Top Qs
Timeline
Chat
Perspective

Russian undesirable organizations law

Russian law during ruling of Vladimir Putin From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Russian undesirable organizations law
Remove ads

The Russian undesirable organizations law (officially Federal Law of 23.05.2015 N 129-FZ "On amendments of some legislative acts of the Russian Federation")[1] is a law that was signed by President Vladimir Putin on 23 May 2015 as a follow-up to the 2012 Russian foreign agent law and Dima Yakovlev Law. Under the law, Russian prosecutors are able to target foreign groups which they deem to present "a threat to the foundation of the constitutional order of the Russian Federation, the defense capability of the country or the security of the state."[2]

Quick Facts Undesirable organizations law Undesirable NGOs law, Citation ...

The law gives prosecutors the power to declare foreign and international organizations "undesirable" in Russia and shut them down. Organizations are subject to heavy fines, while individuals affiliated with them can receive lengthy prison sentences if they fail to dissolve when given notice to do so. These punishments also apply to Russians who maintain ties to them. Critics say that the law is unclear in many areas and can be used to silence dissent. Supporters of the bill claim that this law is vital for the preservation of national security.

Remove ads

History

The proponents revealed that an initial idea of the law was to expand the action of the "foreign agent law" onto foreign noncommercial organizations as well, but after the introduction of economic sanctions against Russia they decided to incorporate economic aspects in the new law as well.[3]

On 23 July 2024 State Duma adopted a law according to which any organizations can be recognized as undesirable in Russia if their founders or participants are foreign government agencies, in addition to foreign NGO.[4]

Remove ads

Implications for NGOs

These organisations are forbidden from holding public events and from possessing or distributing promotional materials, including via mass media. All Russian banks and financial institutions are forbidden from cooperating with them and are required to inform Russia's financial watchdog agency about all those that attempt to use them.[citation needed]

When given notice from the prosecutors, these NGOs have to disband. Violators face fines or prison terms of up to six years. People cooperating with such entities are subject to fines and can be banned from entering Russia.[5] Russians who maintain ties with "undesirables" face penalties ranging from fines to a maximum of six years in prison.[6]

Remove ads

Enforcement

Summarize
Perspective

On 25 May 2015, the first proposed list of undesirable NGOs was sent to the Prosecutor-General's office was made by an MP from LDPR. The list included the think tank Carnegie Moscow Center, the international history and human rights society Memorial, as well as the Moscow offices of Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International.[7]

On 7 July 2015, RIA Novosti published an alleged shortlist by the Federal Council of Russia of organizations to be branded undesirable. Those include the US-based Open Society Institute, the National Endowment for Democracy, the MacArthur Foundation and the Charles Stewart Mott Foundation. The list also includes the Polish-based Education for Democracy foundation and the East European Democratic Centre as well as three Ukrainian organizations: The Ukrainian World Congress, the Ukrainian World Coordinating Council and the Crimean Field Mission on Human Rights.[8][9]

After the Federal Council's vote to include the MacArthur Foundation on the recommended list of "undesirable organizations", it announced the closing of its Russian division, operating since 1992.[10]

In July 2015, the National Endowment for Democracy became the first organization to be officially blacklisted by the Russian authorities under the law. The decision by the Office of the Prosecutor General of the Russian Federation was announced on its website where it was claimed that NED's activities "pose a threat to constitutional order of the Russian Federation, defense potential and security of the state". Among NED's alleged violations were its donations to commercial and non-profit organizations that independently monitor elections, as well as for undefined "political activities" and "discrediting service in the [Russian] armed forces".[11][12]

In November 2015, two branches of George Soros' charity network, the Open Society Foundations and the Open Society Institute Assistance Foundation, were banned under this law in Russia. The infractions were not listed, but the Office of the Prosecutor General of the Russian Federation released a statement stating that "the activity of the Open Society Foundations and the Open Society Institute Assistance Foundation represents a threat to the foundations of the constitutional system of the Russian Federation and the security of the state".[13][14]

Ahead of the March 2018 presidential election, two European organizations involved in election monitoring were added.[15]

Remove ads

Affected organizations

Summarize
Perspective

As of 24 July 2025, the Ministry of Justice of the Russian Federation declared 245 overseas and international non-governmental organizations "undesirable" in Russia (including the occupied territories of Ukraine): most of the affected organizations are based in Germany, Ukraine, the United Kingdom, and the United States.[16]

More information №, Organization affected ...
Remove ads

Reactions

Summarize
Perspective

Russia's human rights ombudsperson Ella Pamfilova said the power given to the Prosecutor General to designate groups "undesirable" without going to court contradicts the Russian constitution and condemned the lack of a right to appeal.[172][173]

German Chancellor Angela Merkel's spokesperson said that the law was an attempt to further isolate and discredit members of civil society who were critical of the government.[174]

Britain's Minister for Europe, David Lidington, said it was "yet another example of the Russian authorities' harassment of NGOs and those who work with them in Russia".[175]

The US State Department stated it was "deeply troubled" by the law and expressed concern that it "will further restrict the work of civil society in Russia and is a further example of the Russian government's growing crackdown on independent voices and intentional steps to isolate the Russian people from the world".[176] The Deputy Chief of the US Mission to the OSCE Permanent Council urged the Russian government "to uphold its international obligations and OSCE commitments to respect the freedoms of expression, peaceful assembly and association, and the rule of law."[177]

Amnesty International said the bill would "squeeze the life" from civil society, while Human Rights Watch warned it would be locals who would be worst-hit.[178] Veteran human rights activist Lyudmila Alexeyeva described the law as "another step toward lowering the curtain between our country and the West."[5]

On 13 June 2016, the opinion of the Venice Commission on Russian undesirable organizations law[179] was published. According to the Venice Commission conclusion, Russian undesirable organizations law consists of vague definition of certain key concepts, such as "non-governmental organisations", which determines whether the activities of a foreign or international NGO may be declared undesirable, "directing of" and "participating in" the activities of a listed NGO, coupled with the wide discretion granted to the Office of the Public Prosecutor and the lack of specific judicial guarantees in the Federal Law, contradicts the principle of legality. The automatic legal consequences (blanket prohibitions) imposed upon NGOs whose activities are declared undesirable (prohibition to organise and conduct mass actions and public events or to distribute information materials) may only be acceptable in extreme cases of NGOs constituting serious threat to the security of the state or to fundamental democratic principles. In other instances, the blanket application of these sanctions might contradict the requirement under the European Convention on Human Rights that the interference with the freedom of association and assembly has to respond to a pressing social need and has to be proportional to the legitimate aim pursued. Furthermore, the inclusion of an NGO in the List should be made on the basis of clear and detailed criteria following a judicial decision or, at least, the decision should be subject to an appropriate judicial appeal.

Remove ads

See also

References

External links

Loading related searches...

Wikiwand - on

Seamless Wikipedia browsing. On steroids.

Remove ads
Remove ads