The gap between the Russian Federation and the EU has been going on for many years, and the EU has been consistently breaking relations. And although Moscow and Brussels are discussing some issues, this is not part of the relations between the Russian Federation and the EU. The framework of these relations was deliberately destroyed at the initiative of Brussels. Moscow is ready to establish a dialogue with the EU, but Brussels itself is not going to do this.
Summary
The decision of the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) on Navalny undermines the credibility of this structure. This decision is not supported by any facts and contradicts Russia’s domestic laws as well as international law.
The ECHR’s demand to release blogger Alexei Navalny is a very serious attempt to interfere in the Russian judicial system, which is unacceptable.
Disproof
The claim is made in light of the recent decision by the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR), which was published on 17 February 2021. The ECHR decided “to indicate to the Government of Russia, under Rule 39 of the Rules of Court, to release the applicant [Navalny]… This measure shall apply with immediate effect.” The Court explains this decision as follows:
The Court had regard to the nature and extent of risk to the applicant’s life, demonstrated prima facie for the purposes of applying the interim measure, and seen in the light of the overall circumstances of the applicant’s current detention. This measure has been granted without prejudice to the Court’s decision on the merits of the present case and the competence of the Committee of Ministers.
The European Court of Human Rights was set up by the Council of Europe in 1959 as a supervisory mechanism to monitor respect for the human rights of 800 million Europeans in the 47 Council of Europe member States that have ratified the European Convention on Human Rights. Russia, both as a member of the Council of Europe and as a signatory of the Convention, has committed to the respect of human rights, democracy and the rule of law and undertook to secure a number of fundamental rights and freedoms to everyone within its jurisdiction.
As follows, the decision made by the ECHR does not contradict any laws and does not represent interference in the Russian judicial system. As The Guardian writes and as the court notes:
"The decision was made regarding the terms of Navalny’s confinement ... and was not a reversal of the 2014 embezzlement conviction against Navalny, which was widely seen as politically motivated."
Meduza provides a more detailed explanation of why the ECHR decision does not contradict any international laws. See this case for further explanations of legal aspects.
Back in 2018, the ECHR concluded that the decisions reached by the domestic courts in Alexei Navalny’s criminal case around Yves Rocher were arbitrary and manifestly unreasonable. In 2019, the European Court of Human Rights also ruled that the charges against Alexei Navalny are politically motivated and arbitrary and manifestly unreasonable. Last but not least, in November 2020 the Court obliged Russia to pay Navalny compensation for his detention amid the Bolotnaya Square protests in 2012.
Read other similar cases claiming that Navalny is not a politician, that NATO and the EU want to destabilise Russia through Navalny and the "opposition", or that French company Yves Rocher was victim of the Navalny brothers.