The “Law on Non-commercial Organizations which Carry Functions of Foreign Agents” and allegations of reprisals against the Anti-Discrimination Center Memorial via that law were mentioned in my previous report (A/HRC/27/38, para. 43). On 20 June 2014, mandate holders raised further concerns over the enforcement of, and amendments to, the Law and the Memorial with the Government (A/HRC/28/85, case RUS 5/2014). (...) On 4 June 2014, the Duma voted in favour of amending the Law, reportedly allowing the Ministry of Justice to register, at its own initiative and without a court decision, non-commercial organizations as “foreign agents” (ibid.). In its response dated 25 August 2014, the Government explained the procedures followed in the case of the Memorial and indicated that such registration should not be considered as interference of any kind in the rights to freely express opinions or form associations but that it aims at ensuring transparency and openness in their activities (ibid.). The Special Rapporteur on the rights to freedom of peaceful assembly and of association, in his report of 10 June 2015, expressed his continued grave concern in relation to the Law and the targeting of human rights organizations that engage with the United Nations human rights mechanisms (A/HRC/29/25/Add.3, para. 436).

In September 2018, in the context of the UPR of the Russian Federation, States made recommendations regarding restrictive legislation, in particular, laws on “foreign agents” and “undesirable” organizations (A/HRC/39/13, paras. 147.61–67; 147.83–95). Since 2012, the Russian Federation has adopted a number of laws and amendments that have reportedly had a direct impact on the willingness and ability of civil society actors to engage with international bodies, in particular with the UN. Human rights organizations have been impacted primarily by the application of laws and policies such as N 121-FZ Foreign Agent Law for Non-Commercial Organizations, adopted in July 2012 and amended in June 2016 (N 147-FZ and N 179-FZ). Since 2013, authorities have carried out multiple inspections of human rights organizations under suspicion of being an “NGO – foreign agent.” Such criteria have included the existence of foreign funding from any charitable foundation, including the UN, and “engagement in policy.” [...] 91. As regards the recurrent criticism of Russian laws on foreign agents, the Government referred to the position taken in its national report to the May 2018 UPR and stated that the legislative requirements’ purpose was to ensure greater transparency. It noted that the obligation of a non-commercial organization performing the functions of a foreign agent to submit an application for inclusion in the relevant register did not: prevent it from receiving financial support from foreign and international organizations, foreign citizens or stateless persons; preclude it from participating in political activities in the Russian Federation; or discriminate against it by comparison to non-commercial organizations that do not receive foreign funding. It was also emphasized that Russian laws regulating the activities of non-commercial organizations performing the functions of foreign agents have recently undergone a significant revision in terms of what constitutes “political activity,” with more legal precision and several exclusions.

105. The 2019 report of the Secretary-General (A/HRC/42/30, Annex II, para. 88) included that, in the context of the September 2018 UPR of the Russian Federation, States made recommendations regarding restrictive legislation, in particular, laws on “foreign agents” and “undesirable” organizations (A/HRC/39/13, paras. 147.61–67; 147.83–95). On 27 February 2020, in her statement to the Human Rights Council, the High Commissioner for Human Rights noted that “new amendments to the 2012 legislation on civil society known as the ‘foreign agent law,’ have further expanded its application to individuals who distribute foreign media, or publish material, while also receiving money from outside the country. It will have chilling effect on the exercise of freedom of expression and other forms of participation by the public in decision-making.” 66 [...] On 29 July 2020, the Government responded to the note verbale in connection to the present report [...]

106. In reference to the national legislative framework, the Government stated that citizens’ right to association is guaranteed in Article 30 of the Constitution, and there is extensive legislation regulating citizens’ exercise of this right, including Federal Law No. 82-FZ of May 19, 1995 “On Public Associations,” the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, Federal Law of January 12, 1996 No. 7-ФЗ “On non-commercial organizations” and other regulations. Inclusion in the register of non-profit organizations performing the functions of a foreign agent does not prevent them from obtaining financial support from foreign and international organizations, foreign citizens and stateless persons, and thus it does not place them in a discriminatory position compared to non-profit organizations that do not receive foreign funding.

