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 MAZUROVA AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA
Doc ref: 984/15, 19096/21, 23107/21, 24124/21, 24864/21, 26904/21, 26949/21, 27420/21, 28256/21, 28259/21, 28... • ECHR ID: 001-228672
Document date: November 9, 2023
- Inbound citations: 0
- •
- Cited paragraphs: 0
- •
- Outbound citations: 14
CASE OF MAZUROVA AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA
Doc ref: 984/15, 19096/21, 23107/21, 24124/21, 24864/21, 26904/21, 26949/21, 27420/21, 28256/21, 28259/21, 28... • ECHR ID: 001-228672
Document date: November 9, 2023
Cited paragraphs only
THIRD SECTION
CASE OF MAZUROVA AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA
(Applications nos. 984/15 and 23 others –
see appended list)
JUDGMENT
STRASBOURG
9 November 2023
This judgment is final but it may be subject to editorial revision.
In the case of Mazurova 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 19 October 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 or participants of public assemblies. Some of them 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 organisers or participants 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 its Protocols, 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.
13. Having examined all the material before it, the Court concludes that these complaints also disclose violations of the Convention and its Protocols in the light of its findings in Lashmankin and Others v. Russia , nos. 57818/09 and 14 others, § 489, 7 February 2017, Butkevich v. Russia , no. 5865/07, §§ 63-65, 13 February 2018, Tsvetkova and Others v. Russia , nos. 54381/08 and 5 others, §§ 115-31, 10 April 2018, and Korneyeva v. Russia , no. 72051/17, §§ 34-36, 8 October 2019, as to various aspects of unlawful deprivation of liberty of organisers or participants of public assemblies; Karelin v. Russia , no. 926/08, §§ 58-85, 20 September 2016, concerning the absence of a prosecuting party in the proceedings under the Code of Administrative Offences (the CAO); Novikova and Others v. Russia , nos. 25501/07 and 4 others, §§ 106-225, 26 April 2016, related to disproportionate measures taken by the authorities against participants of solo manifestations; Elvira Dmitriyeva v. Russia , nos. 60921/17 and 7202/18, §§ 77-90, 30 April 2019, concerning administrative convictions for making calls to participate in public events; Martynyuk v. Russia , no. 13764/15, §§ 38-42, 8 October 2019, and Tsvetkova and Others , cited above, §§ 178 ‑ 88, relating to the lack of suspensive effect of an appeal against the sentence of administrative detention; Korneyeva , cited above, §§ 62-65, as to the right of the organisers or participants of public assemblies not to be tried and punished twice for the same offence.
14. The applicants in application no. 984/15 raised complaints under Article 6 of the Convention. The Court considers that, in the light of all the material in its possession, these complaints do not disclose any appearance of a violation. It follows that this part of the application must be rejected in accordance with Article 35 §§ 1 and 4 of the Convention.
15. Some other applicants also raised additional complaints under Article 6 of the Convention concerning the fairness of the administrative ‑ offence proceedings. In view of the findings in paragraphs 10 and 13 above, the Court considers that there is no need to deal separately with these remaining complaints.
16. 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;
(a) 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 9 November 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]
984/15
26/12/2014
1) Olga Mikhaylovna MAZUROVA
1960
2) Anna Valentinovna ANNENKOVA
1980
3) Niks Neytan NEMENI
1988Pershakova Yelena Yuryevna
Perm
Rally in support of the Russian LGBT community
Moscow
07/02/2014
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
fines of RUB 5,000, 15,000 and 20,000, respectively in relation to the three applicants
Moscow City Court, 26/06/2014, 02/07/2014 and
14/07/2014, respectively
In respect of 2 nd and 3 rd applicants :
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty: escorting to a police station for the purpose of drawing up a record of administrative offence; detention in excess of 3 hours and without “exceptional circumstancesâ€, from 8.15 p.m. to 11.35 p.m. on 07/02/2014
3,000 (to applicant Mazurova)
5,000 (to applicant Annenkova)
5,000 (to applicant Nemeni)
19096/21
23/03/2021
Viktor Kosto GRIVACHAUSKAS
1973Rally against the constitutional amendments
Moscow
22/06/2020
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
fine of RUB 10,000
Moscow City Court
24/09/2020
