On behalf of the Russian Federation

RESOLUTION OF THE CONSTITUTIONAL COURT OF THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION

of June 18, 2019 No. 24-P

On the case of check of constitutionality of provisions of Item 5 of part 4 of Article 5 and Item 6 of part 3 of article 7 of the Federal law "About Meetings, Meetings, Demonstrations, Processions and Piketirovaniye" in connection with the claim of the citizen V. A. Teterin

Constitutional court of the Russian Federation as a part of the Chairman V. D. Zorkin, K. V. Aranovsky's judges, A. I. Boytsova, N. S. Bondar, G. A. Gadzhiyev, Yu. M. Danilov, L. M. Zharkova, S. M. Kazantsev, S. D. Knyazev, A. N. Kokotov, L. O. Krasavchikova, S. P. Mavrin, N. V. Melnikov, Yu. D. Rudkin, V. G. Yaroslavtsev,

with participation of the citizen V. A. Teterin and his representative - the lawyer S. A. Golubk, the plenipotentiary of the State Duma in the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation M. P. Bespalova, the plenipotentiary of the Federation Council in the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation A. A. Klishas, the plenipotentiary of the President of the Russian Federation in the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation M. V. Krotov,

being guided by Article 125 (part 4) Constitutions of the Russian Federation, Item 3 parts one, parts three and the fourth Article 3, Article part one 21, Articles 36, 74, 86, 96, 97 and 99 Federal constitutional Laws "About the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation",

considered case on check of constitutionality of provisions of Item 5 of part 4 of Article 5 and Item 6 of part 3 of article 7 of the Federal law "About Meetings, Meetings, Demonstrations, Processions and Piketirovaniye" in open session.

Reason for consideration of the case was the claim of the citizen V. A. Teterin. The basis to consideration of the case was the found uncertainty in question of whether there correspond the Constitutions of the Russian Federation disputed by the applicant of legislative provision.

Having heard the message of the judge-speaker S. D. Knyazev, explanation of agents of the parties, speeches of the representatives invited in meeting: from the Prosecutor General of the Russian Federation - T. A. Vasilyeva, from the Ministry of Justice of the Russian Federation - M. A. Melnikova, from the Ministry of Internal Affairs of the Russian Federation - G. V. Marjan, from Russian President's Council for Civil Society and Human Rights - I. G. Shablinsky, having researched the submitted documents and other materials, the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation

established:

1. According to Item 5 of part 4 of article 5 of the Federal Law of June 19, 2004 "About meetings, meetings, demonstrations, processions and piketirovaniye" the organizer of public action shall provide to No. 54-FZ within the competence public order and safety of citizens when holding public action, and in the cases provided by this Federal Law, to carry out this obligation together with the authorized representative of executive body of the subject of the Russian Federation or local government body and the authorized representative of law-enforcement body, fulfilling at the same time all their legal requirements.

The Item 6 of part 3 of article 7 of this Federal Law determines that in the notification on holding public action forms and methods of ensuring with the organizer of public action of public order, the organization of medical care, intention to use sound-amplifying technical means when holding public action are specified.

The applicant on this case citizen V. A. Teterin submitted on August 24, 2018 to city administration of Irkutsk the notification on holding on September 9, 2018 public action in the form of meeting with expected participation of 350 people. On August 27 the same year it received the reply of city administration of Irkutsk from which followed that the submitted notification does not correspond to the Federal Law "About Meetings, Meetings, Demonstrations, Processions and Piketirovaniye" as specifying in it on provision of information on telephone numbers of challenge of police and ambulance (mobile communication) as forms and methods of ensuring public order and the organization of medical care does not meet fully the requirements of maintenance of safety and law and order when holding public action. With respect thereto, according to the city administration, the possibility of consideration of the notification in accordance with the established procedure is excluded that, in turn, involves impossibility of approval of the declared public action.

Disclaimer! This text was translated by AI translator and is not a valid juridical document. No warranty. No claim. More info