Onder 3.3 Parket bij de Hoge Raad 5 maart 2024

58. The Court notes that the applicants were not amongst the group of protesters who were arrested and prosecuted on suspicion of publicly committing concerted acts of violence against persons or property (see paragraph 9 above). In this connection the Court reiterates that individuals are not to be held responsible for the acts of violence by other participants (see Ezelin v. France , 26 April 1991, § 53, Series A no. 202, and Gün and Others v. Turkey , no. 8029/07, § 83, 18 June 2013 and compare points 86 and 87 of the OSCE/Venice Commission Guidelines on Freedom of Peaceful Assembly, cited in paragraph 32 above). Since it does not appear from the materials in the case file that the applicants – who must be presumed to have had peaceful intentions in the absence of sufficient and convincing evidence to the contrary (compare Karpyuk and Others , §§ 198-207, and Mushegh Saghatelyan , §§ 230-33, both cited above) – personally set off smoke bombs, threw objects or kicked out in the direction of the police, or otherwise resorted or incited to violence, the Court finds that the conduct during the gathering for which they were held responsible was not of such a nature and degree as to remove their participation in it from the scope of protection of the right to freedom of peaceful assembly under Article 11 of the Convention (see, by contrast, Razvozzhayev v. Russia and Ukraine and Udaltsov v. Russia , nos. 75734/12 and 2 others, § 284, 19 November 2019).

$ curl -s https://bron.page/api/v1/blobs/3c934c1970ec08ec5e758c3ad6f5e53f0a8c6b130ede02f6e348c56ee1edcd21 | shasum -a 256