Moscow April 22, 2013
|
|  Yüklə 12.68 Mb.
|
Conclusions of the ChapterSummarizing the given description of the political situation, it is important to stress out the following. The government in power has been formed under the conditions which does not presuppose any equal communication with the public, and has never done so. As the society was weakened and weary of the revolutionary shocks, the group which took over the power could freely expand its authorities for the purpose of illegal enrichment. This led to a situation, when a possible loss of power became a vital threat for the group, and the people who openly express their free political will turned into their personal enemies. Such people could not fail to appear, as the pro-Putin Russia retained its openness to the rest of the world, which was characteristic of the 90-ies, and the authorities, which concentrated on theft and enrichment, were not ready for total control of the society and left significant non-political areas of freedom for it. The new educated generation, which grew under such conditions, was destined to sooner or later reveal itself by reacting against the inefficiency, cynicism and the criminal nature of the people in power. This took place in 2011-2012. The mass protests that followed have a moral background, ironical content and an absolutely peaceful form. The authorities, who interpreted the protests and the agents thereof as a clear and serious danger, decided that they can protect themselves only through suppression of the protest with all the possible means and with no legal limits. This decision found its reveal in the events of May 6, 2012.
4. Organization and Conduct of Public Events4.1 Preliminary legal comments, describing the Committee’s approach to the issues related to the freedom of peaceful gathering
4.1.1 The international and Russian legal acts, guaranteeing the realization of the right to free and unarmed gatheringAccording to Article 11 of the European Convention for Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (November 4, 1950), “1. Everyone has the right to freedom of peaceful assembly and to freedom of association with others. 2. No restrictions shall be placed on the exercise of these rights other than such as are prescribed by law and are necessary in a democratic society in the interests of national security or public safety, for the prevention of disorder or crime, for the protection of health or morals or for the protection of the rights and freedoms of others.” A more through description of the rights and obligations of mass event participants and the government is contained in the Guidelines on Freedom of Peaceful Assembly (OSCE, Warsaw, 2007). This is a non-regulatory document, yet it highlights the European standards for freedom of peaceful gatherings. In particular, clause 2.2 of the Guidelines stipulates the following: “The positive obligation of the government is to provide assistance and protection of peaceful gatherings… The state must constantly strive to allow organization of peaceful gatherings in places that are most favorable for the organizers thereof, to ensure protection of such gatherings and help in eliminating barriers for the spread of information about the upcoming gatherings within the society”. The document sets forth the possibility to impose limits on the freedom of gathering. The most important is the principle of “adequate proportion”: “…Any limitations imposed in relation to the freedom of public gathering must have adequate proportions. In the process of achieving the legal objectives by the government the preference should be given to the measures which presuppose the minimum amount of interference”. According to p. 3.2 of the Guiding principles “public gathering constitutes a legitimate way of using public space, just as trade, road traffic and pedestrian movement. This consideration must be taken into account while planning the necessity of any limitations”. According to p. 5.6.of the Guiding principles “the initiators of any gatherings should not be made liable for non-fulfillment of their obligations on condition that they put reasonable efforts to perform them”. We also share the position of the European Court of Human Rights displayed by a number of its decisions. For example, in the decision on the Barankevich v. Russia case (Strasbourg, July 26, 2007) it is stated that: “States must restrain from using voluntary measures, which can create obstacles for the right to free gathering…” The European Court recognizes that the freedom of peaceful gathering, proclaimed in Art. 11 of the Convention, is a fundamental rights for democratic societies and, along with the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion, constitutes one of their most essential parts (see also the Decision of the European Court on the Djavit An v. Turkey case, application No. 20652/92, §56, ECHR 2003-III, and the Decision of the European Court on the Kokkianis v. Greece case, с. 17, § 31). The European Court outlines that democracy is the only political model provided by the Convention and compatible therewith. According to clause. 