The ECHR communicated a complaint against the application of the article on the display of Nazi symbols

The European Court will consider the complaint of activist Mikhail Kasimov and ten other Russian citizens who were persecuted under Art. 20.3 of the Code of Administrative Offenses.

On May 14, 2018, the European Court of Human Rights communicated the complaint of the leader of the Perm branch of the People's Freedom Party (PARNAS) Mikhail Kasimov , combining it with the complaints of ten other Russian citizens, liable under Art. 20.3 of the Code of Administrative Offenses (propaganda or displaying Nazi symbols). All of them have undergone different punishment from a fine in the amount of a thousand rubles to administrative arrest for 14 days for the public demonstration of images with Nazi or similar symbols and appealed to the ECtHR against the sanctions applied to them.

It is mainly about various published online collages depicting Russian state symbols or leaders states, including the president, and Nazi symbols or Nazi leaders in the shape of. Such images are aimed at criticism and are intended to draw a parallel between the policy of the Russian authorities and the Third Reich. There are other cases as well. So, one of the applicants was fined for a banner with a Kolovrat, which he hung on match, others were punished for publishing historic photographs, posters, fragments from films with Nazi symbols.

ECHR joint appeal of Mikhail Kasimov Damira Gaifullina, Ivana Gorodiskogo , Andrey Lineva, Pavla Zoreva , Maxima Simonova , Alexey Mandrigeli , Valentina Murzaeva , Artura Gimaeva, Rustema Gareeva and Sergey Derkacheva.

In connection with the complaint about the application of Art. 20.3 Administrative Code of the ECtHR puts before Russia the question of whether there has been an interference with the right applicants for freedom of expression, whether it was based on law, and could whether the complainants foresee that they could be punished for their actions. It is in in particular, persecution publications made before the reformulation of Art. 20.3 of the Code of Administrative Offenses in 2014 (this the change made it possible to punish any display of prohibited symbols, and not only aimed at promoting the corresponding ideology) and considered by law enforcement agencies and courts as continuing offense due to the fact that they continued to remain on the Internet pages applicants.

The ECtHR is also interested in whether the sanctions pursued against the applicants a legitimate aim, for example, whether they were aimed at preventing riots.

In addition, the European Court asks the Russian authorities as to whether there was an interference in each of the cases under consideration necessary in a democratic society, in particular whether the courts have considered the context and the purpose of each of the publications and whether their decisions were based on due examination of the facts and application of the principles set out in Art. 10 European conventions on human rights (on the right to freedom of expression) and the Ordinance Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation No. 21 dated June 27, 2013 "On the application by the courts of measures of procedural coercion when consideration of administrative cases.

A number of questions were asked in due to the procedural irregularities complained of by the applicants.

Not all cases are known to the SOVA Center, involved in the claim, and we accept that in some cases the demonstration Nazi symbols could still be used to promote the corresponding ideology. However, we are convinced that a total ban on the demonstration symbols of banned organizations, including Nazi symbols, fixed in a number of norms of Russian legislation, leads to a large number of abuses and should be repealed. Sanctions are appropriate only when the display of symbols is for propaganda purposes, and courts must make appropriate decisions by carefully considering the context.

Sources

• Application no. 56317/16 Mikhail Borisovich KASIMOV against Russia and 10 other applications // Website of the ECtHR. June 2018