Rechtsprechung
| EGMR, 05.04.2022 - 49588/12, 37220/17, 46358/17, 68554/17 |
Volltextveröffentlichung
- Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte
TESLENKO AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA
Violation of Article 5 - Right to liberty and security (Article 5-1 - Lawful arrest or detention);Violation of Article 10 - Freedom of expression-general (Article 10-1 - Freedom of expression);Pecuniary and non-pecuniary damage - award (Article 41 - Non-pecuniary ...
Sonstiges
Wird zitiert von ... (4) Neu Zitiert selbst (19)
- EGMR, 16.11.2021 - 41055/12
ASSOTSIATSIYA NGO GOLOS AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA
Auszug aus EGMR, 05.04.2022 - 49588/12
At the same time, the Court reiterates that States must be accorded some discretion in regulating certain forms of election campaigning with a view to safeguarding the democratic order within their own political systems (see Assotsiatsiya NGO Golos and Others v. Russia, no. 41055/12, § 89, 16 November 2021 and the cases cited therein).[1] See, respectively, Orlovskaya Iskra v. Russia (no. 42911/08, 21 February 2017); OOO Informatsionnoye Agentstvo Tambov-Inform v. Russia (no. 43351/12, 18 May 2021); and Assotsiatsiya NGO Golos and Others v. Russia (no. 41055/12, 16 November 2021).
- EGMR, 13.02.2018 - 5865/07
BUTKEVICH v. RUSSIA
Auszug aus EGMR, 05.04.2022 - 49588/12
Administrative escorting and arrest 66. For a summary of the applicable legislation, see Tsvetkova and Others v. Russia (nos. 54381/08 and 5 others, §§ 60-75, 10 April 2018), and Butkevich v. Russia (no. 5865/07, §§ 33-36, 13 February 2018).Article 5 § 1 of the Convention requires that for deprivation of liberty to be considered free from arbitrariness, it does not suffice that this measure be taken and executed in conformity with national law; it must also be necessary in the circumstances (see Nesták v. Slovakia, no. 65559/01, § 74, 27 February 2007; Ladent v. Poland, no. 11036/03, § 55, 18 March 2008; and, in a similar context, Butkevich v. Russia, no. 5865/07, § 64, 13 February 2018).
- EGMR, 18.05.2021 - 43351/12
OOO INFORMATSIONNOYE AGENTSTVO TAMBOV-INFORM v. RUSSIA
Auszug aus EGMR, 05.04.2022 - 49588/12
The Court considers that the first, second and fourth applicants' prosecution under Article 5.12 of the CAO sought to pursue the aim of protecting the "rights of others" (see Orlovskaya Iskra, cited above, §§ 99-104, and OOO Informatsionnoye Agentstvo Tambov-Inform v. Russia, no. 43351/12, § 78, 18 May 2021).[1] See, respectively, Orlovskaya Iskra v. Russia (no. 42911/08, 21 February 2017); OOO Informatsionnoye Agentstvo Tambov-Inform v. Russia (no. 43351/12, 18 May 2021); and Assotsiatsiya NGO Golos and Others v. Russia (no. 41055/12, 16 November 2021).
- EGMR, 21.02.2017 - 42911/08
ORLOVSKAYA ISKRA v. RUSSIA
Auszug aus EGMR, 05.04.2022 - 49588/12
His case, concerning a presidential election, had to be distinguished from cases about parliamentary elections, that is, cases which engaged considerations relating to Article 3 of Protocol No. 1 as regards the legitimate aims for the interference with freedom of expression (of the print media, for instance, as in the case of Orlovskaya Iskra v. Russia, no. 42911/08, § 102, 21 February 2017).[1] See, respectively, Orlovskaya Iskra v. Russia (no. 42911/08, 21 February 2017); OOO Informatsionnoye Agentstvo Tambov-Inform v. Russia (no. 43351/12, 18 May 2021); and Assotsiatsiya NGO Golos and Others v. Russia (no. 41055/12, 16 November 2021).
