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 PUZANOV AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA
Doc ref: 3669/18, 3670/18, 3690/18, 4025/18, 4028/18, 4820/18, 4904/18, 5277/18, 6428/18, 7226/18, 7571/18, 7... • ECHR ID: 001-224570
Document date: May 11, 2023
- Inbound citations: 0
- •
- Cited paragraphs: 0
- •
- Outbound citations: 0
CASE OF PUZANOV AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA
Doc ref: 3669/18, 3670/18, 3690/18, 4025/18, 4028/18, 4820/18, 4904/18, 5277/18, 6428/18, 7226/18, 7571/18, 7... • ECHR ID: 001-224570
Document date: May 11, 2023
Cited paragraphs only
SECOND SECTION
CASE OF PUZANOV AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA
(Applications nos. 3669/18 and 29 others –
see appended list)
JUDGMENT
STRASBOURG
11 May 2023
This judgment is final but it may be subject to editorial revision.
In the case of Puzanov and Others v. Russia,
The European Court of Human Rights (Second Section), sitting as a Committee composed of:
Lorraine Schembri Orland , President , Frédéric Krenc, Davor DerenÄinović , judges ,
and Viktoriya Maradudina, Acting Deputy Section Registrar,
Having deliberated in private on 13 April 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 participants or organisers of public assemblies. They 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 Court observes that the facts giving rise to the alleged violations of the Convention occurred prior to 16 September 2022, the date on which the Russian Federation ceased to be a party to the Convention. The Court therefore decides that it has jurisdiction to examine the present applications (see Fedotova and Others v. Russia [GC], nos. 40792/10 and 2 others, §§ 68 ‑ 73, 17 January 2023).
7. The applicants complained principally of disproportionate measures taken against them as participants or organisers of public assemblies, namely their arrest in relation to the dispersal of these assemblies and their conviction for administrative offences. 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 . Some applicants submitted other complaints which also raised issues under the Convention and Protocols thereto, given the relevant well ‑ established case-law of the Court (see the 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 Butkevich v. Russia , no. 5865/07, §§ 63-64, 13 February 2018; Tsvetkova and Others v. Russia , nos. 54381/08 and 5 others, §§ 115-31, 10 April 2018; Korneyeva v. Russia , no. 72051/17, §§ 34-36, 8 October 2019; and Teslenko and Others v. Russia , nos. 49588/12 and 3 others, §§ 72-74 and 81-82, 5 April 2022, as to prompt administrative escorting to and/or detention in a police station beyond three hours for non ‑ custodial offences, without substantiating the impossibility to compile an offence report at a rally venue or any exceptional circumstances or another valid ground under the Code of Administrative Offences (CAO) or continued detention after the offence report was compiled; and Karelin v. Russia , no. 926/08, §§ 58-85, 20 September 2016, concerning the lack of a prosecuting party in criminal proceedings under the CAO.
13. In view of the findings in paragraphs 11 and 12 above, there is no need to examine the other aspects of the complaints raised by some applicants under Articles 5 and 6 of the Convention.
14. 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€
15. 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 11 May 2023, pursuant to Rule 77 §§ 2 and 3 of the Rules of Court.
Viktoriya Maradudina Lorraine Schembri Orland
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]
3669/18
08/01/2018
Aleksandr Viktorovich PUZANOV
1995Terekhov Konstantin Ilyich
Moscow
Anticorruption rally
St Petersburg,
12/06/2017
Article 19.3 § 1 of CAO
Article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
fine of
RUB 500
fine of
RUB 3,000
St Petersburg City Court
13/07/2017
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - on 12-13/06/2017 escorting to and detention in a police station for and after compiling offence reports,
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings – under Article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
4,000
3670/18
08/01/2018
Kirill Vyacheslavovich NIKITIN
1998Terekhov Konstantin Ilyich
Moscow
Anticorruption rally
St Petersburg,
12/06/2017
Article 19.3 § 1 of CAO
Article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
fine of
RUB 500
fine of
RUB 10,000
St Petersburg City Court
13/07/2017
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - on 12-13/06/2017 escorting to and detention in a police station for and after compiling offence reports,
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings – under Article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
4,000
3690/18
08/01/2018
German Aleksandrovich GORELIK
1967Terekhov Konstantin Ilyich
Moscow
Anticorruption rally
St Petersburg,
12/06/2017
Article 19.3 § 1 of CAO
Article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
fine of
RUB 500
fine of
RUB 10,000
St Petersburg City Court
13/07/2017
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - on 12-14/06/2017 escorting to and detention in a police station for and after compiling offence reports,
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings – under Article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
4,000
4025/18
08/01/2018
Sergey Leonidovich PODUSHKOV
1965Terekhov Konstantin Ilyich
Moscow
Anticorruption rally
St Petersburg,
12/06/2017
Article 19.3 § 1 of CAO
Article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
