### General Principles
1. **Definition and Purpose**:
- For a restriction on the freedom of assembly to be "prescribed by law," the law must be adequately accessible and formulated with sufficient precision to enable individuals to regulate their conduct (
12_79,
58_104,
118_106,
118_107,
119_30,
121_33,
121_34,
121_35,
121_36,
126_37,
126_38,
130_26,
131_216,
143_60,
149_69,
158_38,
180_123,
180_124,
181_76,
195_28,
195_29,
235_39,
235_41,
357_22,
360_30,
380_38).
- Absolute precision in the framing of laws is unattainable, especially in fields where societal views are subject to change (
10_45,
118_106,
357_22,
360_30,
380_38).
- A law that confers discretion is not inherently inconsistent with the requirement of foreseeability, provided that the scope of the discretion and the manner of its exercise are indicated with sufficient clarity to protect individuals against arbitrary interference (
47_98,
47_99).
- The law must be published and available in a manner that allows individuals to understand the legal constraints on their actions (
60_106,
104_194,
115_147,
119_30,
121_33,
121_34,
121_35,
121_36,
130_26,
138_31,
143_60,
158_38,
180_123,
180_124,
181_76,
195_28,
195_29,
235_39,
235_41).
- The role of national courts is to clarify any remaining interpretational doubts (
10_45,
118_106,
357_22,
360_30,
380_38).
2. **Quality of Law**:
- The expressions “prescribed by law” and “in accordance with the law” in Articles 8 to 11 of the Convention require that the impugned measure should have a basis in domestic law. The law must be accessible to those concerned and formulated with sufficient precision to enable them to foresee, to a reasonable degree, the consequences of their actions. The law must also be clear enough to give individuals an adequate indication of the circumstances and conditions under which public authorities are entitled to interfere with their rights (
235_39,
357_22,
360_30,
380_38).
Applications
1. **Fulfilled Accessibility Requirements**:
- **Clear Legal Provisions**:
- The Court found that the interference was "prescribed by law" when it was based on clear legal provisions, such as Article 173 of the CAO. This provision was deemed accessible and allowed individuals to foresee the consequences of their actions (
598_54).
2. **Unfulfilled Accessibility Requirements**:
- **Lack of Evidence and Procedural Fairness**:
- In cases where there was no video or other evidence confirming the police officers’ account and the content of the administrative-arrest and administrative-detention reports, the Court found issues with accessibility. The lack of clear and accessible evidence can undermine the fairness of the proceedings and the accessibility of the law (
594_95).
- **Dismissal of Appeals Without Sufficient Explanation**:
- The appellate court's failure to clearly state what important issues and evidence were insufficiently assessed by the lower court can undermine the accessibility of the law. The Court emphasized the need for detailed reasoning to ensure that individuals understand the legal basis for decisions affecting their rights (
594_96).