- EGMR, 22.10.2007 - 21279/02
LINDON, OTCHAKOVSKY-LAURENS ET JULY c. FRANCE
Auszug aus EGMR, 05.04.2022 - 49588/12
The requirement to prove the truth of a value judgment is impossible to fulfil and infringes freedom of opinion itself, which is a fundamental part of the right secured by Article 10 (see Lindon, Otchakovsky-Laurens and July v. France [GC], nos. 21279/02 and 36448/02, § 55, ECHR 2007-IV). - EGMR, 22.04.2013 - 48876/08
Verbot politischer Fernsehwerbung
Auszug aus EGMR, 05.04.2022 - 49588/12
There is little scope under Article 10 § 2 of the Convention for restrictions on freedom of expression in two fields, namely political speech and matters of public interest, including during electoral periods (see Orlovskaya Iskra, cited above, §§ 115-16, and Animal Defenders International v. the United Kingdom [GC], no. 48876/08, § 104, ECHR 2013 (extracts)). - EGMR, 16.07.2009 - 15615/07
FERET c. BELGIQUE
Auszug aus EGMR, 05.04.2022 - 49588/12
Furthermore, the third applicant did not incite hatred, intolerance or discrimination and did not call for violence or other criminal acts to be committed (compare Féret v. Belgium, no. 15615/07, §§ 67-81, 16 July 2009, and Atamanchuk v. Russia, no. 4493/11, §§ 53-73, 11 February 2020). - EGMR, 25.02.2020 - 19273/08
YARTSEVA v. RUSSIA
Auszug aus EGMR, 05.04.2022 - 49588/12
[3] See also Yartseva v. Russia (Committee) (no. 19273/08, 25 February 2020, §§ 18 and 29), involving a journalist convicted of an administrative offence because her media articles were classified as unlawful non-monetary contributions to an electoral campaign. - EGMR, 08.10.2019 - 72051/17
KORNEYEVA v. RUSSIA
Auszug aus EGMR, 05.04.2022 - 49588/12
The Court's assessment 80. The Court reiterates that execution of the measures within the escorting procedure under the CAO amounts to deprivation of liberty under Article 5 § 1 of the Convention (see, among many other authorities, Korneyeva v. Russia, no. 72051/17, § 34, 8 October 2019). - EGMR, 10.07.2020 - 310/15
MUGEMANGANGO c. BELGIQUE
Auszug aus EGMR, 05.04.2022 - 49588/12
The Court reiterates that democracy constitutes a fundamental element of the "European public order", and that the rights guaranteed under Article 3 of Protocol No. 1 are crucial to establishing and maintaining the foundations of an effective and meaningful democracy governed by the rule of law (see Mugemangango v. Belgium [GC], no. 310/15, § 67, 10 July 2020). - EGMR, 06.10.2020 - 76695/11
UDALTSOV v. RUSSIA
- EGMR, 27.02.2007 - 65559/01
NESTAK v. SLOVAKIA
- EGMR, 20.07.2021 - 58361/12
ZOLTÁN VARGA v. SLOVAKIA
- EGMR, 06.12.2011 - 10/10
BRUNNER v. TURKEY
- EGMR, 11.06.2020 - 15271/16
BALDASSI ET AUTRES c. FRANCE
- EGMR, 10.04.2018 - 54381/08
TSVETKOVA AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA
- EGMR, 11.02.2020 - 4493/11
ATAMANCHUK v. RUSSIA
- EGMR, 17.07.2008 - 68514/01
YILMAZ ET KILIÇ c. TURQUIE
- EGMR, 23.02.2016 - 46632/13
Alexei Anatoljewitsch Nawalny
- EGMR, 09.11.2023 - 44850/18
KIRPICHEV (KIRPICHENKO) AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA
49588/12 and 3 others, §§ 99-145, 5 April 2022, concerning prosecution for administrative offences for calling on voters not to vote for a specific political party or to abstain from voting in elections; mutatis mutandis, Sürek v. Turkey (no. 1) [GC], no. 26682/95, § 58, ECHR 1999-IV, and Mariya Alekhina and Others v. Russia, no. 38004/12, §§ 197-201, 17 July 2018, concerning administrative conviction for discreditation of the Russian Army in the context of anti-war protest actions; Martynyuk v. Russia, no. 13764/15, §§ 38-42, 8 October 2019, and Tsvetkova and Others, cited above, §§ 178-88, relating to the lack of suspensive effect of an appeal against the sentence of administrative detention; Korneyeva, cited above, §§ 62-65, as to the right of the organisers or participants of public assemblies not to be tried and punished twice for the same offence. - EGMR - 46953/18 (anhängig)
MARKIN v. RUSSIA and 12 other applications
10 (1) - various restrictions on the right to freedom of expression - 11/09/2021, Vladimir, distribution of leaflets calling not to vote for the United Russia political party at the parliamentary elections in 2021 - arrest, conviction under article 5.12 § 1 of CAO, fine of RUB 5, 000 on account of dissemination of campaign material in breach of the electoral legislation; final judgment of 11/10/2021, Leninskiy District Court of Vladimir (see Teslenko and Others v. Russia, nos. 49588/12 and 3 others, §§ 100-145, 5 April 2022),. - EGMR, 23.11.2023 - 65015/19
BUZIN AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA
49588/12 and 3 others, §§ 72-74 and 81-82, 5 April 2022, concerning various aspects of unlawful deprivation of liberty, and Tsvetkova and Others, cited above, §§ 179-91, and Martynyuk v. Russia, no. 13764/15, §§ 38-42, 8 October 2019, concerning the lack of suspensive effect of an appeal in the administrative-offence proceedings. - EGMR, 23.11.2023 - 26870/19
ANDREYEV AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA
49588/12 and 3 others, §§ 72-74 and 81-82, 5 April 2022, concerning various aspects of unlawful deprivation of liberty.