453_12 interference 12. It has not been disputed by the parties that Mr Navalnyy’s arrest during the march and ensuing conviction for administrative offences constituted an interference with his right to freedom of peaceful assembly. That interference was based on the relevant provisions of the domestic law (see Lashmankin and Others, cited above, §§ 216-312) and pursued the legitimate aims of prevention of disorder and protection of the rights and NAVALNYY AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA JUDGMENT 4freedoms of others. It remains to be assessed whether the interference was “necessary in a democratic society”.