2, Art. 11 and clause 2, Art. 9 of the Convention, any intervention against any of the rights provided by the above-mentioned articles can be only justified by the necessities, which originate inside of a democratic society (see the Decision of the European Court on the Christian Democratic People's Party v. Moldova case, No. 28793/02, §§62-63, ECHR 2006-...). We consider the position of the Court to be essential, according to which “states must restrain from using voluntary measures, which can impose limits on the right to free gathering”. Considering the importance of the freedom of gathering association and its close relations with democracy, there need to be solid and insurmountable grounds to intervene with this right (see the Decision of the European Court dated 20 October 20, 2005 on the Ouranio Toxo v. Greece case, complaint No. 74989/01, § 36, with subsequent references). No less important is the positive obligation of the state to provide possibilities for the exercise of the civilian right to freely conduct peaceful gatherings (confirmed by Art. No. 11 of the Convention), and also its obligation to take all the possible measures to facilitate not only for unconstrained conduct of gatherings, but also to ensure protection thereof. This positive obligation is recognized not only by the Guiding principles of OSCE, but also by the European Court of Human Rights. The European Court has put this obligation in Art. 1 of the Convention, which runs as follows: “The High Contracting Parties shall secure to everyone within their jurisdiction the rights and freedoms defined in Section I of this Convention.” For example, § 64 and 66 of the Decision of the European Court on the Alekseyev v. Russia case, complaints Nos. 4916/07, 25924/08 and 14599/09, read as follows: “True and effective observation of the freedom of gathering and association cannot be limited to a simple obligation to the respect the freedom of gathering and association by the state; … the obligation of the Contracting States is to implement all reasonable and necessary measures to facilitate free conduct of legitimate demonstrations”. A similar position is expressed in § 32 and 34 of the Decision of the European Court on the Plattform Arzte fur das Leben v. Austria case. Having signed the Convention and ratified it by means of establishing the appropriate Federal Law, the Russian Federation unquestionably undertook the obligation to restrain from any interventions and to positively assist the public in its conduct of peaceful gatherings. Apart from that, the right of citizens to hold peaceful gatherings is provided in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, adopted by the UN General Assembly on December 10, 1948 (Art. 20): “1. Everyone has the right to freedom of peaceful assembly and association.”, and in the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights of December 16, 1966 (Art. 21): “The right of peaceful assembly shall be recognized. No restrictions may be placed on the exercise of this right other than those imposed in conformity with the law and which are necessary in a democratic society in the interests of national security or public safety, public order (ordre public), the protection of public health or morals or the protection of the rights and freedoms of others.” Art. 31 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation, referring to the provisions of the international legal acts proclaims the right of citizens to organize peaceful unarmed assemblies, meetings, demonstrations, marches and picketings. De facto we see that in accordance with the Federal Law of the Russian Federation No. 54- ФЗ of June 19, 2004 Оn Gatherings, Meetings, Demonstrations, Matches and Pickets” (hereinafter referred to as “Federal Law No. 54”), the government has established not a declarative, but an administrative procedure for mass public events organization, even on the formal level. Relying on the absence of stable legislative guarantees for the choice of places for public actions, the time and form of conduct thereof, many of the city authorities, in order to deny the coordination of public events or delay them (which does not allow the organizers to timely inform the potential participants and resolve administrative and technical issues connected with preparations to such public events), use fictional arguments: traffic problems within the city limits, the presence of earlier submitted applications requesting coordination of public events to be conducted at the same place and time. In certain cases the authorities use the possibility to start maintenance works or even archeological diggings in the required public events areas (as it happened in the case with the Mayakovsky Square in Moscow). Furthermore, the legislation does provide for the possibilities to submit preliminary and operative appeals through the courts decisions of the authorities to deny coordination of public events. It is obvious that filing complaints against such decisions, when the event didn’t take place in view of the denial to coordinate it by the authorities, is absolutely useless.
