BAILII is celebrating 24 years of free online access to the law! Would you consider making a contribution?
No donation is too small. If every visitor before 31 December gives just £1, it will have a significant impact on BAILII's ability to continue providing free access to the law.
Thank you very much for your support!
 |
[Home] [Databases] [World Law] [Multidatabase Search] [Help] [Feedback] | |
European Court of Human Rights |
||
|
You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> European Court of Human Rights >> BEREZIN AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA - 43924/21 (Article 11 - Freedom of assembly and association : First Section Committee) [2024] ECHR 607 (04 July 2024) URL: http://www.bailii.org/eu/cases/ECHR/2024/607.html Cite as: [2024] ECHR 607 |
||
[New search] [Contents list] [Help]
FIRST SECTION
CASE OF BEREZIN AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA
(Applications nos. 43924/21 and 12 others -
see appended list)
JUDGMENT
STRASBOURG
4 July 2024
This judgment is final but it may be subject to editorial revision.
In the case of Berezin 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 13 June 2024,
Delivers the following judgment, which was adopted on that date:
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. Some applicants 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 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 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 society".
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, 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 in the light of its findings in 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; and 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).
14. 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 4 July 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)
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) | |
23/08/2021 | Timofey Alekseyevich BEREZIN 1997 | Pomazuyev Aleksandr Yevgenyevich Vilnius | Rally "Free Navalnyy"
Surgut
23/01/2021 | article 20.2 § 5 of CAO | fine of RUB 15,000 | Court of the Khanty-Mansiysk Autonomous Region 06/04/2021 | Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - Arrest and detention on 23/01/2021 - Applicant taken to the police station as an administrative suspect: no evidence/assessment that it was impracticable, on the spot, to compile the offence record (Art. 27.2 § 1 CAO) and achieve the objectives set out in Art. 27.1 CAO, e.g. to establish the suspect's identity; the complaint was raised on appeal in the administrative proceedings,
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings | 4,000 | |
03/09/2021 | Azat Anvarovich MANSUROV 1995 | Pomazuyev Aleksandr Yevgenyevich Vilnius | Rally "Free Navalnyy"
Kazan
31/01/2021 | article 20.2 § 5 of CAO | fine of RUB 10,000 | Supreme Court of the Tatarstan Republic 17/03/2021 | Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - Arrest and detention on 31/01/2021 - Applicant taken to the police station as an administrative suspect: no evidence/assessment that it was impracticable, on the spot, to compile the offence record (Art. 27.2 § 1 CAO) and achieve the objectives set out in Art. 27.1 CAO, e.g. to establish the suspect's identity; the complaint was raised on appeal in the administrative proceedings | 4,000 | |
03/09/2021 | Darya Alekseyevna SIBILEVA 1998 | Pomazuyev Aleksandr Yevgenyevich Vilnius | Rally "Free Navalnyy"
Ryazan
31/01/2021 | article 20.2 § 2 of CAO | 20 hours of community work | Ryazan Regional Court 18/03/2021 | Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - Arrest and detention on 31/01/2021 - Applicant taken to the police station as an administrative suspect: no evidence/assessment that it was impracticable, on the spot, to compile the offence record (Art. 27.2 § 1 CAO) and achieve the objectives set out in Art. 27.1 CAO, e.g. to establish the suspect's identity; the complaint was raised on appeal in the administrative proceedings,
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings | 4,000 | |
10/09/2021 | Yelena Viktorovna TABULOVICH 1972 | Pomazuyev Aleksandr Yevgenyevich Vilnius | Rally "Free Navalnyy"
Tomsk
23/01/2021 | article 20.2 § 5 of CAO | fine of RUB 13,000 | Tomsk Regional Court 23/03/2021 | Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings | 3,500 | |
17/09/2021 | Tatyana Gennadyevna KOROVINA 1955 | Mezak Ernest Aleksandrovich Saint-Barthélemy-d'Anjou | Rally "Free Navalnyy"
Syktyvkar
31/01/2021 | article 20.2 § 5 of CAO | fine of RUB 5,000 | Supreme Court of the Republic of Komi 17/03/2021 | Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings | 3,500 | |
19/11/2021 | Aleksandr Sergeyevich ZENKOVSKIY 1987 | Zhdanov Ivan Yuryevich Vilnius | Rally "Free Navalnyy"
Perm