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty:
1) escorting to a police station for the purpose of drawing up a record of administrative offence; detention in excess of 3 hours and without “exceptional circumstancesâ€, from 6.00 p.m. to 11.40 p.m. on 26/06/2020, while the said record was drawn up only on 06/07/2020,
2) escorting to the police station for the purpose of drawing up a record of administrative offence, from 12.10 p.m. to 2.30 p.m. on 11/10/2020;
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in all sets of the administrative-offence proceedings - final decisions: Moscow City Court, 24/09/2020 and 07/06/2021;
Art. 10 (1) - disproportionate measures against solo demonstrators - solo picketing on 11/10/2020, in Moscow, administrative conviction under art. 20.2 § 5 of the CAO, fine of RUB 10,000. Final decision: Moscow City Court, 07/06/2021
5,000
23107/21
12/04/2021
Natalya Yuryevna KOCHUGOVA
1977Sidelnikova Polina Aleksandrovna
Vladivostok
Rally in support of the governor of the Khabarovsk Region, Mr S. Furgal
Vladivostok
01/08/2020
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
fine of RUB 10,000
Primorye Regional Court
15/12/2020
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative ‑ offence proceedings – final decision: Primorye Regional Court, 15/12/2020
4,000
24124/21
13/04/2021
Mariya Nikolayevna PONOMARENKO
1978Rally in support of the governor of the Khabarovsk Region Mr S. Furgal
Barnaul
08/08/2020
article 20.2.2 § 1 of CAO
fine of RUB 10,000
Altay Regional Court
13/10/2020
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty: escorting to a police station for the purpose of drawing up a record of administrative offence; detention in excess of 3 hours and without “exceptional circumstancesâ€:
- from 11.20 a.m. on 22/08/2020 to 24/08/2020, after the administrative record was drawn up and until the court hearing,
- from 7.00 p.m. on 16/06/2021 to 12.00 a.m. on 17/06/2021,
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in all sets of the administrative-offence proceedings – final decisions: Altay Regional Court, 13/10/2020 and 25/08/2021;
Art. 10 (1) - conviction for making calls to participate in public events - conviction for having made calls on 20/04/2021 to participate in an unauthorised public event scheduled for 21/04/2021, art. 20.2 § 8 of the CAO, fine of RUB 75,000. Final decision: Altay regional Court, 25/08/2021
5,500
24864/21
20/04/2021
Nikolay Andreyevich NIKOLAYEV
1998Aksenova Darya Dmitriyevna
Kolomna
Rally in support of Mr A. Navalnyy
Moscow
31/01/2021
article 20.2 § 6.1 of CAO
administrative detention of 14 days
Moscow City Court
12/02/2021
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty: escorting to a police station for the purpose of drawing up a record of administrative offence; detention in excess of 3 hours and without “exceptional circumstancesâ€, from 31/01/2021 to 01/02/2021;
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, 12/02/2021
5,000
26904/21
08/05/2021
Oksana Viktorovna KURAKOVA
1986Bochilo Anna Yevgenyevna
Barnaul
Rally in support of the governor of the Khabarovsk Region, Mr S. Furgal
Irkutsk
08/08/2020
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
fine of RUB 10,000
Irkutsk Regional Court
18/11/2020
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings – final decision: Irkutsk Regional Court, 18/11/2020
4,000
26949/21
17/05/2021
Aleksandr Andreyevich RASSOKHIN
1990Memorial Human Rights Centre
Moscow
Rally in support of Mr I. Safronov
Moscow
13/07/2020
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
fine of RUB 10,000
Moscow City Court
08/12/2020
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty: escorting to a police station for the purpose of drawing up a record of administrative offence; detention from 2.15 p.m. to 5.00 p.m. on 13/07/2020, while the said record was drawn up only on 21/07/2020;
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, 08/12/2020
5,000
27420/21
04/05/2021
Dmitriy Valeryevich LANETS
1975Bubon Konstantin Vladimirovich
Khabarovsk
Rally in support of the governor of the Khabarovsk Region, Mr S. Furgal
Khabarovsk
10/10/2020
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO, article 20.2 § 6.1 of CAO
two fines of RUB 15,000 each
Khabarovsk Regional Court, 05/11/2020 and
10/11/2020
Prot. 7 Art. 4 - right not to be tried or punished twice in criminal proceedings - The applicant was convicted twice for his participation in the same public event of 10/10/2020 - under art. 20.2 § 5 and under art. 20.2 § 6.1 of the CAO (respective final decisions: Khabarovsk regional Court, 05/11/2020 and 10/11/2020)
4,000
28256/21
30/04/2021
Diana Vladimirovna LUKA
1987Memorial Human Rights Centre