4.1.2 Recommendations of the Committee regarding amendment of the legal acts related to the freedom of gatheringThe Committee fully shares the position of Russian hunam rights activists and the experts of the Venice Commission of the Council of Europe, who have tried numerous times to draw the attention of the Russian government to the fact that the country’s legislation does not guarantee proper realization of the constitutional right to freedom of peaceful gathering. Nevertheless, the absence of such guarantees in the legislation does not abolish the requirement to act in accordance with the international obligations, which derive from the international agreements of the Russian Federation, the latter being a constituent part of the Russian legal system and having the priority in case the laws of Russia contradict them. In the opinion on Federal Law No. 54- ФЗ of June 19, 2004 on Assemblies, Meetings, Demonstrations, Marches and Picketings of the Russian Federation published on March 20, 2012, the Venice Commission of the Council of Europe prepared a set of recommendations for the Russian political authorities to amend the legislation (these recommendations fully reflect the Committee’s position):
II. 5 Art. 5 of Federal Law No. 54- ФЗ “The promoter of a public action has no right to conduct it in case they did not submit a proper notification thereof in a timely manner, or if the place and (or) time of the public action was not coordinated with the proper executive body of the constituent entityof the Russian Federation or with a local government body on the basis of its reasoned proposal”. Article 7, Federal Law No. 54- ФЗ “Notification of a public action” 1. The notification of a public action (with the exception of gatherings and picketing held by a single person) shall be submitted by its organizing party in writing to an appropriate local government body in a term of 15 to 10 days before the action is held. In case of a picketing held by a group of people, the notification shalln be submitted no later than 3 days before its date. 2. The submission procedure for notifications of public events to be provided to the appropriate executive body of any subject of the Russian Federation (or local government bodies) is regulated by the respective laws of the entity of the Russian Federation. 3. Any notification of a public event must contain the following information: 1) the goal of the event; 2) form of the event; 3) the place (places)of the public event, the march route of its participants; 4) the date, start and end times of the event; 5) the suggested number of participants; 6) forms and methods suggested by the organizing party to ensure public order, medical aid, a notice of the intention to use sound amplifying equipment during the event; 7) full name or title of the organizing party, the information about its place of residence or stay and the telephone number; 8) full names of the persons assigned by the organizing party to execute management and supervision thereof; 9) the submission date of the notification. 4. In line with the principles contained in Article 3 of the present Federal Law, notifications of all upcoming public events shall be signed by their organizing parties and the persons assigned to execute the management and supervision thereof”. Art. 12 of Federal Law No. 54- ФЗ “Obligations of the executive offices of the entities of the Russian Federation or local government bodies 1. The appropriate executive body of any entity of the Russian Federation, or the local government body, upon reception of a notification of a public event shall perform the following procedures: 1) provide documentary proof of having received the notification, indicate the date and time of its acceptance; 2) provide the organizing party of a public events with a reasoned proposal to change its place (or) time, to eliminate the non-conformities of the notified goals, forms and other conditions of the public event with the requirements of the present Federal Law within three (3) days after the day of reception of the notification (and in case the notification informs of a picketing to be conducted by a group of people less than five (5) days before it is held – on the day of acceptance thereof); 3) appoint its official representative for providing assistance in conducting of the public event depending on its form and number of participants in compliance with the requirements of the present Federal Law. The official representative is to be appointed by a written order, which shall be timely forwarded to the organizing party of the public event; 4) properly inform the organizing party of a public action of the maximum occupancy rate of the chosen territory (premise) ; 5) ensure the public safety and medical aid (if necessary) on the public event territory in cooperation with the organizing party and the official representative of the responsible body of internal affairs; 6) inform all responsible state agencies and local government bodies of the issues which caused to conduct the public event; 7) timely inform the respective federal bodies of state guard of any data referring to the conduct of a mass public event on traffic highways or in places of permanent dislocation of state protected objects, determined by Federal Law N 57- ФЗ of May 27, 1996“On state guard”. 