Week-ending 1 October 2021
This week the European Court of Human Rights handed down 13 judgments with regard to Russia, 12 of which found violations of Convention rights by the Russian Federation. The rights violated were: Article 2 (right to life); Article 5 (right to liberty and security of person); Article 6 (right to fair trial); Article 8 (right to private and family life)’ Article 10 (freedom of expression); Article 13 (right to an effective remedy); Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 (protection of property); Article 3 of Protocol No. 1 (right to free elections).
28 September 2021
CRAVCIȘIN v. THE REPUBLIC OF MOLDOVA AND RUSSIA
A violation of Article 6 § 1 of the Convention by the Russian Federation; a violation of Article 8 of the Convention by the Russian Federation; a violation of Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 to the Convention by the Russian Federation; the Russian Federation is to pay the applicants, within three months from the date on which the judgment becomes final in accordance with Article 44 § 2 of the Convention, the following amounts: (i) EUR 12,500 (twelve thousand five hundred euros), plus any tax that may be chargeable, in respect of non-pecuniary damage; (ii) EUR 3,000 (three thousand euros), plus any tax that may be chargeable to the applicants, in respect of costs and expenses.
DROVORUB v. THE REPUBLIC OF MOLDOVA AND RUSSIA
A violation of Article 2 of the Convention under its substantive and procedural limbs by the Russian Federation; the Russian Federation is to pay the applicant, within three months, the following:(i) EUR 26,000 (twenty-six thousand euros), plus any tax that may be chargeable, in respect of non-pecuniary damage; (ii) EUR 4,000 (four thousand euros), plus any tax that may be chargeable, in respect of costs and expenses, to be paid directly to the applicant’s representative’s bank account.
JESTCOV v. THE REPUBLIC OF MOLDOVA AND RUSSIA
A violation of Article 2 of the Convention by the Republic of Moldova; no violation of Article 2 of the Convention by the Russian Federation; the Republic of Moldova is to pay the applicant, within three months, EUR 10,000 (ten thousand euros), plus any tax that may be chargeable, in respect of non-pecuniary damage, to be converted into Moldovan lei, at the rate applicable at the date of settlement.
A violation of Article 5 § 1 of the Convention; a violation of Article 8 of the Convention read in the light of Article 9; the respondent State is to pay the applicant, within three months, the following amounts, to be converted into the currency of the respondent State at the rate applicable at the date of settlement:(i) EUR 5,000 (five thousand euros), plus any tax that may be chargeable, in respect of non-pecuniary damage.
NOVAYA GAZETA AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA
A violation of Article 10 of the Convention; 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.
RUSSIAN UNITED DEMOCRATIC PARTY YABLOKO AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA
A violation of Article 3 of Protocol No. 1 to the Convention in respect of each of the applicants; the respondent State is to pay the applicants and Ms N. Krapivkina, within three months, the following amounts, to be converted into the currency of the respondent State at the rate applicable at the date of settlement: (i) EUR 5,000 (five thousand euros), plus any tax that may be chargeable, in respect of non-pecuniary damage, to the first, second, and third applicant and to Ms N. Krapivkina each; (ii) EUR 5 (five euros), plus any tax that may be chargeable, in respect of costs and expenses to the third applicant and Ms N. Krapivkina each.
Il y a eu violation de l’article 10 de la Convention; que l’État défendeur doit verser au requérant, dans un délai de trois mois les sommes suivantes, à convertir dans la monnaie de l’État défendeur au taux applicable à la date du règlement : 330 EUR (trois cent trente euros), plus tout montant pouvant être dû sur cette somme à titre d’impôt, pour dommage matériel; 7 500 EUR (sept mille cinq cents euros), plus tout montant pouvant être dû sur cette somme à titre d’impôt, pour dommage moral; 1 650 EUR (mille six cent cinquante euros), plus tout montant pouvant être dû sur cette somme par le requérant à titre d’impôt, pour frais et dépens.;
30 September 2021
A breach of Article 8 of the Convention concerning the secret surveillance in the context of criminal proceedings; a violation of Article 13 Convention as regards the other complaints raised under well-established case-law of the Court (see the appended table); 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 breach of Article 6 § 1 of the Convention and Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 to the Convention concerning the non-enforcement or delayed enforcement of domestic decisions; the respondent State has an outstanding obligation to secure, by appropriate means, within three months, the enforcement of the pending domestic judgments in the applicants’ favour referred to in the appended table; 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 breach of Article 6 § 1 of the Convention and Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 of the Convention concerning the non-enforcement or delayed enforcement of domestic decisions; the respondent State shall ensure, by appropriate means, within three months, the enforcement of the pending domestic decisions referred to in the appended table; 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 violation of Article 5 § 1 of the Convention concerning the unlawful detention (deprivation of liberty); a violation of the Convention as regards the other complaints raised under well-established case-law of the Court (see the appended table); 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.
These complaints, as set out in the table appended below, disclose a breach of Article 5 § 4 of the Convention concerning the deficiencies in proceedings for review of the lawfulness of detention; the respondent State is to pay the applicant, within three months, the amount 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 breach of Article 5 § 4 of the Convention concerning the deficiencies in proceedings for review of the lawfulness of detention; a violation of the Convention as regards the other complaints raised under well-established case-law of the Court (see the appended table); 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.
