Here’s a breakdown of the Chaykovskiy and Others v. Russia decision:
1. **Essence of the Decision:**
The European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) found Russia in violation of Article 9 of the Convention on Human Rights, which guarantees freedom of thought, conscience, and religion, in the case of Mr. Chaykovskiy, Mr. Chernyshev, and Mr. Komarov. The violation stemmed from their criminal prosecution for “extremism” due to their involvement with a liquidated local religious organization of Jehovah’s Witnesses. The Court also identified violations related to unlawful searches and pre-trial detentions, referencing its established case-law on similar issues. The Court asserted its jurisdiction because the events occurred before Russia ceased being a party to the Convention on September 16, 2022.
2. **Structure and Main Provisions:**
* **Procedure:** Details the application process, including the applicant’s representation and notification to the Russian Government.
* **Facts:** Briefly describes the applicants’ complaints regarding the prohibition of Jehovah’s Witnesses and the criminal prosecution of its followers.
* **Law:**
* **Jurisdiction:** Affirms the Court’s jurisdiction over the case.
* **Article 9 Violation:** Focuses on the violation of Article 9 concerning the criminal prosecution of the applicants. It references the Taganrog LRO and Others v. Russia case, which established a similar violation.
* **Other Alleged Violations:** Addresses other complaints under the Convention, referencing established case-law.
* **Remaining Complaints:** States that additional complaints under Article 14 in conjunction with Article 9 do not need separate examination.
* **Article 41 Application:** Addresses just satisfaction, awarding sums to the applicants and dismissing the remaining claims.
3. **Key Provisions for Use:**
* **Jurisdiction:** The Court explicitly states its jurisdiction over cases related to events that occurred before Russia’s exit from the Convention on September 16, 2022.
* **Article 9 Violation:** The decision reinforces the stance that prosecuting individuals for peacefully practicing their religion as Jehovah’s Witnesses, based on broadly applied extremism legislation, violates Article 9 of the Convention.
* **Unlawful Searches and Detentions:** The decision refers to established case-law, highlighting the unlawfulness of pre-trial detentions within criminal procedures tainted with arbitrariness and searches conducted without proper safeguards.
* **Just Satisfaction:** The Court awards specific amounts for pecuniary and non-pecuniary damage to the applicants, as detailed in the appended table.
: This decision may have implications for Ukrainians who were or are members of Jehovah’s Witnesses and who were persecuted in the occupied territories of Ukraine before September 16, 2022.