2. In case the information contained in the text of the notification in question or other data provide the grounds to assume that the goals of the planned public action contradict the provisions of the Constitution of the Russian Federation and (or) violate any prohibitions, provided by the legislation of the Russian Federation on administrative and criminal offences, the executive office of the respective entity of the Russian Federation or the local government body must immediately send to the organizing party of the public event a reasoned written warning that the organizer and all the public event participants can be brought to justice in case of any of the notified violations or misconducts during its progress”. * the co-operation between the organisers and the authorities in Article 12 Assembly Act should be settled on a voluntary basis respecting the assemblies’ autonomy and without depriving the organisers of the right to hold an assembly on the ground of a failure to agree on any changes to the format of an assembly or to comply with the timeframe for notification of the public event; the power of the executive authorities to alter the format of a public event should be expressly limited to cases where there are compelling reasons to do so (Article 11.2 ECHR), Art. No. 11, p. 2 of the Convention “No restrictions shall be placed on the exercise of these rights other than such as are prescribed by law and are necessary in a democratic society in the interests of national security or public safety, for the prevention of disorder or crime, for the protection of health or morals or for the protection of the rights and freedoms of others. This Article shall not prevent the imposition of lawful restrictions on the exercise of these rights by members of the armed forces, of the police or of the administration of the State” with due respect for the principles of proportionality and non-discrimination and the presumption in favour of assemblies; * the right to appeal decisions before a court (Article 19 Assembly Act) is welcomed; Art. No. 19 of Federal Law No. 54- ФЗ “The procedure of appealing against the decisions and activities (or their absence), violating the civil right to conduct public actions All decisions and activities (or their absence) of state bodies, local government bodies, public associations, officials, which violate the civil right to conduct public events, can be appealed in court in compliance with the procedure provided by the legislation of the Russian Federation” it should be provided that a court decision will be delivered before the planned date of the assembly; * spontaneous assemblies and urgent assemblies as well as simultaneous and counter demonstrations should be allowed as long as they are peaceful and do not pose direct threats of violence or serious danger to public safety; * the grounds for restrictions of assemblies should be narrowed to allow application of the principle of proportionality in order to bring them in line with Article 11.2 ECHR and reasons for suspension and termination of assemblies should be limited to public safety or a danger of imminent violence; * the obligations of the organisers in Article 5.4 Assembly Act should be reduced; their responsibility to uphold public order should be restricted to the exercise of due care; Art. 5 p. 4 of Federal Law No. 54 ФЗЗ “The organizing party of a public event shall: 1) file a notification to conduct a public event to the appropriate executive body of any entity of the Russian Federation or the local government body in compliance with Art. 7 of the present Federal Law; 2) inform in writing the appropriate executive body of the entity of the Russian Federation or the local government body about its acceptance (denial) of all suggested changes of the place (time) of a public event, contained in the notification thereof, no later than three (3) days before the public event is to be held (except for the gatherings and pickets organized by a single person); 3) ensure observation of the conditions of a public event, provided in the notification of the public event or changed after prior coordination with the respective executive body of the subject of the Russian Federation or the local government body; 4) ensure, that the participants of a public event maintain public order and adhere to the rules of its conduct. The persons that do not fulfill the requirements imposed by the organizer of any public event can be expelled from it; 5) maintain public order and safety during a public event within the scope of its competence, and in cases provided by the present Federal Law, fulfill this obligation in cooperation with the official representative of the subject of the Russian Federation or the local government body and with the authorized agent of the internal affairs body, fulfill all legal demands thereof; 6) hold a public event or stop it in case an illegal act is committed by one of its participants; 7) control the observance of the maximum occupancy rate of the territory (premise ) of a public event, established by the executive body of the subject of the Russian Federation or the local government body; 8) ensure preservation of softscapes, premises, buildings, constructions, equipment, furniture, inventory and other property on the territory occupied by a public event; 9) inform the participants of a public event of any decisions made by the official representative of the executive body of the subject of the Russian Federation or the local government body to hold or stop it; 10) possess a distinctive mark as the organizer of a public event. The respective marks must also be worn all its official representatives. 