4.  The applicant was born in 1992 and lives in Voronezhskaya, Krasnodar Region. 5.  In summer 2014 Ms F., the head of the Ust-Labinskiy District and of the non-governmental organisation “Human Rights Defender”, spoke at a television talk show on the situation in the eastern region of Ukraine and relations between Russia and Ukraine. 6.  On 28 July 2015 the applicant published on YouTube a video with the title “Kolkhoz TV on Ukrainian crisis” (Колхозное телевидение об украинском кризисе) where he made comments on Ms F.’s speech as follows:
“Ms F.: Nobody in the whole world has ever thought that Russia would become such a strong country and ... that Russia would reach new horizons...
The applicant (Mr R.): Nodding ironically, showing the brochure “Life of a galley slave”.
Ms F.: ... would organise worldwide renowned Olympic Games...
Mr R.: Nodding ironically, showing brochure “Winter Olympic Games in subtropics”.
Ms F.: ...and would host the Eurovision competition and, at the same time, would become a leading leader among gases (станет лидирующим лидером среди газа).
Mr R.: Yet today, according to the latest reports of the Mendeleyev international rating agency, Russia has reached the top of the list, drawing ahead of such gases as carbon, hydrogen and oxygen.
Ms F.: ...There is a war against Russia, which has become a first-rate power and everybody is annoyed by this fact...They want us to die of drug and alcohol abuse and poverty etc.
Mr R.: But it is not true that we die of alcohol, drugs and poverty... poverty?
Ms F.: ... Ukraine is, so to say, our Russian belly...
Mr R.: I am afraid of asking what the Far East is.
Ms F.: And that’s why we must, certainly, help these people who have found themselves in a horrible situation because Kyiv, to be honest, does not need these people. It needs gas.
Mr R.: But who is ‘the leading leader among gases’? That means they need Russia!
Ms F.: So, Slavyansk means gas...
Mr R.: Slavyansk means gas. As we know, gas means Russia. This proves that Slavyansk belongs to us on lawful grounds. In fact, it does not.
Ms F.: ... We must not get involved in a war...
Mr R.: Wait! You have said that a war has been declared on us. How can we not get involved in the war if we have been drawn into the war, as everybody knows, by Bulgarians?
Ms F.: ... we may not interfere [with what is happening in Ukraine]. Yes, we are sorry, yes, people die there. As has previously been said, what if our people go there and die?
Mr R.: I would recommend that this woman go to mothers of Russian soldiers, in particular those who had been dismissed from the service or who were on leave and who returned from Ukraine in coffins, so she could tell them that we did not interfere and that we do not have troops there.
Ms F.: And if now the economic situation in the country worsens and Russian people seek to rebel? We are already under pressure from various religious conventions (конвенций) which have infiltrated the country. Even in Krasnodar Region there are many such protestant, so to say, religious cults, as I call them, which influence people’s minds.
Mr R.: What, [beep] you are talking about?!
Ms F.: I guess they are now trying to convince us ideologically that if we are not happy with regional authorities’ decisions we need to organise rallies, revolutions etc. I believe that we must not take the bait!
Mr R.: ... because this breaks with long traditions and principles: to stay in a horsebox and eat all this sh** coming from the television.
Ms F.: We all, including all human rights defenders, need to work together as a team...
Mr R.: A person who claims to be a human rights defender must know what human rights are... Now you have an idea of what is happening inside the heads of those who watch television! Next patient, please!” 7.  On 11 January 2016 Ms F. brought an action against the applicant, stating that he had offended her and had harmed her reputation. 8.  On 28 January 2016 the Ust-Labinskiy District Court of the Krasnodar Region allowed her claim. The court held as follows:
“... [the applicant] disseminated untrue statements about Ms F. which damaged her honour, dignity and reputation, because these statements referred to unethical behaviour on her part...
The court has established that the defendant used abusive and obscene language in his video ..., therefore [the applicant] intended to humiliate Ms F. and damage her reputation.
... Ms F., the head of the Ust-Labinsk District, has sustained damage of a non‑pecuniary nature due to emotional distress caused by the defendant’s defamatory and discrediting statements and allusions to her unethical conduct. In accordance with the principle of reasonableness, taking into account the seriousness of the wrongful acts, the nature of the offence and the contents of the publication, the degree of suffering involved, and that the information concerned a public activist and was available for the general public, the court allows the plaintiff’s claim for non‑pecuniary damage in part and awards 50,000 roubles (‘RUB’)”. 9.  On 24 February 2016 the applicant lodged an appeal against the decision of 28 January 2016. He submitted that he had not offended Ms F., but had rather commented on her statements regarding the situation in Ukraine; nor had he disseminated any untruths relating to Ms F. As to obscene words, the applicant had used only one word meaning “prostitute”. However this word had been an interjection rather than an offence, and had been bleeped out. The applicant emphasised that the first-instance court had established that Ms F. was a public person who should tolerate critics, but had still issued a decision violating freedom of political speech. 10.  On 5 May 2016 the Krasnodar Regional Court upheld this decision on appeal, stating that the applicant had failed to provide any proof in respect of statements about Ms F. used in his video, and that he had used vulgar and obscene words humiliating Ms F. 11.  On 1 August and 1 November 2016 the Krasnodar Regional Court and the Supreme Court of Russia dismissed the applicant’s cassation appeals.