KARIMULLINA AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA - 45351/21 (Article 11 - Freedom of assembly and association : Fourth Section Committee) [2024] ECHR 580 (27 June 2024)

BAILII [Home] [Databases] [World Law] [Multidatabase Search] [Help] [Feedback]

European Court of Human Rights


You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> European Court of Human Rights >> KARIMULLINA AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA - 45351/21 (Article 11 - Freedom of assembly and association : Fourth Section Committee) [2024] ECHR 580 (27 June 2024)
URL: http://www.bailii.org/eu/cases/ECHR/2024/580.html
Cite as: [2024] ECHR 580

[New search] [Contents list] [Help]


 

 

 

FOURTH SECTION

CASE OF KARIMULLINA AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA

(Applications nos. 45351/21 and 19 others -

see appended list)

 

 

 

 

 

 

JUDGMENT

 

STRASBOURG

27 June 2024

 

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


In the case of Karimullina and Others v. Russia,

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

 Branko Lubarda, President,
 Armen Harutyunyan,
 Ana Maria Guerra Martins, judges,

and Viktoriya Maradudina, Acting Deputy Section Registrar,

Having deliberated in private on 6 June 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 and its Protocols.

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 and its Protocols 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).

  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 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.

  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 administrative-offence proceedings. In view of the findings in paragraphs 10-11 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 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,

  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 breach 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 27 June 2024, pursuant to Rule 77 §§ 2 and 3 of the Rules of Court.

 

 Viktoriya Maradudina Branko Lubarda

 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.    

45351/21

11/08/2021

Gulshat Ranifovna KARIMULLINA

1997

Nurgaleyev Danil Ilnurovich

Kazan

Rally "Free Navalnyy"

 

Kazan

 

31/01/2021

article 20.2 § 5 of CAO

fine of RUB 10,000

Supreme Court of the Tatarstan Republic

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 circumstances", from 1.40 p.m. on 31/01/2021 to 8.25 p.m. on 01/02/2021, hearing in the applicant's administrative-offence case

 

4,000

  1.    

58773/21

19/11/2021

Elvira Olegovna MESHCHERYAKOVA

2002

Nemanov Vladimir Sergeyevich

Moscow

Rally "Free Navalnyy"

 

Moscow

 

31/01/2021

article 20.2 § 5 of CAO

fine of RUB 18,000

Moscow City Court

21/05/2021

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 circumstances", from 4.40 p.m. to 11.30 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.    

60225/21

24/11/2021

Vladimir Vladimirovich BREDIKHIN

1999

Memorial Human Rights Centre

Moscow

Rally "Free Navalnyy"

 

Moscow

 

02/02/2021

article 20.2 § 5 of CAO

fine of RUB 15,000

Moscow City Court

11/06/2021

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 circumstances", from 11.18 a.m. to 7.10 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.    

61039/21

20/11/2021

Gleb Borisovich ZEMSKOV

1995

Zakhvatov Dmitriy Igorevich

Moscow

Rally "Free Navalnyy"

 

Moscow

 

23/01/2021

article 20.2 § 5 of CAO

fine of RUB 20,000

Moscow City Court

21/05/2021

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 circumstances", from 4.30 p.m. to 10.00 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.    

915/22

06/12/2021

Veronika Alekseyevna OSHCHEPKOVA

2001

Markin Konstantin Aleksandrovich

Velikiy Novgorod

Rally "Free Navalnyy"

 

Velikiy Novgorod

 

21/04/2021

article 20.2 § 5 of CAO

20 hours of community works

Novgorod Regional Court

17/06/2021

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 circumstances", from 8.23 p.m. to 11.30 p.m. on 21/04/2021, while the said record was drawn up on 23/04/2021,

 

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.    

1130/22

17/12/2021

Nadezhda Nikolayevna BATULKINA

1970

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

17/06/2021

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 circumstances", from 12.00 a.m. until 7.00 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.    

2018/22

13/12/2021

Vadim Andreyevich MUNTAYKIN

2002

Sabinin Andrey Vasilyevich

Stavropol

Rally "Free Navalnyy"

 

Stavropol

 

21/04/2021

article 20.2 § 8 of CAO

administrative detention for 10 days

Stavropol Regional Court

16/06/2021

Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty: escorting to a police station for the purpose of drawing up a record of administrative offence, on 21/04/2021,

 

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.    

2023/22

13/12/2021

Vladislav Olegovich KIRICHENKO

1985

Sabinin Andrey Vasilyevich

Stavropol

Rally "Free Navalnyy"

 

Stavropol

 

31/01/2021

article 20.2 § 5 of CAO

fine of RUB 10,000

Stavropol Regional Court

20/10/2021

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 circumstances", from 1.00 p.m. to 6.00 p.m. on 31/01/2021, while the said record was drawn up only on 16/02/2021,

 

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.    

