THE MEETING PLACE CANNOT BE PROHIBITED. OR CAN IT BE?
This article is dedicated to issues of legislative regulation of the place of public events. The concept of "acceptability" of a place for holding a public event is considered, as well as the principle of proportionality, which is necessary to maintain a balance between the right to freedom of assembly and the rights and freedoms of others. The main object of analysis is the restriction of the right to freedom of assembly by establishing a legislative ban on holding public events in certain places. On this issue, federal laws of the Russian Federation and laws of the majority of the subjects of the Russian Federation, which establish such prohibitions, are analyzed. Based on an analysis of Russian regional legislation, the author proposes the classification of groups of places that are prohibited for holding public events. The lack of equality in the list of places prohibited for public events in the subjects of the Russian Federation is revealed. Also, there is a discrepancy between a number of laws and the positions of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation. In accordance with these positions, norms that cancel the ban on holding a public event in a certain place if it is held on certain holidays or if this place is actually "specially designated" are recognized as unacceptable. The balance of interests between people taking part in a public event and other persons on the example of an unconditional and absolute prohibition on holding public events on the sidewalks is analyzed. The possibility of achieving goals aimed at imposing a ban on holding public events in certain places, in other ways in accordance with the principle of proportionality, is considered. Attention is drawn to the need for further work on the requirements to recognize the proposal of the public authority to change the location of the public event as justified. The author concludes that it is necessary to narrow the discretion of the subjects of the Russian Federation in setting these prohibitions and suggests options for adjusting federal legislation.