111. The 2020 and 2019 reports of the Secretary-General218 noted the effects that restrictive legislation, in particular laws on “foreign agents” or “undesirable organizations,” have had on the willingness and ability of civil society actors to engage with international bodies, especially with the UN. These include the N 121-FZ Foreign Agent Law for NonCommercial Organizations, adopted in July 2012 and amended in June 2016 (N 147-FZ and N 179-FZ). The operations of civil society organizations have reportedly been subject to particular scrutiny, in particular their receipt and use of foreign funding. The issue has been raised by multiple UN actors, including during the 2018 UPR of the Russian Federation,219 by the High Commissioner for Human Rights,220 by special procedures mandate holders,221 to which the Government has replied,222 and by the treaty bodies.223 The Government has stated that the right to freedom of association is guaranteed in Article 30 of the Constitution, and that the inclusion in the foreign agent register does not prevent non-profit organization from accessing foreign funding, and does not place them in a discriminatory position compared to non-profit organizations that do not receive this type of funding (A/HRC/45/36, Annex II, para. 107).
112. According to information received by OHCHR, on 30 December 2020, several pieces of federal legislation were signed into effect further expanding the list of actors that can be designated “foreign agents” to include unregistered NGOs and individuals, regardless of nationality. Reportedly, media is prohibited from publishing any information about such NGOs and unregistered public associations without indicating that they are included in the register of “foreign agents.” Federal Law No. 538-FC reportedly introduced a five-year prison sentence for libel, which had been criminalized in 2012, and Federal Law No. 525-FZ reportedly introduced criminal liability for malicious violation of the duties of a “foreign agent” with a penalty of up to five years in prison. On 5 April 2021, Bills No.1052327-7 and 105895-7 were adopted and published, reportedly introducing amendments and penalties for non-compliance with the norms mentioned above.
113. The High Commissioner for Human Rights, in her oral update to the Human Rights Council on 25 February 2021, regretted the entry into force in late 2020 of new legal provisions further limiting fundamental freedoms and the growing expansion of the definition of ‘foreign agent.’ 224 She had previously expressed concern that the definition “further expanded its application to individuals who distribute foreign media, or publish material, while also receiving money from outside the country” and “will have chilling effect”. 225 It has been reported to OHCHR that the enforcement of the aforementioned legislation, as well as the new pieces of federal legislation, have further contributed to self-censorship and reluctance of civil society to engage with the UN. While some civil society organizations have continued to cooperate with the UN, including from outside the country, some human rights defenders reportedly decline international attention, including by the UN, to their issues or situations for fear of retaliation. In particular, some have reportedly expressed concerns about repercussions for participating in side-events in the margins of the Human Rights Council and have therefore avoided taking part. Names and further details are withheld due to fear of further reprisals.

22. Russian Federation
23. The 2019, 2020 and 2021 reports of the Secretary-General addressed the alleged effects that restrictive legislation, in particular laws on “foreign agents” or “undesirable organizations,” have had on the willingness and ability of civil society actors to engage with international bodies, including with the United Nations. These included the N 121-FZ Foreign Agent Law for Non-Commercial Organizations, adopted in July 2012 and amended in June 2016 (N 147-FZ and N 179-FZ) and several pieces of federal legislation signed into effect on 30 December 2020 further expanding the list of actors that can be designated “foreign agents” to include unregistered NGOs and individuals, regardless of nationality. The operations of civil society organizations had reportedly been subject to particular scrutiny, in particular their receipt and use of foreign funding. On 5 April 2021, Bills No.1052327-7 and 105895-7 were adopted and published, reportedly introducing amendments and penalties for non-compliance with the norms mentioned above. The enforcement of this legislation reportedly contributed to self-censorship and dissuaded civil society actors from publicly engaging with the United Nations.
24. During the reporting period, multiple United Nations actors, including the Spokesperson of the High Commissioner for Human Rights and the CEDAW Committee, continued to address repressive legislation used against civil society actors and human rights defenders as a result of which organizations have been audited, heavily fined, and some forced into dissolution. Special Procedure mandate holders called for the Foreign Agent Law to be abolished or substantially amended (RUS/13/2021). On 7 March 2022 the High Commissioner for Human Rights reiterated her concern about the use of repressive legislation that impedes the exercise of civil and political rights. She noted further that “fundamental freedoms and the work of human rights defenders continue to be undermined by widespread use of the 2012 so-called ‘foreign agent law” and added that further legislation criminalising circumstances of ‘discrediting” the armed forces continues down this concerning path.

