Global Freedom of Expression

Gritsevich v. Sochi Police

Closed Contracts Expression

Key Details

  • Mode of Expression
    Press / Newspapers
  • Date of Decision
    August 11, 2015
  • Outcome
  • Case Number
  • Region & Country
    Russian Federation, Europe and Central Asia
  • Judicial Body
    Appellate Court
  • Type of Law
    Administrative Law
  • Themes
    Freedom of Association and Assembly / Protests
  • Tags
    Public Order

Content Attribution Policy

Global Freedom of Expression is an academic initiative and therefore, we encourage you to share and republish excerpts of our content so long as they are not used for commercial purposes and you respect the following policy:

  • Attribute Columbia Global Freedom of Expression as the source.
  • Link to the original URL of the specific case analysis, publication, update, blog or landing page of the down loadable content you are referencing.

Attribution, copyright, and license information for media used by Global Freedom of Expression is available on our Credits page.

Case Analysis

Case Summary and Outcome

Anna Gritsevich, a journalist, was arrested while covering a protest in Sochi. The police accused her of being the protest’s organizer, along with another person. The court sentenced her to three days in prison for an administrative violation of disobeying lawful orders of the police, which she served. She appealed her guilty verdict, but it was upheld by the court of appeals.


On June 25, 2014, Sochi, the host of the 2014 winter Olympics was severely flooded.  One of the dump-sites for the debris was the village of Chereshnya,  which lays on the border of Sochi. On June 28, 2014, the village’s residents blocked off the road to the dump-site. Anna Gritsevich reported on this via her Facebook page and mentioned that law enforcement threatened to use OMON, Russia’s special police, against them, after which the protesters dispersed.

On June 29, 2014, the Sochi police returned to the village to disperse the protesters again. During the operation, Anna Gritsevich was detained by the police. She was covering the story for Kavkazkiy Uzel, an online news publication. Gritsevich claims that she was filming the actions of the police from a distance and was pointed-out by a police colonel in charge of the the operation. She yelled-out that she was a journalist on an assignment as she was being detained and placed in the police car. She was not given a reason for her detention at the time.

At the police station, Anna Gritsevich was charged with disobedience of a lawful police order during an operation to disperse an illegal protest, in violation of the Criminal Procedure Code, Article 19.3, para. 1.

On July 6, 2015, a court found Anna Gritsevich guilty of violating the Criminal Procedure Code, Article 19.3, para. 1., and sentenced her to three days in prison. She appealed her guilty verdict, but the court of appeals upheld it. She served the three days, despite her case being appealed.

Upon release, she also sued the Sochi police for criminal abuse of authority, but the prosecutor did not accept the criminal claim.

Decision Overview

The court did not admit the video of Gritsevich’s arrest on the basis that the court lacked the technical capacity to show it. Instead, the court relied solely on police evidence based on a statement of an unidentified witness. The court denied Gritsevich’s motion to question the witness, without specifying the reason, simply stating that she would have the opportunity to read it in court documents later.

The court of appeal’s upheld the lower court’s decision without admitting Gritsevich’s evidence and witnesses.

Decision Direction

Quick Info

Decision Direction indicates whether the decision expands or contracts expression based on an analysis of the case.

Contracts Expression

The judgment establishes an impunity precedent for improper action of the police, even when evidence to it exists.

Global Perspective

Quick Info

Global Perspective demonstrates how the court’s decision was influenced by standards from one or many regions.

Table of Authorities

National standards, law or jurisprudence

Case Significance

Quick Info

Case significance refers to how influential the case is and how its significance changes over time.

The decision establishes a binding or persuasive precedent within its jurisdiction.

The recent decision was from the court of appeals, which has precedential effects over lower courts in its jurisdiction.

Official Case Documents

Official Case Documents:

Reports, Analysis, and News Articles:

Have comments?

Let us know if you notice errors or if the case analysis needs revision.

Send Feedback