ORLOVSKAYA ISKRA v. RUSSIA JUDGMENT 7 It is incumbent on the courts and other authorities to establish that there is a campaigning aim in each case ... Thus, in view of the above statement of principle, the impugned legislative provisions cannot be considered to have violated the applicant organisation’s rights or freedoms ... Establishment of the specific circumstances (whether or not the information provided by the applicant organisation concerned the electoral campaign rather than the reporting on the candidate’s professional activity as a governor) are beyond of the Constitutional Court’s competence ...” II. RELEVANT DOMESTIC LAW AND PRACTICE A. Review of decisions concerning administrative offences under the CAO 1. Ordinary appeal procedure 24. Under the CAO, depending on the subject matter decisions concerning administrative offences could be issued by a non-judicial authority or a court (Chapter 23 of the CAO). 25. At the relevant time, Chapter 30 of the CAO contained provisions concerning review of such decisions. 26. Review could be sought by the person or legal entity accused of the administrative offence, the victim of the offence, or their representatives (Article 30.1). If the decision on the administrative offence concerned a legal entity or a person engaged in entrepreneurial activities, it was reviewed by a commercial court according to the rules of commercial procedure (Article 30.1). 27. An ordinary appeal against a decision on an administrative offence could be lodged within ten days (or fifteen days, for some offences) following receipt of the copy of the decision (Article 30.3). The appeal should be examined within ten days (or within shorter periods, for some offences) following receipt of the case file to the reviewing court or authority (Article 30.5). The reviewing authority or court was not bound by the scope of arguments and reviews in the case in its entirety (Article 30.6). 28. Article 30.10 gave a prosecutor a right to seek review of a decision on an administrative offence, within the procedure and time-limits set in Articles 30.1 – 30.3 of the CAO. 2. Supervisory review procedure 29. Until 20 December 2008, Article 30.11 of the CAO provided for supervisory review of final court decisions taken in respect of administrative offences. A regional prosecutor or his deputy, the Prosecutor General of the Russian Federation or his deputy had a right to apply for such a review. Pursuant to the ruling no. 5 of 24 March 2005 by the Plenary Supreme Court of Russia, those prosecuted in administrative offences cases also had a right to lodge a supervisory-review application (§ 34).