escorting to a police station, and detention between 27/07/2019 and 29/07/2019 as administrative suspect: no evidence/ assessment of “exceptional circumstances†under the CAO;
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings.
4,000
65114/19
18/12/2019
Yevgeniy Igorevich KOLYAKOV
1986Manifestation for fair elections to Mosgorduma
Moscow
27/07/2019
Article 20.2 § 6.1 of CAO
fine of
RUB 15,000
Moscow City Court
28/08/2019
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty, including unrecorded detention and detention without a judicial order and any other legal basis - arrest, escorting to a police station, and detention between 27/07/2019 and 29/07/2019: no evidence/ assessment of “exceptional circumstances†under the CAO;
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings.
4,000
65133/19
18/12/2019
Aleksey Sergeyevich SVIRSHCHEVSKIY
1982Manifestation for fair elections to Mosgorduma
Moscow
27/07/2019
Article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
fine of
RUB 18,000
Moscow City Court
04/09/2019
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty, including unrecorded detention and detention without a judicial order and any other legal basis - arrest and escorting to a police station on 27/07/2019 for the sole purpose of drawing up a record of administrative offence, detention in excess of three hours: no evidence/ assessment that it was impracticable, on the spot, to compile the offence record and to achieve the objectives set out in the CAO (administrative offence record compiled on 30/07/2019);
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings.
4,000
65144/19
18/12/2019
Yelena Vladimirovna GOLUBEVA
1974Manifestation for fair elections to Mosgorduma
Moscow
27/07/2019
Article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
fine of
RUB 10,000
Moscow City Court
08/10/2019
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty - arrest and escorting to a police station on 27/07/2019, detention in excess of three hours, for the sole purpose of drawing up a record of administrative offence;
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings.
4,000
65180/19
18/12/2019
Andrey Dmitriyevich CHEGODAYEV
1990Manifestation for fair elections to Mosgorduma
Moscow
27/07/2019
Article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
20 hours of community service
Moscow City Court
08/10/2019
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty - arrest and escorting to a police station on 27/07/2019, in excess of three hours, for the sole purpose of drawing up a record of administrative offence;
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings.
4,000
65202/19
18/12/2019
Yasha Mikhaylovich FINKELBERG
1998Manifestation for fair elections to Mosgorduma
Moscow
27/07/2019
Article 20.2 § 6.1 of CAO
fine of
RUB 15,000
Moscow City Court
08/10/2019
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty - arrest, escorting to the police station and detention between 27/07/2019 and 29/07/2019 as administrative suspect, no evidence/ assessment of “exceptional circumstances†under the CAO, detention beyond the three-hour statutory period, and after the administrative offence record had been compiled on 28/07/2019;
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings.
4,000
65205/19
18/12/2019
Konstantin Valeryevich BAZROV
1992Manifestation for fair elections to Mosgorduma
Moscow
27/07/2019
Article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
fine of RUB 15,000
Moscow City Court
02/10/2019
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty - arrest and escorting to a police station on 27/07/2019, detention in excess of three hours, for the sole purpose of drawing up a record of administrative offence;
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings.
4,000
65211/19
18/12/2019
Oleg Yuryevich IVANOV
1994Manifestation for fair elections to Mosgorduma
Moscow
27/07/2019
Article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
fine of
RUB 15,000
Moscow City Court
06/09/2019
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty - arrest and escorting to a police station and detention there on 27/07/2019 for the sole purpose of drawing up a record of administrative offence;
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings.
4,000
65291/19
18/12/2019
Aleksandr Valeryevich STAMIKOV
1970Manifestation for fair elections to Mosgorduma
Moscow
27/07/2019
Article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
fine of
RUB 10,000
Moscow City Court
16/09/2019
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty - arrest, escorting to a police station, detention on 27/07/2019 in excess of three hours, for the sole purpose of drawing up a record of administrative offence;
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings.
4,000
65292/19
18/12/2019
Lidiya Vladimirovna TYUKOVA
1952Manifestation for fair elections to Mosgorduma
Moscow
27/07/2019
Article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
fine of
RUB 20,000
Moscow City Court
20/08/2019
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty - arrest, escorting to the police station, and detention there on 27/07/2019 in excess of three hours, for the sole purpose of drawing up a record of administrative offence;
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings.
4,000
65294/19
18/12/2019
Timur Orifdzhanovich RAFIYEV
1973Manifestation for fair elections to Mosgorduma
Moscow
27/07/2019
Article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
fine of
RUB 15,000
Moscow City Court
30/08/2019
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty - arrest, escorting to the police station, and detention there on 27/07/2019 in excess of three hours, for the sole purpose of drawing up a record of administrative offence;
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings.
4,000
63/20
18/12/2019
Vladislav Olegovich TRETYAKOV
1992Manifestation for fair elections to Mosgorduma
Moscow
27/07/2019
Article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
fine of
RUB 15,000
Moscow City Court
10/09/2019
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty - arrest, escorting to a police station, and detention on 27/07/2019 in excess of three hours for the sole purpose of drawing up a record of administrative offence;
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings.
