Best practices that promote and protect the rights to freedom of peaceful assembly and of association 2012, para. 29
Paragraph- Paragraph text
- Should the organizers fail to notify the authorities, the assembly should not be dissolved automatically (e.g. as in Austria) and the organizers should not be subject to criminal sanctions, or administrative sanctions resulting in fines or imprisonment. This is all the more relevant in the case of spontaneous assemblies where the organizers are unable to comply with the requisite notification requirements, or where there is no existing or identifiable organizer. In this context, the Special Rapporteur holds as best practice legislation allowing the holding of spontaneous assemblies, which should be exempted from prior notification. This is the case for example, in Armenia, Estonia, Germany, the Republic of Moldova and Slovenia. In this connection, the European Court of Human Rights has emphasized that "in special circumstances when an immediate response, in the form of a demonstration, to a political event might be justified, a decision to disband the ensuing, peaceful assembly solely because of the absence of the requisite prior notice, without any illegal conduct by the participants, amounts to a disproportionate restriction on freedom of peaceful assembly".
- Legal status
- Non-negotiated soft law
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the rights to freedom of peaceful assembly and association
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Means of adoption
- N.A.
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Humanitarian
- Person(s) affected
- N.A.
- Year
- 2012
- Paragraph type
- Other
- Reference
- SR Freedom of Assembly, Report to the HRC (2012), A/HRC/20/27, para. 29.
- Paragraph number
- 29
sorted by
Date added
99 relationships, 99 entities