BULGAKOV v. RUSSIA JUDGMENT In the case of Bulgakov v. Russia, The European Court of Human Rights (Third Section), sitting as a Chamber composed of: Paul Lemmens, President, Georgios A. Serghides, Helen Keller, Dmitry Dedov, Alena Poláčková, Lorraine Schembri Orland, Ana Maria Guerra Martins, judges, and Milan Blaško, Section Registrar, Having regard to: the application (no. 20159/15) against the Russian Federation lodged with the Court under Article 34 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (“the Convention”) by a Russian national, Mr Yevgeniy Vladimirovich Bulgakov (“the applicant”), on 13 April 2015; the decision to give notice to the Russian Government (“the Government”) of the complaints relating to the right to impart information and the right to an effective domestic remedy, and to declare the remainder of the application inadmissible; the observations submitted by the respondent Government and the observations in reply submitted by the applicant; the comments submitted by third-party interveners who were granted leave to intervene by the President of the Section; Having deliberated in private on 26 May 2020, Delivers the following judgment, which was adopted on that date: INTRODUCTION The case concerns the method of implementation of a blocking order targeting extremist content which had the effect of blocking access to the applicant’s entire website. THE FACTS 1. The applicant was born in 1978 and lives in Bryansk. He had been granted legal aid and was represented by Mr O. Anishchik, a lawyer practising in St Petersburg. 2. The Government were represented by Mr M. Galperin, Representative of the Russian Federation to the European Court of Human Rights. 3. The facts of the case, as submitted by the parties, may be summarised as follows. 4. The applicant is the owner and administrator of the website “Worldview of the Russian Civilization” (www.razumei.ru). In November 2013, he discovered that the local Internet service provider (ISP) had blocked access to his website on the basis of a judgment by the Kirovskiy District Court in Rostov-on-Don dated 3 April 2012. 1