5. The organizing party of a public event has no right to conduct it, if the notification thereof has submitted in bad time, or if the change of place (time) of the public event was not coordinated with the executive body of the subject of the Russian Federation or the local government body based on their reasoned proposals”. * the blanket restrictions on the time and places of public events should be narrowed. The latest amendments to the legislation on meetings (Federal Law No. 65- ФЗ of 08.06.2012 Оn Certain Amendments of the Code of Administrative Violations of the Russian Federation and the Federal Law Оn Gatherings, Meetings, Demonstrations, Marches and Picketing, hereinafter referred to as Federal Law No. 65) significantly degraded the situation with the guarantees to the freedom of gathering. This fact is noted in the Decision of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation of February 4, 2013 No. 4-P on the case of checking the constitutional compliance of the Federal Law Оn Certain Amendments of the Code of Administrative Violations of the Russian Federation and the Federal Law Оn Gatherings, Meetings, Demonstrations, Marches and Picketing in connection with the request of a group of deputies of the State Duma and the complaint made by E.V. Savenko (it should be noted that the Constitutional Court performed the procedure inconsistently and not in full measure). A more definite reflection of the matter is contained in the opinion of the Venice Commission of the Council of Europe of March 11, 2013 (Opinion on Federal Law No. 65- ФЗ of 8 June 2012 of the Russian Federation –CDL-AD(2013)003). In the final part of the document, the Commission stated the evaluation of the changes made and expressed a regret that the Russian authorities did not take any steps to implement the Committee’s proposals of March, 2012, as well as their conviction that the legislative changes of June, 2012 constitute a big step back in the work done to protect the freedom of gathering in the Russian Federation (this opinion is fully shared by us). The Opinion of the Venice Commission of the Council of Europe of March 11, 2012 contains the following suggestions: a. to review the newly added clause 2.1.1, Art . 5 of Federal Law No. 54 p. 2.1.1, Art. 5, Federal Law No. 54- ФЗ, as amended by No. 65- ФЗ: “any person having unexpunged conviction for a crime against the constitutional order and safety of the state, or a crime against public safety and order, or a person having two or more records of administrative liability for illegal acts, described in Articles 5.38, 19.3, 20.1 – 20.3, 20.18, 20.29 of the Code of Administrative Violations, during the term when the person is considered subject to administrative punishment” and liquidate the prohibition to organize public events by groups of people, who were subject to legal liability for both criminal and administrative offences irrespective of their gravity; b. to add the following to Art. 5, clause 3.6 of Federal Law No. 54: “the organizing party of a public event is entitled <…> to demand from the official representative of the internal affairs body expulsion of any person who does not fulfill the legal requirements of the organizing party” to add a provision stating that the absence of opportunities to demand intervention of law-enforcement officials shall not entail any negative outcomes for the organizing party; с. to review Art. 5, clauses 4.3 and 4.7.1 of Federal Law No. 54 Art. 5, clause 4.3, Federal Law No. 54- ФЗ “the organizing party of a public event must <…> ensure observation of its conditions, provided in the notification about the event or changed after prior coordination with the respective executive body of the subject of the Russian Federation or the local government body” Art. 5, clause 4.7.1, Federal Law No. 54- ФЗ “…to take all the necessary measures to prevent excessive attendance of a public meeting above the limit provided in the notification thereof, if such an excess poses threats to public order and (or) safety, the safety of its participants and other persons, or if it creates threats of causing damages to property”. in a manner to exclude liability of the organizing party for the quantity of participants; d. to replace the liability of the organizing party for the damages caused during a public event, provided in Art. 5, clause 6 of Federal Law No. 54, by the obligation to take all possible measures to maintain public order Art. 5, p. 6, Federal Law No. 54- ФЗ “In case of non-fulfillment of the obligations provided in Part 4of the present article, the organizing party of the public event shall be held liable for the damages caused by its participants. Compensations of all harms and damages shall effected through civil legal proceedings”; e. to review the prohibition to wear masks and similar attributes; f. to limit the liability of picketers to cases of present threats to public order and safety; g. to review the timeframes for public events in Art. 9 of Federal Law No. 54 Art. 9, Federal Law No. 54- ФЗ “No public event can start before 7 o’clock and end later than 22 o’clock, except for the events devoted to memorable dates of Russian history, cultural events of the current day on local time”; h. to review the “immediately after coordination” time limit for the beginning of preliminary agitation for upcoming events in Art. 10 of Federal Law No. 54 Art. 10 of Federal Law No. 54- ФЗ “The organizing party of a public event and other citizens, immediately after coordination of the time and (or) place of the event with the executive body of the subject of the Russian Federation or the local government body, can freely perform preliminary agitation by informing the public of the place(s), time, goals of the public event and other information connected with its preparation and conduct, also to invite citizens and associations thereof to take part in the upcoming event” i. to review the provision of Art. 8, Federal Law No. 54 on special public event places, where the events in question should be organized “in most of the cases”: Art. 8 of Federal Law No. 54- ФЗ, as amended by Federal Law No.