31/01/2021 | article 20.2 § 5 of CAO | fine of RUB 10,000 | Perm Regional Court 08/06/2021 | Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - Arrest and detention at the police station on 31/01/2021 - Applicant taken to the police station as an administrative suspect: no evidence/assessment that it was impracticable, on the spot, to compile the offence record (Art. 27.2 § 1 CAO) and achieve the objectives set out in Art. 27.1 CAO, e.g. to establish the suspect's identity; the complaint was raised on appeal in the administrative proceedings,
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings | 4,000 | |
19/11/2021 | Boris Anatolyevich KURKIN 1990 | Zhdanov Ivan Yuryevich Vilnius | 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 - Arrest and detention on 23/01/2021 - Applicant taken to the police station as an administrative suspect: no evidence/assessment that it was impracticable, on the spot, to compile the offence record (Art. 27.2 § 1 CAO) and achieve the objectives set out in Art. 27.1 CAO, e.g. to establish the suspect's identity; the complaint was raised on appeal in the administrative proceedings,
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings - | 4,000 | |
27/11/2021 | Nikita Olegovich SHMATKO 1994 | Zhdanov Ivan Yuryevich Vilnius | Rally "Free Navalnyy"
Moscow
31/01/2021 | article 20.2 § 5 of CAO | fine of RUB 20,000 | Moscow City Court 03/06/2021 | Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - Arrest and detention on 31/01/2021 - Applicant taken to the police station as an administrative suspect: no evidence/assessment that it was impracticable, on the spot, to compile the offence record (Art. 27.2 § 1 CAO) and achieve the objectives set out in Art. 27.1 CAO, e.g. to establish the suspect's identity; the complaint was raised on appeal in the administrative proceedings,
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings | 4,000 | |
27/11/2021 | Vladislav Igorevich DRUGOV 1989 | Zhdanov Ivan Yuryevich Vilnius | Rally "Free Navalnyy"
Vladimir
23/01/2021 | article 20.2 § 6.1 of CAO | fine of RUB 10,000 | Vladimir Regional Court 29/07/2021 | Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - Arrest and detention on 23/01/2021 - Applicant taken to the police station as an administrative suspect: no evidence/assessment that it was impracticable, on the spot, to compile the offence record (Art. 27.2 § 1 CAO) and achieve the objectives set out in Art. 27.1 CAO, e.g. to establish the suspect's identity; the complaint was raised on appeal in the administrative proceedings | 4,000 | |
27/11/2021 | Aygul Maratovna AMINEVA 1992 | Zhdanov Ivan Yuryevich Vilnius | Rally "Free Navalnyy"
Izhevsk
21/04/2021 | article 20.2 § 5 of CAO | fine of RUB 10,000 | Supreme Court of the Udmurtia Republic 28/06/2021 | Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - Arrest and detention on 21/04/2021 - Applicant taken to the police station as an administrative suspect: no evidence/assessment that it was impracticable, on the spot, to compile the offence record (Art. 27.2 § 1 CAO) and achieve the objectives set out in Art. 27.1 CAO, e.g. to establish the suspect's identity; the complaint was raised on appeal in the administrative proceedings,
Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings | 4,000 | |
27/11/2021 | Sergey Mikhaylovioch BIZYAYEV 1975 | Zhdanov Ivan Yuryevich Vilnius | Rally "Free Navalnyy"
Perm
31/01/2021 | article 20.2 § 5 of CAO | fine of RUB 10,000 | Perm Regional Court 04/06/2021 | Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - Arrest and detention on 31/01/2021- Applicant taken to the police station as an administrative suspect: no evidence/assessment that it was impracticable, on the spot, to compile the offence record (Art. 27.2 § 1 CAO) and achieve the objectives set out in Art. 27.1 CAO, e.g. to establish the suspect's identity; the complaint was raised on appeal in administrative proceedings | 4,000 | |
27/11/2021 | Anastasiya Yuryevna GALKINA 1998 | Zhdanov Ivan Yuryevich Vilnius | Rally "Free Navalnyy"
Vladimir
31/01/2021 | article 20.2 § 5 of CAO | fine of RUB 10,000 | Vladimir Regional Court 24/06/2021 | Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - Arrest and detention on 31/01/2021 - Applicant taken to the police station as an administrative suspect: no evidence/assessment that it was impracticable, on the spot, to compile the offence record (Art. 27.2 § 1 CAO) and achieve the objectives set out in Art. 27.1 CAO, e.g. to establish the suspect's identity; the complaint was raised on appeal in the administrative proceedings | 4,000 | |
27/11/2021 | Vladimir Nikolayevich DEMENTYEV 1989 | Zhdanov Ivan Yuryevich Vilnius | Rally "Free Navalnyy"
Volgograd
21/04/2021 | article 20.2 § 5 of CAO | fine of RUB 10,000 | Volgograd Regional Court 10/06/2021 | Art. 5 (1) - unlawful detention - Arrest and detention on 21/04/2021 - Applicant taken to the police station as an administrative suspect: no evidence/assessment that it was impracticable, on the spot, to compile the offence record (Art. 27.2 § 1 CAO) and achieve the objectives set out in Art. 27.1 CAO, e.g. to establish the suspect's identity; the complaint was raised on appeal in the administrative proceedings | 4,000 |
[1] Plus any tax that may be chargeable to the applicants.
