Single picket in Russia and Germany: Constitutional and legal dimension

About the author:

Alexander V. Salenko, Dr. Sci. (Jur.), Master of Law (LL.M., Göttingen), Associated Professor, Higher School of Law of the Educational and Scientific Cluster “Institute of Management and Territorial Development” of Immanuel Kant Baltic Federal University, Member of the Qualification Board of Judges of the Kaliningrad Region, Kaliningrad, Russia; asalenko@kantiana.ru

Abstract:

In Russia the Public Assembly Law, which regulates the implementation of the constitutional right to freedom of peaceful assembly, is in the process of constant development. The author analyzes the Russian legislation and case-law of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation, which affect the holding of peaceful assemblies in the form of picketing (also single picketing). The author conducts that the conduct of single pickets in the Russian Federation in law years has been highly formalized. Theoretically, holding a single picket does not require notification and approval from representatives of public authorities. However, as the analysis shows, it is difficult to exercise the right to a single picket in practice, because law has established a number of restrictions, which significantly complicate the exercise of the freedom of peaceful assembly in the form of single picketing. The author concludes that the right to a single picket without approval de facto has a declarative nature, since law enforcement authorities have considerable discretion when qualifying a single picket as an unauthorized public event. The article contains an analysis of the legal positions of the Constitutional Court of Russia, which attempted to limit the discretion of law enforcement authorities in order to simplify the procedure for holding single pickets in Russia. In the article, the author examines the constitutional and legal experience of modern Germany (in particular, the German legal doctrice of Versammlungsrecht), where a single picket is regarded as one of forms to implement the constitutional freedom of speech and opinion, as well as the right to free development of the individual. The general conclusion of the author is that it is necessary to significantly simplify the procedure for holding a single picket, which could be regarded as the safest form of public event.

References:

