Onder 4.4.2 Hoge Raad 14 oktober 2025

“100. (...) the Court will establish whether the applicants’ right to freedom of assembly has been interfered with. It reiterates that the interference does not need to amount to an outright ban, legal or de facto, but can consist in various other measures taken by the authorities. The term ‘restrictions’ in Article 11 § 2 must be interpreted as including both measures taken before or during a gathering and those, such as punitive measures, taken afterwards (see Ezelin, cited above, § 39; Kasparov and Others v. Russia, no. 21613/07 (https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng), § 84, 3 October 2013; Primov and Others, cited above, § 93; and Nemtsov, cited above, § 73). For instance, a prior ban can have a chilling effect on the persons who intend to participate in a rally and thus amount to an interference, even if the rally subsequently proceeds without hindrance on the part of the authorities. A refusal to allow an individual to travel for the purpose of attending a meeting amounts to an interference as well. So too do measures taken by the authorities during a rally, such as dispersal of the rally or the arrest of participants, and penalties imposed for having taken part in a rally (see Kasparov and Others, cited above, § 84, with further references).”

$ curl -s https://bron.page/api/v1/blobs/4cd2ca7c3e02c7732a572041032af9998213d04c7c42496aa4fb9e0a5f292385 | shasum -a 256