Moscow
Rally in support of the governor of the Khabarovsk Region, Mr S. Furgal
Khabarovsk
15/09/2020
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
fine of RUB 10,000
Khabarovsk Regional Court
10/11/2020
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings – final decision: Khabarovsk Regional Court, 10/11/2020
4,000
28259/21
30/04/2021
Andrey Aleksandrovich LATALIN
1981Memorial Human Rights Centre
Moscow
Rally in support of Mr N. Platoshkin
Moscow
25/07/2020
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
fine of RUB 20,000
Moscow City Court
26/11/2020
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty: escorting to a police station for the purpose of drawing up a record of administrative offence; detention in excess of 3 hours and without “exceptional circumstancesâ€, from 2.00 p.m. to 8.15 p.m. on 25/07/2020, while the said record was drawn up only on 06/08/2020;
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, 26/11/2020
5,000
28549/21
02/06/2021
Anton Viktorovich KOSYY
1989Memorial Human Rights Centre
Moscow
Rally in support of Mr. A. Navalnyy
Moscow
31/01/2021
article 20.2 § 6.1 of CAO
administrative detention of 15 days
Moscow City Court
05/02/2021
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty: escorting to a police station for the purpose of drawing up a record of administrative offence; detention in excess of 3 hours and without “exceptional circumstancesâ€, from 3.15 p.m. on 31/01/2021 to 00. 35 a.m. on 01/02/2021
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, 05/02/2021
Prot. 7 Art. 2 - delayed review of conviction by a higher tribunal - The sentence of administrative detention imposed on the applicant was executed immediately, on account of the lack of suspensive effect of an appeal under the CAO
5,500
28558/21
17/05/2021
Tatyana Gennadyevna LARICHEVA
1976Eysmont Mariya Olegovna
Moscow
Rally against the constitutional amendments
Moscow
15/07/2020
article 20.2 § 6.1 of CAO
fine of RUB 10,000
Moscow City Court
18/11/2020
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty: escorting to a police station for the purpose of drawing up a record of administrative offence; detention in excess of 3 hours and without “exceptional circumstancesâ€, from 07.30 p.m. on 15/07/2020 to 03.00 a.m. on 16/07/2020
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, 18/11/2020
4,000
28568/21
19/05/2021
Aleksey Gennadyevich FILIMONOV
1970Fedotova Yuliya
Yekaterinburg
Rally in support of the governor of the Khabarovsk Region, Mr S. Furgal
Khabarovsk
10/10/2020
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
fine of RUB 15,000
Khabarovsk Regional Court
24/11/2020
3,500
28608/21
20/05/2021
Taisiya Lvovna BEKBULATOVA
1991Gamazov Alan Olegovich
Moscow
Rally in support of Mr I. Safronov
Moscow
13/07/2020
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
fine of RUB 10,000
Moscow City Court
20/11/2020
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty: escorting to a police station for the purpose of drawing up a record of administrative offence on 13/07/2020;
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, 20/11/2020
5,000
29831/21
15/05/2021
Anatoliy Ivanovich KOSTENKO
1951Shchukin Andrey Yevgenyevich
Nizhniy Tagil
Rally in support of Mr A. Navalnyy
Yekaterinburg
31/01/2021
Political rally
Yekaterinburg
06/03/2022
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
article 20.2 § 8 of CAO
fine of RUB 15,000
administrative detention of 30 days
Sverdlovsk Regional Court
14/04/2021
Sverdlovsk Regional Court
16/03/2022
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty: escorting to a police station for the purpose of drawing up a record of administrative offence; detention in excess of 3 hours and without “exceptional circumstancesâ€:
- from 1.50 p.m. to 5.10 p.m. on 31/01/2021,
- from 2.50 p.m. 06/03/2022 to 07/03/2022, hearing in the applicant’s administrative-offence case;
Prot. 7 Art. 2 - delayed review of conviction by a higher tribunal - the sentence of administrative detention imposed on the applicant by the court of first instance was executed immediately, on account of the lack of suspensive effect of an appeal under the CAO
5,500
30314/21
18/05/2021
Pavel Sergeyevich VERTIKOV
2001Yatsenko Irina Aleksandrovna
Moscow
Rally against the constitutional amendments
Moscow
15/07/2020
article 20.2 § 6.1 of CAO
fine of RUB 20,000
Moscow City Court
18/11/2020
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty: escorting to a police station for the purpose of drawing up a record of administrative offence; detention in excess of 3 hours and without “exceptional circumstancesâ€, from 9.30 p.m. on 15/07/2020 to 3.30 a.m. on 16/07/2020;