fine of
RUB 500
fine of
RUB 3,000
St Petersburg City Court
20/07/2017
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - on 12-14/06/2017 escorting to and detention in a police station for and after compiling offence reports,
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings – under Article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
4,000
4028/18
08/01/2018
Ivan
Ivanovich DRAGOMILOV
1990Terekhov Konstantin Ilyich
Moscow
Anticorruption rally
St Petersburg,
12/06/2017
Article 19.3 § 1 of CAO
Article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
fine of
RUB 500
fine of
RUB 10,000
St Petersburg City Court
27/07/2017
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - on 12-14/06/2017 escorting to and detention in a police station for and after compiling offence reports,
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings – under Article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
4,000
4820/18
12/01/2018
Vladimir Aleksandrovich FEDIN
1990Terekhov Konstantin Ilyich
Moscow
Anticorruption rally
St Petersburg,
26/03/2017
Article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
fine of
RUB 10,000
St Petersburg City Court
13/07/2017
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings
3,500
4904/18
17/01/2018
Artem
Valeryevich SOLOMKIN
1990Terekhov Konstantin Ilyich
Moscow
Anticorruption rally
St Petersburg,
12/06/2017
Article 19.3 § 1 of CAO
Article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
fine of
RUB 1,000
fine of
RUB 10,000
St Petersburg City Court
18/07/2017
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - on 12-13/06/2017 escorting to and detention in a police station for and after compiling offence reports,
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings – under Article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
4,000
5277/18
08/01/2018
Yevgeniy Aleksandrovich PYRYAYEV
1945Terekhov Konstantin Ilyich
Moscow
Anticorruption rally
St Petersburg,
12/06/2017
Article 19.3 § 1 of CAO
Article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
fine of
RUB 500
fine of
RUB 10,000
St Petersburg City Court
11/07/2017
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - on 12-13/06/2017 escorting to and detention in a police station for compiling offence reports,
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings – under Article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
4,000
6428/18
10/01/2018
Artem Valentinovich MISHCHENKO
1995Zhdanov
Ivan Yuryevich
Vilnius
Anticorruption rally
St Petersburg,
12/06/2017
Article 19.3 § 1 of CAO
Article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
fine of
RUB 500
fine of
RUB 10,000
St Petersburg City Court
11/07/2017
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings – under Article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
3,500
7226/18
10/01/2018
Svetlana
Ivanovna SAKHAROVA
1966Zhdanov
Ivan Yuryevich
Vilnius
Anticorruption rally
St Petersburg,
12/06/2017
Article 19.3 § 1 of CAO
Article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
fine of
RUB 1,000
fine of
RUB 10,000
St Petersburg City Court
11/07/2017
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings – under Article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
3,500
7571/18
12/01/2018
Yuliya
Igorevna SAVELYEVA
1994Peredruk
Aleksandr Dmitriyevich
St Petersburg
Anticorruption rally
St Petersburg,
26/03/2017
Article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
fine of
RUB 10,000
St Petersburg City Court
13/07/2017
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings
3,500
7628/18
10/01/2018
Kirill
Alekseyevich KHROMOV
1989Zhdanov
Ivan Yuryevich
Vilnius
Anticorruption rally
St Petersburg,
12/06/2017
Article 19.3 § 1 of CAO
Article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
fine of
RUB 500
fine of
RUB 5,000
St Petersburg City Court
11/07/2017
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings – under Article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
3,500
7748/18
10/01/2018
Dmitriy Vladimirovich MALYUGA
1993Zhdanov
Ivan Yuryevich
Vilnius
Anticorruption rally
St Petersburg,
12/06/2017
Article 19.3 § 1 of CAO
Article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
fine of
RUB 1,000
fine of
RUB 10,000
St Petersburg City Court
11/07/2017
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings – under Article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
3,500
8177/18
09/01/2018
Yuriy Mikhaylovich VASILYEV
1996Peredruk
Aleksandr Dmitriyevich
St Petersburg
Anticorruption rally
St Petersburg,
12/06/2017
Article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
fine of
RUB 10,000
St Petersburg City Court
11/07/2017
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings
3,500
29140/18
07/06/2018
Vladimir Viktorovich SYTNIK
1967Zhdanov
Ivan Yuryevich
Vilnius
Anticorruption rally
Rostov-on-Don,
07/10/2018
Article 20.2
§ 6.1 of CAO
3 days of detention
Rostov Regional Court
07/12/2017
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings
5,000
52988/18
26/10/2018
Eleonora Sergeyevna TERESHONOK
1995Peredruk
Aleksandr Dmitriyevich
St Petersburg
Opposition rally
St Petersburg,
05/05/2018
Article 19.3 § 1 of CAO
Article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
fine of
RUB 500
fine of
RUB 10,000
St Petersburg City Court
26/06/2018
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings – under Article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
3,500
6679/19
21/01/2019
Anton
Olegovich METELEV
1991Zhdanov
Ivan Yuryevich
Vilnius
Opposition rally
Kirov,
05/05/2018
