In two rulings ECtHR finds violations of freedom of expression, liberty and security of person and binding force and execution of judgments

Week-ending 19 November 2021

In two judgments this week with regard to Russia the European Court of Human Rights found violations of Article 10 (freedom of expression), Article 5 (liberty and security of person) and Article 46 (binding force and execution of judgments).


Art 10 • Freedom of expression • Unjustified sanctioning of NGO for disseminating election-monitoring material on the basis of statutory ban on all election-related publications during pre-election “silence period” • Domestic courts’ failure to provide relevant and sufficient reasons • Election observers to be allowed to draw the public’s attention to potential violations of electoral laws and procedures as they occur • Unjustified “chilling effect” vis-à-vis NGO’s exercise of its “social watchdog” function warranting similar protection as that afforded to the press

A violation of Article 10 of the Convention in respect of the Association of Non-Governmental Organisations “For the Protection of Voters’ Rights ‘Golos’”


Art 5 § 3 • Unjustified length of the applicants’ pre-trial detention and house arrest

Art 5 § 5 • Lack of an enforceable right to compensation for detention in breach of Article 5 § 3

Art 46 • Respondent State required to continue to adopt measures to address the structural problem

A violation of Article 5 § 3 of the Convention in respect of each of the applicants on account of unjustified pre-trial detention and house arrest; a violation of Article 5 § 5 of the Convention in respect of the applicant in application no. 42296/09 on account of his inability to obtain compensation for the violation of his right to trial within a reasonable time or to release pending trial; the respondent State 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 amounts indicated in Appendix II to be converted into the currency of the respondent State at the rate applicable at the date of settlement, plus any tax that may be chargeable to the applicants,

Leave a Reply