FIRST SECTION

CASE OF CHURSIN AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA

(Applications nos. 38648/21 and 18 others –

see appended list)

 

 

 

 

 

 

JUDGMENT
 

STRASBOURG

11 April 2024

 

This judgment is final but it may be subject to editorial revision.


In the case of Chursin and Others v. Russia,

The European Court of Human Rights (First Section), sitting as a Committee composed of:

 Lətif Hüseynov, President,
 Ivana Jelić,
 Erik Wennerström, judges,

and Viktoriya Maradudina, Acting Deputy Section Registrar,

Having deliberated in private on 21 March 2024,

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 Convention”) on the various dates indicated in the appended table.

2.  The Russian Government (“the Government”) 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. They also raised other complaints under the provisions of the Convention.

THE LAW

  1. JOINDER OF THE APPLICATIONS

5.  Having regard to the similar subject matter of the applications, the Court finds it appropriate to examine them jointly in a single judgment.

  1. JURISDICTION

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, §§ 6873, 17 January 2023).

  1. ALLEGED VIOLATION OF ARTICLE 11 OF THE CONVENTION

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 Kudrevičius 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 2006XIV, 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 society”.

11.  These complaints are therefore admissible and disclose a breach of Article 11 of the Convention.

  1. OTHER ALLEGED VIOLATIONS UNDER WELL-ESTABLISHED CASE-LAW

12.  The 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 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); and Martynyuk v. Russia, no. 13764/15, §§ 38-42, 8 October 2019, relating to the lack of suspensive effect of an appeal against the sentence of administrative detention.

  1. REMAINING COMPLAINTS

14.  Some applicants raised further additional complaints under Article 6 of the Convention concerning other aspects of fairness of the administrativeoffence proceedings. In view of the findings in paragraphs 1011 and 13 above, the Court considers that there is no need to deal separately with these remaining complaints.

  1. APPLICATION OF ARTICLE 41 OF THE CONVENTION

15.  Regard being had to the documents in its possession and to its caselaw (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,

  1. Decides to join the applications;
  2. Holds that it has jurisdiction to deal with these applications as they relate to facts that took place before 16 September 2022;
  3. Declares the complaints under Article 11 of the Convention and the other complaints under the well-established case-law of the Court, as set out in the appended table, admissible, and finds that there is no need to examine separately the remaining complaints under Article 6 of the Convention;
  4. Holds that these applications disclose a violation of Article 11 of the Convention;
  5. Holds that there has been a violation of the Convention and the Protocols thereto as regards the other complaints raised under the well-established case-law of the Court (see appended table);
  6. Holds

(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 April 2024, pursuant to Rule 77 §§ 2 and 3 of the Rules of Court.

 

 Viktoriya Maradudina Lətif Hüseynov
 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 / criminal offence

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]

  1.    

38648/21

15/07/2021

Aleksandr Ivanovich CHURSIN

1989

Memorial Human Rights Centre

Moscow

Rally “Free Navalnyy”

 

Moscow

 

31/01/2021

article 20.2 § 6.1 of CAO

administrative detention for 13 days

Moscow City Court

08/02/2021

Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings,

 

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

5,000

  1.    

38650/21

15/07/2021

Valentina Sergeyevna PEREGUDOVA

1990

Memorial Human Rights Centre

Moscow

Rally "Free Navalnyy"

 

Moscow

 

31/01/2021

article 20.2 § 6.1 of CAO

administrative detention of

 7 days

Moscow City Court

24/03/2021

Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings,

 

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

5,000

  1.    

55914/21

29/10/2021

Maksim Vladimirovich POPOV

1991

Memorial Human Rights Centre

Moscow

Rally "Free Navalnyy"

 

Moscow

 

31/01/2021

 

article 20.2 § 5 of CAO

fine of RUB 10,000

Moscow City Court

17/05/2021

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.    

61251/21

19/11/2021

Ruslan Aleksandrovich FOMIN

1984

Vanslova Yekaterina

Nizhniy Novgorod

Rally “Free Navalnyy”

 

Nizhniy Novgorod

 

23/01/2021

article 20.2 § 5 of CAO

fine of RUB 10,000

Nizhniy Novgorod Regional Court

20/05/2021

Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - 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 circumstances”, from 5.00 p.m. to 9.20 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

4,000

  1.    

61344/21

03/12/2021

Aleksey Davidovich CHICHINADZE

1989

Memorial Human Rights Centre

Moscow

Rally “Free Navalnyy”

 

Moscow

 

02/02/2021

article 20.2 § 5 of CAO

fine of RUB 20,000

Moscow City Court

03/08/2021

Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - 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 circumstances”, from 10.45 a.m. to 8.40 p.m. on 02/02/2021,

 

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.    

61348/21

03/12/2021

Natalya Sergeyevna SMILGA

1997

Memorial Human Rights Centre

Moscow

Rally "Free Navalnyy"

 

Moscow

 

02/02/2021

article 20.2 § 6.1 of CAO

fine of RUB 10,000

Moscow City Court

07/06/2021

Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - 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 circumstances”, from 11.00 p.m. on 02/02/2021 to 3.30 p.m. on 03/02/2021, 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

 

4,000

  1.    

61356/21

03/12/2021

Dmitriy Sergeyevich ZAVALISHIN

1987

Memorial Human Rights Centre

Moscow

Rally “Free Navalnyy”

 

Moscow

 

23/01/2021

article 20.2 § 5 of CAO

fine of RUB 10,000

Moscow City Court

07/06/2021

Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - 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 circumstances”, from 4.00 p.m. to 8.00 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

4,000

  1.    

