issued by the Registrar of the Court
ECHR 060 (2023)
23.02.2023
Judgments and decisions of 23 February 2023
The European Court of Human Rights has today given notification in writing of six judgments1 and
four decisions2:
one Chamber judgment is summarised below;
a separate press release has been issued for a decision in the case of Freire Lopes v. Portugal
(application no. 58598/21);
five Committee judgments, concerning issues which have already been examined by the Court, and
The judgment summarised below is available only in English.
Rustamzade v. Azerbaijan (no. 2) (application no. 22323/16)
The applicant, Ilkin Bakir oglu Rustamzade, is an Azerbaijani national who was born in 1992 and lives
in Baku. He is one of the founders of Free Youth, a non-governmental organisation established in
2011.
The application concerns his criminal charge initially for hooliganism following his arrest in May 2013
when he was a student at the Azerbaijan State University of Economics and a civil society activist, for
having allegedly participated in a video-recording of the “Harlem Shake” dance, popular in
Azerbaijan at the time, and for uploading the video to YouTube. He was subsequently convicted of
hooliganism and additional criminal offences including preparation of a crime, mass disorder, and
being involved in a group that illegally acquired and carried arms and supplied explosive substances
and devices. He was sentenced to eight years’ imprisonment.
Relying on Articles 6 (right to a fair hearing), 7 (no punishment without law), 10 (right to freedom of
expression) and 18 (limitation on use of restrictions on rights) of the European Convention on
Human Rights, the applicant alleges that he did not commit any criminal offence and that his
conviction amounted to a breach of his rights.
Violation of Article 6 § 1
Violation of Article 10
Just satisfaction:
non-pecuniary damage: EUR 12,000 euros (EUR)
costs and expenses: EUR 2,500
This press release is a document produced by the Registry. It does not bind the Court. Decisions,
1
Under Articles 43 and 44 of the Convention, Chamber judgments are not final. During the three-month period following a judgment’s
delivery, any party may request that the case be referred to the Grand Chamber of the Court. If such a request is made, a panel of five
judges considers whether the case deserves further examination. In that event, the Grand Chamber will hear the case and deliver a final
judgment. If the referral request is refused, the Chamber judgment will become final on that day. Under Article 28 of the Convention,
judgments delivered by a Committee are final.
Once a judgment becomes final, it is transmitted to the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe for supervision of its execution.
Further information about the execution process can be found here: www.coe.int/t/dghl/monitoring/execution.
2
Inadmissibility and strike-out decisions are final.