4,000
630/20
18/12/2019
Yaroslav Vladimirovich BYSTROV
1973Manifestation for fair elections to Mosgorduma
Moscow
27/07/2019
Article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
fine of
RUB 20,000
Moscow City Court
30/08/2019
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty - arrest, escorting to a police station, and detention on 27/07/2019 in excess of three hours for the sole purpose of drawing up a record of administrative offence (administrative offence record compiled on 30/07/2019);
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings.
4,000
670/20
18/12/2019
Dmitriy Aleksandrovich KIRYUKIN
1998Manifestation for fair elections to Mosgorduma
Moscow
27/07/2019
Article 20.2 § 6 of CAO
10 days of administrative detention
Moscow City Court
05/08/2019
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty - arrest, escorting to a police station, and detention between 27/07/2019 and 29/07/2019 as administrative suspect: no evidence/ assessment of “exceptional circumstances†under the CAO, detention beyond the three-hour statutory period, and after the administrative offence record had been compiled on 28/07/2019;
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings.
5,000
692/20
18/12/2019
Aleksey Vasilyevich TIKHOMIROV
1961Manifestation for fair elections to Mosgorduma
Moscow
27/07/2019
Article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
fine of
RUB 15,000
Moscow City Court
26/08/2019
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty - arrest, escorting to a police station, and detention there on 27/07/2019 for the sole purpose of drawing up a record of administrative offence (the administrative offence record compiled on 31/07/2019);
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of tribunal - absence of a prosecuting party in the administrative proceedings.
4,000
1914/20
27/12/2019
Denis Vladimirovich SIMONOV
1976Manifestation for fair elections to Mosgorduma
Moscow
27/07/2019
Article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
fine of
RUB 15,000
Moscow City Court
28/08/2019
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty - arrest, escorting to a police station, and detention there on 27/07/2019 for the sole purpose of drawing up a record of administrative offence;
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings.
4,000
2278/20
24/12/2019
Ilya Valeryevich BALAKIN
1998Manifestation for fair elections to Mosgorduma
Moscow
27/07/2019
Article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
fine of
RUB 15,000
Moscow City Court
12/09/2019
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty - arrest and escorting to a police station, and detention there on 27/07/2019, in excess of three hours, for the sole purpose of drawing up a record of administrative offence;
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings.
4,000
2784/20
23/12/2019
Polina Aleksandrovna BOGDANOVA
1994Manifestation for fair elections to Mosgorduma
Moscow
27/07/2019
Article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
fine of
RUB 15.000
Moscow City Court
10/09/2019
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty - arrest and escorting to a police station, and detention there on 27/07/2019, in excess of three hours, for the sole purpose of drawing up a record of administrative offence;
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings.
4,000
3021/20
23/12/2019
Vladimir Vyacheslavovich BAZANOV
1976Manifestation for fair elections to Mosgorduma
Moscow
27/07/2019
Article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
fine of
RUB 20,000
Moscow City Court
04/09/2019
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty - arrest, escorting to a police station, and detention there on 27/07/2019 in excess of three hours, for the sole purpose of drawing up a record of administrative offence;
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings.
4,000
3031/20
23/12/2019
Arseniy Alekseyevich AMURSKIY
1984Manifestation for fair elections to Mosgorduma
Moscow
27/07/2019
Article 20.2 § 6.1 of CAO
8 days’ administrative detention
Moscow City Court
01/08/2019
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty - arrest and detention between 27/07/2019 and 29/07/2019 as administrative suspect: no evidence / assessment of “exceptional circumstances†(the administrative offence record compiled on 27/07/2019);
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings.
5,000
5864/20
17/01/2020
Andrey Aleksandrovich DEGTYAREV
1996Manifestation for fair elections to Mosgorduma
Moscow
27/07/2019
Article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
fine of
RUB 20,000
Moscow City Court
30/08/2019
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty - arrest, escorting to a police station and detention there on 27/07/2019 as administrative suspect (the administrative offence record compiled on 31/07/2019);
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings.
4,000
5938/20
17/01/2020
Danil Dmitriyevich KULESHOV
2001Manifestation for fair elections to Mosgorduma
Moscow
27/07/2019
Article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
fine of
RUB 15,000
Moscow City Court
16/09/2019
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty - arrest and escorting to a police office, and detention on 27/07/2019 as administrative suspect
(the administrative offence record compiled on 30/07/2019);
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings.
4,000
5998/20
17/01/2020
Sergey Pavlovich POPOV
1981Manifestation for fair elections to Mosgorduma
Moscow
27/07/2019
Article 20.2 § 6.1 of CAO
fine of
RUB 10,000
Moscow City Court
10/10/2019
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty - arrest, escorting to a police station, and detention between 27/07/2019 and 29/07/2019 as administrative suspect: no evidence/assessment of any "exceptional circumstances" (administrative offence record compiled on 29/07/2019);
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings.
4,000
6070/20
22/01/2020
Andrey Mikhaylovich NAUMOV
1987Manifestation for fair elections to Mosgorduma
Moscow
27/07/2019
Article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
fine of
RUB 20,000
Moscow City Court
22/08/2019
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty - arrest and escorting to a police station, and detention there on 27/07/2019 in excess of three hours, for the sole purpose of drawing up a record of administrative offence (the administrative offence record compiled on 31/07/2019);
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.
© European Union,
https://eur-lex.europa.eu, 1998 - 2026