61727/21

10/12/2021

Diana Vasilyevna SHARIPOVA

2002

Memorial Human Rights Centre

Moscow

Rally “Free Navalnyy”

 

Nizhniy Novgorod

 

31/01/2021

article 20.2 § 5 of CAO

fine of RUB 5,000

Nizhniy Novgorod Regional Court

23/06/2021

Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - 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 circumstances”, from 12.10 p.m. to 7.50 p.m. on 31/01/2021,

 

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.    

991/22

25/11/2021

Aleksey Sergeyevich STARKOV

1993

Usanova Olimpiada Valentinovna

Nizhniy Novgorod

Rally "Free Navalnyy"

 

Nizhniy Novgorod

 

31/01/2021

article 20.2 § 5 of CAO

fine of RUB 10,000

Nizhniy Novgorod Regional Court

27/05/2021

Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - 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 circumstances”, from 12.30 p.m. to 11.30 p.m. on 31/01/2021, the applicant spent 4h30 in the police van,

 

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.  

35552/22

28/06/2022

Ivan Valeryevich TEREKHOV

2000

Markin Konstantin Aleksandrovich

Velikiy Novgorod

Anti-war protest

 

Velikiy Novgorod

 

06/03/2022

article 20.2 § 5 of CAO

fine of RUB 20,000

Novgorod Regional Court

22/04/2022

Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - 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 circumstances”, from 2.20 p.m. to 9.00 p.m. on 06/03/2022,

 

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.  

36533/22

11/07/2022

Nikolay Vladimirovich KOMYAGIN

1987

Loktev Sergey Aleksandrovich

St Petersburg

Anti-war protest

 

St Petersburg

 

25/02/2022

article 20.2 § 6.1 of CAO

fine of RUB 10,000

St Petersburg City Court

26/04/2022

Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - 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 circumstances”, from 25/02/2022 to 26/02/2022, hearing in the applicant’s administrativeoffence case,

 

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.  

39846/22

29/07/2022

Georgiy Petrovich MIKHAYLOV

1985

Magomedova Luiza Magomedovna

St Petersburg

Anti-war protest

 

St Petersburg

 

27/02/2022

article 20.2 § 5 of CAO

administrative detention of 10 days

St Petersburg City Court

12/04/2022

Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - 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 circumstances”, from 8.40 p.m. on 27/02/2022 to 01/03/2022, 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

 

4,000

  1.  

45035/22

24/08/2022

Irina Nasikhovna MANSUROVA

2001

Baranova Natalya Andreyevna

Moscow

Anti-war protest

 

Yekaterinburg

 

26/02/2022

article 20.2 § 5 of CAO

fine of RUB 10,000

Sverdlovsk Regional Court

18/05/2022

Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - 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 circumstances”, from 3.25 p.m. to 7.25 p.m. on 26/02/2022,

 

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.  

46493/22

12/09/2022

Valeriya Vyacheslavovna POYMAKOVA

1998

Zinovyev Konstantin Mikhaylovich

Nizhniy Novgorod

Anti-war protest

 

Nizhniy Novgorod

 

06/03/2022

article 20.2 § 5 of CAO

fine of RUB 10,000

Nizhniy Novgorod Regional Court

13/05/2022

Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - 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 circumstances”, from 3.10 p.m. on 06/03/2022 to 3.45 p.m. on 07/03/2022, 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

 

4,000

  1.  

47108/22

12/09/2022

Dmitriy Yuryevich KHVAN

1990

Baranova Natalya Andreyevna

Moscow

Anti-war protest

 

Moscow

 

24/02/2022

article 20.2 § 5 of CAO

fine of RUB 15,000

Moscow City Court

05/07/2022

Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - 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 circumstances”, from 7.15 p.m. on 24/02/2022 to 1.00 a.m. on 25/02/2022,

 

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.  

47129/22

14/09/2022

Aleksandr Sergeyevich GARYAYEV

1991

Baranova Natalya Andreyevna

Moscow

Anti-war protest

 

Yekaterinburg

 

06/03/2022

article 20.2 § 5 of CAO

39 hours of community works

Sverdlovsk Regional Court

08/06/2022

Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - 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 circumstances”, from 2.30 p.m. to 11.30 p.m. on 06/03/2022,

 

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.  

47607/22

14/09/2022

Nadezhda Sergeyevna SKULKINA

1998

Zinovyev Konstantin Mikhaylovich

Nizhniy Novgorod

Anti-war protest

 

Nizhniy Novgorod

 

06/03/2022

article 20.2 § 5 of CAO

fine of RUB 10,000

Nizhniy Novgorod Regional Court

25/05/2022

Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - 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 circumstances”, from 3.10 p.m. on 06/03/2022 to 1.00 a.m. on 07/03/2022,

 

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.  

48748/22

12/09/2022

Artem Vladimirovich SHKALOV

1992

 

 

Anti-war protest

 

St Petersburg

 

03/03/2022

article 20.2 § 6.1 of CAO

fine of RUB 12,000

St Petersburg City Court

12/05/2022

Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - 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 circumstances”, from 8.30 p.m. on 03/03/2022 to 4.50 p.m. on 06/03/2022, 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

4,000

  1.  

50600/22

08/10/2022

Yekaterina Olegovna STRUTSENKO

1991

Zyryanova Mariya Sergeyevna

St Petersburg

Anti-war protest

 

St Petersburg

 

27/02/2022

article 20.2 § 6.1 of CAO

fine of RUB 15,000

St Petersburg City Court

09/06/2022

Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - 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 circumstances”, from 27/02/2022 to 28/02/2022,

 

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.