-65 ФЗ “Location of public events 1. Public events can be organized in any appropriate place in case they do not create dangers to destroy buildings and constructions, or any other threats to safety of their participants. The conditions to prohibit or limit public events in particular places can be specified by federal laws. 1.1. Executive bodies of the subjects of the Russian Federation shall be responsible for defining specially equipped places for the conduct of collective discussions on significant issues and expression of public attitudes, for mass civilian gatherings organized to express opinions on the actual social issues (hereinafter referred to as “special places”). The procedures guiding the usage of special paces, their occupancy limits and the maximum attendance figures for the events, which do not require prior notification, are established by the legislation of the appropriate subject of the Russian Federation. The reported maximum number of participants cannot be less than 100 people. (Part 1.1. was introduced by Federal Law N 65- ФЗ of 08.06.2012) 1.2. The process of choosing special places and the manner of their usage must take into account the possibility to achieve the goals of public events, access to transport, the possibility to use the available infrastructure, the compliance with sanitary norms and rules, public safety, and etc. In case the organizers of two separate public events deliver notifications to conduct them in special places at the same time, the order of their usage shall be defined based on the time the appropriate notification was received by the responsible executive body of the subject of the Russian Federation or the local government body. (Part 1.2 was introduced by Federal Law No. 65- ФЗ of 08.06.2012) 2. The places, which prohibit organization of public events, include the following: 1) territories in close proximity to dangerous industrial sites and other objects requiring observation of special safety rules; 2) over-bridges, railways, oil, gas and products pipelines, high voltage electrical lines; 3) territories in close proximity to the residences of the President of the Russian Federation, to the buildings occupied by courts, state penitentiary facilities; 4) border areas in case there is no permission received from the border authorities. 2.1. After the special laces have been defined by the appropriate executive body of the subject of the Russian Federation in compliance with Part 1.1 of the present article, public events are usually carried out in specially appointed places. A public event can be conducted outside of the specially outlined area only after prior coordination with the responsible executive body of the subject of the Russian Federation or the local government body. The executive bodies that were mentioned can deny coordination of a public event only on the legal grounds provided by Part 3, Art. No. 12 of the present Federal Law. (Part 2.1 was introduced by Federal Law No. 65- ФЗ of 08.06.2012) 2.2. In order to protect the civil rights and freedoms, ensure public order and safety, the legislation of the Russian Federation defines the additional set of places that prohibit accomodation of gatherings, meetings, marches, demonstrations, also in cases when public events in the places specified can cause distortions in the functioning of critical infrastructure, transport and social infrastructure, objects of communication, create obstacles to pedestrians and (or) vehicles or block the access to living quarters, objects of transport and social infrastructure. (Part 2.2 was introduced by Federal Law No. 65- ФЗ of 08.06.2012) 3. The procedures of conducting public events within the objects of historical and cultural value shall be defined by the executive body of the respective subject of the Russian Federation with regard to their peculiar features and the requirements of the present Federal Law. 3.1. The procedure of conducting public events within objects of transport used by public means of transportation and not related to the places, where public events are prohibited in accordance with Part 2 of the present article, shall be defined by the laws of the respective subject of the Russian federation with regard to the requirements imposed by the current Federal Law and the traffic safety requirements provided by federal laws and other legal acts and norms. (Part 3.1 was introduced by Federal Law No. 344- ФЗ of 08.12.2010) 4. The order of conducting public events on the territory of the State historical and cultural open-air museum “The Moscow Kremlin”, including the Red Square and Aleksandrovsky Garden, shall be defined by the President of the Russian Federation” j. to withdraw clause 3, Art. 12 of Federal Law No. 54 clause 3, Art. 12 of Federal Law No. 54- ФЗ “Any executive body of the subjects of the Russian Federation or the local government body can deny coordination of a public event only in case the notification to conduct it was submitted by a person which in accordance with the present Federal Law cannot be an organizer of any public events, or if the notification designates the place which is prohibited to host public events in compliance with the present Federal Law or any other legal act of the Russian Federation”. k. to review and decrease significantly the severity of punishment for possible legal violation of Federal Law No. 54; l. to review Art. 20, clause 2.2 of Federal Law No. 65 Art. 20, clause 2.2 of Federal Law No. 65- ФЗ “The Code of administrative violations, Article 20.22. Organization of a mass simultaneous civilian gathering and (or) movement in public places, leading to violations of public order. 