16 May 2007 by the mayor of Moscow refusing permission to hold the march. In particular, he alleged that under the Assemblies Act, the authorities were not entitled to ban public events, but could only propose changing their time and location, which in the present case they had not. He also argued that official disapproval of the purpose of a public event was not by itself a sufficient ground, in a democratic society, for a ban.
36. On 26 June 2007 the applicant challenged before a court the prefect's decision of 23 May 2007 refusing permission for the picketing.
37. On 24 August 2007 the Taganskiy District Court of Moscow dismissed the complaint concerning the ban on the picketing, finding that the ban had been justified on safety grounds. That judgment was upheld on 8 November 2007 by the Moscow City Court.
38. On 4 September 2007 the Tverskoy District Court dismissed the applicant's claim, upholding the grounds for the ban on the march and confirming the lawfulness of the authorities' acts. That judgment was upheld on 6 December 2007 by the Moscow City Court.
C. Pride Marches in May 2008 and picketing
in May and June 2008
39. In 2008 the applicant, together with other individuals, decided to organise several marches similar to the ones attempted the two previous years.
40. On 18 April 2008 the organisers submitted a notice to the mayor of Moscow stating the date, time and route of ten intended marches to be held on 1 and 2 May 2008 in central Moscow.
41. On 24 April 2008 the Department for Liaison with Security Authorities of the Moscow Government informed the applicant that permission to hold all the marches had been refused on the grounds of potential breaches of public order and violence against the participants.
42. Having received the above reply, on 22 April 2008 the organisers submitted a notice with a view to holding a further fifteen marches from 3 to 5 May 2008.
43. On 28 April 2008 the Department for Liaison with Security Authorities of the Moscow Government informed the applicant that permission to hold the fifteen marches had also been refused on the same grounds.
44. The applicant submitted a number of alternative proposals for holding marches on different dates in May 2008 and in various locations. These proposals were refused, on the same grounds, as follows:
(i) applications of 25 and 28 April 2008 (30 marches in total), refused on 5 May 2008;
(ii) application of 30 April 2008 (20 marches), refused on 7 May 2008;
(iii) application of 5 May 2008 (20 marches), refused on 8 May 2008;
(iv) application of 8 May 2008 (15 marches), refused on 13 May 2008;
(v) application of 12 May 2008 (15 marches), refused on 16 May 2008;
(vi) application of 15 May 2008 (15 marches), refused on 21 May 2008;
(vii) application of 19 May 2008 (15 marches), refused on 23 May 2008.
45. On 16 May 2008 the applicant gave notice to the President of Russia of his intention to hold a march in the Aleksandrovskiy Garden on 31 May 2008. He received no reply to the notice.
46. From 28 April 2008 to 17 June 2008 the applicant brought several court actions challenging the decisions by the mayor of Moscow refusing permission to hold the marches. The Tverskoy District Court joined these applications and on 17 September 2008 it dismissed the applicant's claim, upholding the grounds for the bans on the marches and confirming the lawfulness of the authorities' acts. That judgment was upheld on 2 December 2008 by the Moscow City Court.
47. In the meantime, the applicant also attempted to organise picketing to call for criminal charges to be brought against the mayor of Moscow for hindering the holding of public events. The picket intended to be held on 17 May 2008 was prohibited on 13 May 2008 on
> 1 2 ... 3 4 5 6 ... 19 20 21
Zaki.ru законы и право
поиск по сайту
каталог документов
добавить сайт Zaki.ru в избранное
Правовые акты международные
Правовые акты Российской Федерации