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, 18/11/2020
5,000
30337/21
17/05/2021
Anna Aleksandrovna VASILYEVA
1995Memorial Human Rights Centre
Moscow
Rally in support of Mr I. Safronov
Moscow
13/07/2020
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
fine of RUB 10,000
Moscow City Court
02/12/2020
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty: escorting to a police station for the purpose of drawing up a record of administrative offence; detention in excess of 3 hours and without “exceptional circumstancesâ€, from 1.30 p.m. to 5.50 p.m. on 13/07/2020, while the said record was drawn up only on 22/07/2020;
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, 02/12/2020
5,000
30585/21
13/05/2021
Yevgeniy Valentinovich BAKHOTSKIY
1970Vasin Vladimir Valeryevich
Krasnoyarsk
Rally in support of the governor of the Khabarovsk Region, Mr S. Furgal
Krasnoyarsk
15/08/2020
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
fine of RUB 13,000
Krasnoyarsk Regional Court
19/11/2020
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty: escorting to a police station for the purpose of drawing up a record of administrative offence; detention in excess of 3 hours and without “exceptional circumstancesâ€, from 4.40 p.m. 15/08/2020 to 2.00 p.m. on 17/08/2020;
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings – final decision: Krasnoyarsk Regional Court, 19/11/2020
5,000
31158/21
22/05/2021
Oksana Vladimirovna SERGEYEVA
1973Markin Konstantin Aleksandrovich
Velikiy Novgorod
Rally in support of Mr A. Navalnyy
Velikiy Novgorod
23/01/2021
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
fine of RUB 10,000
Novgorod Regional Court
05/03/2021
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings – final decision: Novgorod Regional Court, 05/03/2021
4,000
31379/21
12/05/2021
Vasiliy Dodiyevich VAYSENBERG
1983Bochilo Anna Yevgenyevna
Barnaul
Rally in support of Mr A. Navalnyy
Moscow
23/01/2021
article 20.2 § 6.1 of CAO
administrative detention of 5 days
Moscow City Court
30/03/2021
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, 30/03/2021;
Prot. 7 Art. 2 - delayed review of conviction by a higher tribunal - the sentence of administrative detention imposed on the applicant by the court of first instance was executed immediately, on account of the lack of suspensive effect of an appeal under the CAO
4,000
31526/21
24/05/2021
Diana Yevgenyevna YADRYSHNIKOVA
1985Ruchko Irina Yuryevna
Yekaterinburg
Rally in support of Mr A. Navalnyy
Yekaterinburg
31/01/2021
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
25 hours of community works
Sverdlovsk Regional Court
31/03/2021
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty: escorting to a police station for the purpose of drawing up a record of administrative offence; detention in excess of 3 hours and without “exceptional circumstancesâ€, from 12.30 a.m. to 5.30 p.m. on 31/01/2021
5,000
32172/21
11/06/2021
Andrey Mikhaylovich YEPIFANOVSKIY
2002Memorial Human Rights Centre
Moscow
Rally in support of Mr A. Navalnyy
Tula
23/01/2021
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
fine of RUB 10,000
Tula Regional Court
09/03/2021
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty: escorting to a police station for the purpose of drawing up a record of administrative offence; detention in excess of 3 hours and without “exceptional circumstancesâ€, from 2.50 p.m. to 7.00 p.m. on 23/01/2021;
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings – final decision: Tula Regional Court, 09/03/2021
5,000
32196/21
25/05/2021
Olga Nikolayevna LAZARENKO
1974Peredruk Aleksandr Dmitriyevich
St Petersburg
Rally in support of the governor of the Khabarovsk Region, Mr S. Furgal
Poyarkovo village, Amur Region
23/07/2020
article 20.2 § 5 of CAO
fine of RUB 10,000
Amur Regional Court
07/12/2020
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings – final decision: Amur Regional Court, 07/12/2020
4,000
32666/21
24/05/2021
Shamil Ramilevich VALISHIN
1999Aksenova Darya Dmitriyevna
Kolomna
Rally in support of Mr. A. Navalnyy
Moscow
31/01/2021
article 20.2 § 6.1 of CAO
administrative detention of 12 days
Moscow City Court
12/02/2021
Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty: escorting to a police station for the purpose of drawing up a record of administrative offence; detention in excess of 3 hours and without “exceptional circumstancesâ€, from 5.00 p.m. on 31/01/2021 to 01/02/2021, hearing in the applicant’s administrative-offence case;
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, 12/02/2021
5,000
[1] Plus any tax that may be chargeable to the applicants.
© European Union,
https://eur-lex.europa.eu, 1998 - 2026