1. Organization of simultaneous mass gatherings and (or) movement of people in public places (which is not a public actions), agitation of people to participate in such gatherings or movements or participation therein, which cause violations of public order or sanitary norms and rules, problems with the functioning and preservation of the critical infrastructure and objects of communication, or block the access to living quarters and objects of social and transport infrastructure with the exception of cases, stipulated in Part 2 of the present article, - is subject to civil liability in the form of an administrative penalty charge of 10 to 20 thousand roubles or 50 hours of obligatory community works; for executive officers – 50 to 100 thousand roubles of penalty charge; for legal persons – 200 to 300 thousand roubles. 2. The acts stipulated in Part 1 of the present article, which caused damages to people’s health and property, and did not entail any criminal acts, - are subject to civil liability in the form of an administrative penalty charge of 100 to 300 roubles or up to 200 hours of obligatory community works; for executive officers – 300 to 600 thousand roubles of penalty charges; for legal persons – 500 thousand tо 1 million roubles of penalty charges. Note. In this article the organizers of simultaneous mass gatherings and (or) movements of people in public places (which is not a public event) is the person who actually performed the management and supervisory functions during such gathering or movement in a public” m. to ensure that the guarantees of fundamental rights provided by the law apply not only for the citizens of the country, but to all people. The 6th May, 2012 Public Investigation Committee considers that all the suggested changes to the Russian legislation on gatherings, meetings, marches, demonstrations and picketing shall become one of the basic constituent parts of the demands of the democratic community to the current authorities. 4.1.3 Judicial practiceIt should be noted that the courts also contribute to the overall atmosphere of lawlessness in relation to the basic constitutional values by copying the numerous decisions on administrative offences committed by the participants of the unapproved (and even approved) public events. The judges’ decisions are grounded merely on the testimonies given by the policemen inferring the priority of their words over the testimonies given by general citizens. The judges never doubt the objectivity and indisputability of the policemen’s evidence and do not presume the possibility of intentional distortion of information on the real circumstances. It becomes obvious that the arbitrary and rigid interpretations of the legal limitations for peaceful and unarmed assemblies of people are politically selective. The judicial experience has shown that the courts are not guided by the principle of direct action of the Constitution of the Russian Federation and the priority of the international obligations related to the international legal agreements that were enacted on the territory of the Russian Federation. The legal collisions between the contents of Russian laws and the legal essence of the norms contained in the Constitution of the Russian Federation and the international agreements (and, as stаted by the opinions of the Venice Commission of the Council of Europe, such collisions are quite numerous) were always resolved in favor of the Russian laws. Unfortunately, when dealing with the issues related to protection of principal human rights and freedoms (freedom of gathering, association, fair and free election and etc.), the principle of the Supremacy of Law becomes alien to Russian courts. The Committee considers that it will be hard to achieve a true freedom of gathering with no principal shift in the court approach towards the issue of protecting fundamental human rights and freedoms to the true understanding of the priority of these rights and the most rigid interpretation of the limitations imposed by the state.
4.1.4 Legal norms regulating the obligations of the executive bodies of the entities of the Russian Federation immediately involved in the organization of public events.Federal Law No. 54, in particular, provides the following obligations for the executive bodies of the entities of the Russian Federation, immediately involved in the organization of public events: “...to ensure, within the scope of its competence and in close cooperation with the organizing party of the public events and the with the official representative of the appropriate internal affairs body, public order and safety of the civilian population during the public event and urgent medical help, if necessary” (Art. 12). Article 14 of Federal Law No. 54 stipulates the obligations of the official representative of an internal affairs body: in particular, the obligation “to provide assistance during public events within the scope of their competence”, as well as to “to provide, in close cooperation with the organizing party and the official representative of the appropriate executive body of the Russian Federation entity or the local government body, public order and safety during the public event, ensure the legal nature of its conduct”. Article 18 of Federal Law No. 54 envisages the following: “executive officials and other people have no right to prevent protesters form expressing their opinions in a way that does not violate public order and the regulations guiding the conduct of a public event”.
