The court in Bugulma considered the refusal to approve the actions of Navalny’s supporters illegal

The Bugulma City Court (Tatarstan) on August 11 declared illegal the refusal of the local administration to approve pickets in support of Alexei Navalny. This is reported by the publication “Idel. Realities".

Activist Alexei Boyarov filed a notice of a series of pickets from August 4 to 15 in front of the House of Technology, a local cultural institution. Boyarov indicated in the notice four more alternative venues, if for some reason the administration is not satisfied with the site in front of the House of Technology. In response, the head of the Executive Committee of the city, Mikhail Konkov, said that the notification was filed in violation of the law on rallies (he did not specify what exactly the violation consists of), and that the city has “specially designated places for collective discussion of socially significant issues and expression of public sentiment ".

Boyarov, in a conversation with the publication , noted that there are only two “specially designated places” in Bugulma, and both of them were indicated in his notice as alternative sites.

According to Boyarov, the answer was sent to him later than expected (according to the law, the applicant of the event must be notified of violations on the day the notification was submitted).

The court decision cited by the publication states that the city executive committee insisted that, firstly, the answer was sent within the appropriate three-day period, secondly, Boyarov indicated not a specific date for the event, but a whole period, and thirdly , there are only two “specially designated places”, and Boyarov indicated five sites in the notification (the law does not prohibit indicating in the notification sites that are not included in the list of “specially designated places”).

At the same time, the executive committee claimed that it did not prohibit anything. “Agreement of the place of picketing was advisory in nature, Boyarov A.V. had the right to organize picketing in the future, ”the publication quotes the position of the administration.

The judge, however, considered that the arguments of the executive committee "are refuted by the presented objective evidence." The Court recalled that the administration was under an obligation to invite the applicant to rectify the inconsistencies and indicate in what place and at what time it is recommended to hold the event.

The court ordered the executive committee to "eliminate the committed violations."