43.As noted in my previous report, 64 several United Nations human rights experts have expressed concern at the law on non-governmental organizations which carry functions of foreign agents”, adopted in November 2012.65 Particular concern was raised by the Committee against Torture at allegations of reprisals against the Anti-Discrimination Centre Memorial and the Public Verdict Foundation via that law. On 23 December 2013, the Committee expressed grave concern after a Russian court ordered Memorial to register as a “foreign agent”, allegedly owing to its political activities and foreign funding.66 Replies to letters by the special procedures and the Committee were received on 9 August 2013 and 19 February 2014 respectively. In them, the Government indicated that the “activities of Russian law enforcement authorities ... are carried out in strict accordance with existing legal norms and have nothing to do with ‘reprisals’”, and that Russian legislation did not establish any legislative or administrative barriers restricting activities of non-commercial organizations. The Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights defenders, in her report of 3 March 2014,67 reiterated serious concern about the use of that law to target and intimidate human rights organizations which had engaged with the United Nations, its mechanisms and representatives in the field of human rights, in particular about the acts of reprisals against the Public Verdict Foundation and the Anti-Discrimination Centre Memorial.

3.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 Memorialwith the Government (A/HRC/28/85, case RUS 5/2014). On 8 April 2014, the Saint Petersburg Court upheld that the Memorial was performing functions of a “foreign agent”, reportedly for submitting information on police actions to the Committee against Torture. The Memorial refused to register as such and decided to dissolve its structure and continue its activities without registration. On 4 June 2014, the Duma voted in favour of amending the Law, reportedly allowing the Ministry of Justice toregister, at its own initiative and without a court decision, non-commercial organizations as “foreign A/HRC/30/2918agents”(ibid.). In its response dated 25 August 2014, the Government explained the procedures followed in the case ofthe Memorial and indicated that such registration should not be considered as interference of any kind in the rights to freely express opinions orform 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.” 89. The case of the Anti-Discrimination Centre Memorial (ADC Memorial) was included in the 2013 report of the Secretary-General when the Committee against Torture raised concerns at reported reprisals faced for providing information to the Committee in December 2012 (A/HRC/24/29, para. 31). The Government responded to the allegations, stating that activities of Russian law enforcement authorities regarding ADC Memorial, or any other non-profit organization, were carried out in accordance with the law and have nothing to do with reprisals (HRC/NONE/2013/102). 152 In August 2018, the Committee against Torture recalled the administrative case against ADC Memorial, regretting that the prosecutor’s office had reportedly referred to alternative reports sent to the Committee as a political activity justifying their registration as “foreign agents.” The Committee reiterated its recommendation that rights defenders, journalists and lawyers should not be subjected to reprisals for their communication with or provision of information to the United Nations treaty bodies, including the Committee (CAT/C/RUS/CO/6/ paras. 28 and 29 (c)). 90. On 24 July 2019, the Government provided an update to OHCHR. Regarding ADC Memorial, it noted that in 2013 the St. Petersburg Prosecutor’s Office reviewed the organization’s compliance with laws governing non-commercial organizations. It was found to have engaged in political activity while in receipt of foreign funding and to have failed to register with the justice authorities as a non-commercial organization performing the functions of a foreign agent. The Government stated that ADC Memorial did not agree with the measures taken in response and ceased operations on 11 April 2014.