2126/22

06/12/2021

Nikita Andreyevich BARYKIN

1992

 

 

Rally "Free Navalnyy"

 

Saratov

 

23/01/2021

article 20.2 § 5 of CAO

fine of RUB 10,000

Saratov Regional Court

07/06/2021

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.  

2463/22

06/12/2021

Anastasiya Valeryevna ALEKSEYEVA

1988

Glukhov Aleksey Vladimirovich

Novocheboksarsk

Rally "Free Navalnyy"

 

Cheboksary

 

21/04/2021

article 20.2 § 5 of CAO

fine of RUB 10,000

Supreme Court of the Chuvashia Republic

16/07/2021

Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty: escorting to a police station for the purpose of drawing up a record of administrative offence, on 23/04/2021,

 

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.  

2501/22

06/12/2021

Olga Konstantinovna ORLOVA

2002

Glukhov Aleksey Vladimirovich

Novocheboksarsk

Rally "Free Navalnyy"

 

Cheboksary

 

21/04/2021

article 20.2 § 5 of CAO

fine of RUB 10,000

Supreme Court of the Chuvashia Republic

10/08/2021

Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty: escorting to a police station for the purpose of drawing up a record of administrative offence, on 24/04/2021,

 

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

 

4,000

  1.  

2508/22

06/12/2021

Yevgeniy Sergeyevich AGAFONOV

1992

Glukhov Aleksey Vladimirovich

Novocheboksarsk

Rally "Free Navalnyy"

 

Cheboksary

 

23/01/2023

article 20.2 § 5 of CAO

fine of RUB 10,000

Supreme Court of the Chuvashia Republic

04/08/2021

Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty: escorting to a police station for the purpose of drawing up a record of administrative offence, 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.  

9068/22

03/02/2022

Sergey Sergeyevich KULIKOV

1993

Valenkov Andrey Olegovich

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

04/08/2021

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 circumstances", from 12.20 p.m. to 9.30 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.  

11782/22

31/01/2022

Maksim Dmitriyevich GRIGORYEV

1987

Aksenova Darya Dmitriyevna

Kolomna

Rally "Free Navalnyy"

 

Moscow

 

31/01/2021

article 20.2 § 5 of CAO

fine of RUB 10,000

Moscow City Court

03/08/2021

Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty: escorting to a police station for the purpose of drawing up a record of administrative offence, 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.  

12059/22

11/02/2022

Nadezhda Vladimirovna ZANINA

1974

Usanova Olimpiada Valentinovna

Nizhniy Novgorod

Rally "Free Navalnyy"

 

Nizhniy Novgorod

 

31/01/2021

article 20.2 § 5 of CAO

fine of RUB 5,000

Nizhniy Novgorod Regional Court

11/08/2021

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 circumstances", from 1.30 p.m. to at least 9.00 p.m. on 31/01/2021; the applicant spent 2h20 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.  

13231/22

19/01/2022

Daniil Semenovich SEMENOV

1998

Kochenkov Viktor Valeryevich

Izhevsk

Rally "Free Navalnyy"

 

Izhevsk

 

21/04/2021

article 20.2 § 5 of CAO

fine of RUB 10,000

Supreme Court of the Udmurtia Republic

19/07/2021

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 circumstances" from 8.00 to 11.30 p.m. on 21/04/2021,

 

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.  

17009/22

24/02/2022

Islomidin Kadridinovich SADULOYEV

1989

Memorial Human Rights Centre

Moscow

Rally in support of Izzat Amon

 

Moscow

 

02/04/2021

article 20.2 § 5 of CAO

fine of RUB 10,000

Moscow City Court

25/08/2021

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.  

17048/22

24/02/2022

Mirzonaim Saidamanovich BOBOYEV

2000

Memorial Human Rights Centre

Moscow

Rally in support of Izzat Amon

 

Moscow

 

02/04/2021

article 20.2 § 5 of CAO

fine of RUB 10,000

Moscow City Court

27/08/2021

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.  

18232/22

02/03/2022

Andrey Aleksandrovich MEZENTSEV

1976

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

13/09/2021

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.  

18590/22

14/03/2022

Manuchakhr Khasanovich BURIYEV

2000

Memorial Human Rights Centre

Moscow

Rally in support of Izzat Amon

 

Moscow

 

02/04/2021

article 20.2 § 5 of CAO

fine of RUB 10,000

Moscow City Court

15/09/2021

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 circumstances", from 3.00 p.m. on 02/04/2021 to 11.00 p.m. on 04/04/2021,

 

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] Plus any tax that may be chargeable to the applicants.


BAILII: Copyright Policy | Disclaimers | Privacy Policy | Feedback | Donate to BAILII
URL: http://www.bailii.org/eu/cases/ECHR/2024/580.html