125. The alleged impact of the arbitrary application of restrictive legislation, 153 in particular laws on “foreign agents” or “undesirable organizations”, on the willingness and ability of civil society actors to engage with international bodies, including with the UnitedNations, were included in the 2013, 2014 and 2015, 2019, 2020, 2021 and 2022 reports of the Secretary-General.154
126. During the reporting period, multiple United Nations actors expressed concerns over new legislative developments, and the impact of the long-term application of the aforementioned legislation.155
127. Between July and November 2022, special procedures mandate holders noted concerns over the amendments that had come into force on 1 December 2022 to the Foreign Agents Law of 2012, including “on control over the activities of persons being under foreign influence” (RUS 16/2022), 156 while reiterating concerns over the Law itself and its subsequent amendments. The Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights defenders raised concerns about the introduction of prison terms of up to eight years for those convicted of “confidentially co-operating, including with an international organization”, if the cooperation aims to assist in “activities knowingly aimed against the state security”. 157
128. In its concluding observations adopted on 31 October 2022, the Human Rights Committee noted concern about provisions on “foreign agents” and “undesirable” organizations, and their expansion, including through the law broadening the categories of “foreign agents” to include additional groups 158 as well as the new law criminalizing confidential cooperation with foreign States and international or foreign organizations 159 (CCPR/C/RUS/CO/8, para. 30 (c)). The Committee noted the significant restrictions that the application of these laws has imposed on the activities of numerous human rights organizations, leading even to closures.
129. In its concluding observations adopted on 25 April 2023, the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination (CERD) noted concerns about the low number of civil society organizations operating and registered in the State party and the unusually low level of submissions by civil society organizations in the context of the consideration of the report of the State party. The Committee considers that this may be attributed to the closure of many domestic organizations because of the restrictive legal framework (CERD/C/RUS/CO/25-26, paras. 18 and 19).

154. References to the alleged impact of the arbitrary application of restrictive legislation, 160 in particular laws on “foreign agents” or “undesirable organizations”, on the willingness and ability of civil society actors to engage with international bodies, including with the United Nations, have been included in the reports of the Secretary-General since 2019 and, prior to that, in 2013, 2014, and 2015.161 Multiple United Nations actors have expressed concerns on several occasions over restrictive legislative developments and the impact of the long-term application of the aforementioned legislation.162
155. In her 2023 report to the Human Rights Council, the Special Rapporteur on the human rights situation in the Russian Federation addressed the impact and new developments concerning restrictive legislation targeting civil society (A/HRC/54/54, paras. 19–31). She addressed the inclusion of Human Rights House Foundation along with several other international non-governmental organizations in the list of the so-called “undesirable organizations’ during the reporting period, (para. 29, see also Annex I). The Special Rapporteur noted with concern that the definition of “foreign influence” in the Foreign Agents Law,163 could potentially include any engagement with foreign nationals or entities, including the United Nations (para. 21). She highlighted that at the end of July 2023 at least 103 organizations had been included in the list of “undesirable organizations” and 649 in the register of “foreign agents” (para. 22). The Special Rapporteur further addressed the June 2023 draft amendments to the “Law on undesirable Organizations” which, in her view, would further restrict and isolate Russian civil society (para. 31).