4.1.5 Legal norms, regulating the obligations of law-enforcement officialsThe Committee considers that the police should be guided by the constitutional principle of the priority of the rights of citizens to peaceful gathering. The instructions defining the code of actions to be followed by state officials during public and political events, their instruction and training should be directed towards ensuring public guarantees for the right to peaceful gathering and expression of opinions. The police shall remain absolutely neutral towards the social and political content of public actions. The participants of peaceful gatherings should feel comfortable and understand that the police forces are striving to create comfortable conditions for them. The authorities must create the atmosphere of trust to the police forces as the state law-enforcement machine created for protecting human dignity and rights irrespective of people’s attitude to the authorities in power. The current legislation (Federal Law No. 3- ФЗ On Police Forces of 07.02.2011, last amended on 05.04.2013, Federal Law No. 37- ФЗ) contains the norms, the implementation of which must provide protection of civilian rights during public events. They include the following: Article 1. The purpose of the police forces “1. The purpose of the police forces is to protect the lives, health, rights and freedoms of the citizens of the Russian Federation, foreign citizens, persons without citizenship (hereinafter referred to as citizens; persons), to counteract crime, protect public order, property and safety”. Article 2. The principal aspects of the police activities “1) protection of persons, society and state from illegal offences; 6) ensuring security in public places” Article 5. Protection and respect of human rights and freedoms “1. The police shall exercise its activities observing and respecting the human rights and freedoms.
Article 6. Legal compliance «1. The police must perform their activities in full compliance with the law. 2. Any limitations to the rights, freedoms and legitimate interests of the civilian population, public associations, organizations and executive officials can be implemented only in full compliance the procedures stiplated by the federal legislation. 3. Police officials are prohibited to directly or indirectly provoke, persuade or incite any person to commit illegal acts. 4. No police official can justify their actions (or inaction) performed on duty by the interests of service, economic practicability, unlawful requirements, orders and instructions of their superiors or any other circumstances. 5. Usage of public enforcement measures by police officials with the aim to fulfill the obligations and enforce the rights of the police can be justified exclusively in cases stipulated by the federal law. 6. All Federal internal affairs executive bodies shall execute control of the legality of actions taken by police officials.” Article 7. Impartiality “1. The police shall protect the rights, freedoms and legal interest of persons irrespective of … views, relation to any public association…” Article 9. Public trust and civilian support “1. The police strives to ensure public trust and support the civilian population.
Article 12. Responsibilities of the police “1.The police has the following responsibilities:
Article 14. Detention “1. The police shall protect the right of every person to freedom and personal security. No person can be subject to detention for more than 48 hours before the proper judicial decision in cases, provided by the present Federal Law and other federal legal acts.
Article 16. Surrounding (blocking) terrains, residential spaces and other objects “1. The police shall protect the rights of free movement within the state borders for all persons legally staying on the territory of the Russian Federation. Any limitations to the freedom of movement can be imposed only in compliance with the present Federal Law and other federal legal acts.
Article 19. The procedure for using physical force, special equipment and firearms “1. All police officials, prior to using physical force, special equipment or firearms against any person, must inform such person of their belonging to the police forces, warn them of the intentions to use physical force, special equipment or firearms and provide the time necessary to fulfill their legitimate requirements. In case of using physical force, special equipment or firearms by a police group, the necessary announcements must be made by one of the group members.
Article 20. Use of physical force “1. Police officials have the right to use physical force personally (within a group), including various combat techniques, if peaceful methods do not allow to fulfill their duty, in the following cases:
Article 21. Use of special equipment “1. Police officials are entitled to use special equipment personally (within a group) in the following cases:
Article 22. Restrictions and limitations on the use of special equipment “1. Police officials are prohibited to use special equipment:
|