1. Alekseev S. S. 2011. Ascent to the law. Searches and solution. Moscow: NORMA Publishing House. 752 p. [In Russian]
2. Afanasiev S. 2021. “The case of non-recognition of multi-day single picketing as a public event”. Institute of Law and Public Policy. Reviews of decisions of the Constitutional Court of Russia. Accessed on 5 May 2021. https://academia.ilpp.ru/postanovlenie-ot-17-maya-2021-goda-v-19-p/ [In Russian]
3. Danshov V. 2021. “Picket lines in the Constitutional Court: A nail in the coffin or protection of the right to a single picket (jurisprudence)”. Law Publishing Group. ZAKON.RU. Accessed on 14 November 2022. https://zakon.ru/blog/2021/1/18/piketnye_ocheredi_v_konstitucionnom_sude_gvozd_v_kryshku_groba_ili_zaschita_prava_na_odinochnyj_pike [In Russian]
4. Official website of the OSCE. 1990. Document of the Copenhagen Meeting of the Conference on the Human Dimension of the CSCE. Accessed on 14 November 2022. https://www.osce.org/ru/odihr/elections/14304 [In Russian]
5. PRAVO.RU. Practice. 2021. The Constitutional Court defended the right to a multi-day series of pickets. Accessed on 5 May 2022. https://pravo.ru/news/231779/ [In Russian]
6. Official website of the United Nations. International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. Adopted by resolution 2200A (XXI) of the General Assembly on 16 December 1966. Accessed on 14 November 2022. https://www.un.org/ru/documents/decl_conv/conventions/pactpol.shtml [In Russian]
7. Kondrashev A. A. 2017. “Freedom of assembly in Russia: systemic defects in legislation and political and legal practice”. Comparative constitutional review, no. 6 (121),
   pp. 24-44. [In Russian]
8. Website of the Constitutional Court of Russia. Decree of the Constitutional Court of Russia dated 14 February 2013 No. 4-P on the case of checking the constitutionality of the Federal Law “On Amendments to the Code of the Russian Federation on Administrative Offenses” and the Federal Law “On Assemblies, Rallies, Demonstrations, Marches and Pickets” in connection with the request of the group deputies of the State Duma and the complaint of citizen E. V. Savenko. Accessed on 14 November 2022. http://doc.ksrf.ru/decision/KSRFDecision131666.pdf [In Russian]
9. Website of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation. Resolution of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation of 17 May 2021 No. 19-P on the case of checking the constitutionality of part 11 of article 7 of the Federal Law “On meetings, rallies, demonstrations, marches and pickets” and part 2 of article 20.2 of the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation in connection with the complaint citizen I. A. Nikiforova. Accessed on 14 November 2022. http://doc.ksrf.ru/decision/KSRFDecision534114.pdf [In Russian]
10. Guidelines on Freedom of Peaceful Assembly. 2nd edition. Prepared by the OSCE/ODIHR Panel of Experts on Freedom of Assembly and the European Commission for Democracy through Law (Venice Commission) of the Council of Europe (CDL-AD (2010) 020). Warsaw. Strasbourg. 2010. Accessed on 14 November 2022. https://www.osce.org/files/f/documents/d/6/83237.pdf [In Russian]
11. Salikov M. S. 2003. “Legal positions of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation: concept and system”. News of higher Educational institutions. Jurisprudence, no. 5 (250), pp. 49-59. [In Russian]
12. Taribo E. V. 2018. “Problems of implementation of freedom of expression and freedom of assembly in the practice of constitutional justice”. Constitutional and municipal law,
    no. 2, pp. 20-31. [In Russian]
13. ConsultantPlus SPS. Federal Law No. 54-FZ of 19 June 2004 (as amended on 30 December 2020) “On meetings, rallies, demonstrations, processions and picketing”. [In Russian]
14. Tsareva M. 2021. “They saw a lack of justice in the picket lines. The constitutional court is asked to deal with the norms of the law on rallies”. Kommersant newspaper, no. 46.
    Accessed on 5 May 2022. https://www.kommersant.ru/doc/4731564 [In Russian]
15. Tsareva M. 2021. “Do not take the picket line”. Kommersant newspaper, no. 83. Accessed on 14 November 2022. https://www.kommersant.ru/doc/4816972 [In Russian]
16. Tsareva M. 2021. “KS made a picket proposal. The court explained the norms of a single protest”. Kommersant newspaper, no. 84. Accessed on 5 November 2022. https://www.kommersant.ru/doc/4817856 [In Russian]
17. Bayerisches Versammlungsgesetz (BayVersG) vom 22. Juli 2008 (GVBl. S. 421, BayRS 2180-4-I), das zuletzt durch § 1 des Gesetzes vom 23. November 2015 (GVBl. S. 410) geändert worden ist. Accessed on 5 November 2022. http://gesetze-bayern.de
18. Blanke. Sterzel. Demonstrationsfreiheit — Geschichte und demokratische Funktion. Kritische Justiz (KJ). 1981. S. 3477.
19. Gesetz über das Sächsische Versammlungsgesetz und zur Änderung des Polizeigesetzes des Freistaates Sachsen vom 25. Januar 2012. Sächsisches Gesetz- und Verordnungsblatt. 2012. № 2. S. 54. Accessed on 5 November 2022. http://www.sachsen-gesetze.de
20. Hillgruber. Die Meinungsfreiheit als Grundrecht der Demokratie. Juristen Zeitung (JZ). 2016. Vol. 71. No. 10. May 2016. S. 495-507.
21. Frankenberg. Demonstrationsfreiheit — eine verfassungsrechtliche Skizze. Kritische Justiz (KJ). 1981. S. 370.
22. Niedersächsisches Versammlungsgesetz (NVersG) vom 7. Oktober 2010. Niedersächsisches Gesetz- und Verordnungsblatt (GVBl). 2010. 465. 532. Gliederungs-Nr: 21031. Accessed on 5 November 2022. http://www.nds-voris.de/ (дата обращения: 05.11.2022).
23. Ullrich N. Das Versammlungsfreiheitsgesetz Schleswig-Holstein im Kontext europäischer Versammlungsgesetze. Neue Zeitschrift für Verwaltungsrecht (NVwZ). 2016. № 8. S. 501.
24. Versammlungsfreiheitsgesetz für das Land Schleswig-Holstein (VersFG SH) vom 18. Juni 2015. Gesetz- und Verordnungsblatt (GVOBl). 2015. 135. Gliederungs-Nr: 2180-1. Accessed on 14 November 2022. http://www.gesetze-rechtsprechung.sh.juris.de