Article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
fine of
RUB 10,000
Kirov Regional Court
07/08/2018
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings
3,500
7628/19
21/01/2019
Natalya Nikolayevna KUPRIYANOVA
1999Zhdanov
Ivan Yuryevich
Vilnius
Opposition rally
Saratov,
05/05/2018
Article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
fine of
RUB 10,000
Saratov Regional Court
04/09/2018
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings
3,500
7885/19
23/01/2019
Dmitriy Aleksandrovich VASILYEV
1980Zhdanov
Ivan Yuryevich
Vilnius
Rally against the pension reform
St Petersburg,
09/09/2018
Article 20.2
§ 6.1 of CAO
6 days of detention
St Petersburg City Court
02/10/2018
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - on 09-10/09/2018 detention in a police station after compiling an offence report,
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings
5,000
7915/19
23/01/2019
Dmitriy
Igorevich PAVLOV
1998Peredruk
Aleksandr Dmitriyevich
St Petersburg
Rally against the pension reform
St Petersburg,
09/09/2018
Article 20.2
§ 6.1 of CAO
fine of
RUB 10,000
St Petersburg City Court
08/11/2018
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - on 09-11/09/2018 escorting to and detention in a police station for and after compiling an offence report,
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings
4,000
7921/19
23/01/2019
Daniil Yaroslavovich FARADEY
1995Peredruk
Aleksandr Dmitriyevich
St Petersburg
Rally against the pension reform
St Petersburg,
09/09/2018
Article 20.2
§ 6.1 of CAO
fine of
RUB 10,000
St Petersburg City Court
08/11/2018
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - on 09-11/09/2018 escorting to and detention in a police station for and after compiling an offence report,
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings
4,000
8052/19
26/01/2019
Richard Richardovich ROUZ
1985Zboroshenko Nikolay Sergeyevich
Mytishchi
Opposition rally
Kirov,
05/05/2018
Article 20.2 § 2 of CAO
fine of
RUB 20,000
Kirov Regional Court
18/09/2018
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings
3,500
8150/19
19/01/2019
Marat
Faradovich SHABANOV
1984Peredruk
Aleksandr Dmitriyevich
St Petersburg
Rally against the pension reform
St Petersburg,
09/09/2018
Article 20.2
§ 6.1 of CAO
fine of
RUB 10,000
St Petersburg City Court
02/10/2018
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - on 09-10/09/2018 escorting to and detention in a police station for compiling an offence report,
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings
4,000
8244/19
21/01/2019
Mariya Dmitriyevna SIROTKINA
1993Zhdanov
Ivan Yuryevich
Vilnius
Opposition rally
St Petersburg,
05/05/2018
Article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
fine of
RUB 10,000
St Petersburg City Court
31/07/2018
3,500
8421/19
01/02/2019
Pavel
Sergeyevich TUMENBAYEV
1988Zhdanov
Ivan Yuryevich
Vilnius
Rally against the pension reform
St Petersburg,
09/09/2018
Article 20.2
§ 6.1 of CAO
fine of
RUB 15,000
St Petersburg City Court
09/10/2018
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - on 09-10/09/2018 detention in a police station after compiling an offence report,
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings
4,000
8929/19
19/01/2019
Daniil Alekseyevich TROITSKIY
1998Peredruk
Aleksandr Dmitriyevich
St Petersburg
Rally against the pension reform
St Petersburg,
09/09/2018
Article 20.2
§ 6.1 of CAO
40 hours of community work
St Petersburg City Court
02/10/2018
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - on 09-11/09/2018 escorting to and detention in a police station for and after compiling an offence report,
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings
4,000
8998/19
22/01/2019
Yevgeniy Borisovich KASHPIREV
1993Yesipova
Alina Vladimirovna
St Petersburg
Rally against the pension reform
St Petersburg,
09/09/2018
Article 20.2
§ 6.1 of CAO
10 days of detention
St Petersburg City Court
24/09/2018
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - on 09-11/09/2018 escorting to and detention in a police station for and after compiling an offence report,
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings
5,000
15248/19
11/03/2019
Aleksandr Leonidovich KASATKIN
1992Pomazuyev Aleksandr Yevgenyevich
Vilnius
Rally against the pension reform
St Petersburg,
09/09/2018
Article 20.2
§ 6.1 of CAO
fine of
RUB 15,000
St Petersburg City Court
16/10/2018
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - on 9-10/09/2018 detention in a police station for and after compiling an offence report,
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings
4,000
16142/19
07/03/2019
Yevgeniya Eduardovna LITVINOVA
1960Peredruk
Aleksandr Dmitriyevich
St Petersburg
Event against the pension reform
St Petersburg,
07/09/2018
Article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
fine of
RUB 10,000
St Petersburg City Court
18/10/2018
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - on 26-27/09/2018 escorting to and detention in a police station for and after compiling an offence report in relation to the event on 07/09/2018,
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings
4,000
24478/19
30/04/2019
Eduard Viktorovich SHITIK
1961Peredruk
Aleksandr Dmitriyevich
St Petersburg
Event against the pension reform
St Petersburg,
07/09/2018
Article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
fine of
RUB 10,000
St Petersburg City Court
21/02/2019
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings
3,500
[1] Plus any tax that may be chargeable to the applicants.
© European Union,
https://eur-lex.europa.eu, 1998 - 2026
