Jump to content

Talk:Russian foreign agent law

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Was the Foreign Agent Restriction Act an inspiration for the Agent law?

[edit]

Does someone know something about it?--Edward Zeiss (talk) 09:14, 7 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Parallel US-Law under "see also" deleted

[edit]

I inserted:

It was immediately deleted.

Just for the record. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.130.44.239 (talk) 13:15, 29 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

---

This is curious. Really, without the link article looks somewhat biased. I dare to add this link back with a little explanation. Please if for some reason it is unwanted, add the motivation here.

Rodion Gork (talk) 20:11, 13 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

NGO abbreviation is not explained

[edit]

The article uses "NGO" abbreviation, without explaining or linking it to anything. This makes the article looking poorly prepared. NGO may stand for "non-governmental organizations" - though Russian law in question is about "Non-Commercial Organizations" or "NKO" in Russian. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rodion Gork (talk • contribs) 19:25, 13 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Created table

[edit]
An organization that has been designated as a foreign agent can be looked up here: [1]
Aktsent Yekaterinburg organization affiliated with LGBT Center[1][2] Open
Alliance of Doctors Added in March 2021. The Moscow Alliance Of Doctors (Альянс врачей) is headed by ophthalmologist Anastasia Vasilyeva, who has treated opposition leader Aleksei Navalny in the past. It was founded in 2018. It fights for fair wages and working conditions for medical professionals.[3] Open
Anna Domestic-Violence Crisis Center[3] www.anna-center.ru[4] Open
Committee Against Torture Russia’s Committee Against Torture disputed their inclusion into the registry in court, but the appeal was rejected. Refusing to operate under the law's conditions, it announced its dissolution.[5][6] Closed
Dynasty Foundation Russia's only private funder of scientific research, shut down after being included in the registry.[7][8] Closed
Glasnost Defence Foundation After Defence Foundation was designated a "foreign agent", the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe[9] and the Russian President's Human Rights Council criticised the decision.[10] Open
Global Giving[1] Open
GOLOS Association Russia's only independent election monitoring organization,[11] was instructed by the Russian Justice Ministry to declare themselves a "foreign agent" for accepting an award from the Norwegian Helsinki Committee.[12] After GOLOS refused to register, stating that it had not accepted the prize money, it was fined and suspended for six months.[12][13][14] Russian police subsequently raided the offices and the homes of employees and confiscated equipment.[15] Open
Humanitarian Action Russia’s Justice Ministry added “Humanitarian Action,” a charity based in St. Petersburg, to its list of “foreign agents” in late 2020. The organization works mainly with drug users and people living with HIV.[1][16] Open
Levada Center Russia's only independent polling agency, received between 3 and 1.5% of its total budget from abroad.[17] It was issued with a public warning that it would be eligible under the law.[17] Levada said it suspended foreign funding in 2013.[18] In 2016, the polling agency was named a foreign agent, barring it from work on the upcoming election.[18][19] Levada's director stated that the designation may mean that Levada would be unable to continue its work as a pollster.[20] Open
MacArthur Foundation The American MacArthur Foundation, citing the foreign agent law along with its designation as an "undesirable organization", closed its Russian division, operating since 1992.[21] Closed
Meduza On April 23, 2021, the Russian Ministry of Justice designated Meduza as a 'foreign agent'.[22][23] In response, the European Union rejected the decision, saying this restriction "goes against Russia's international obligations and human rights commitments".[24][25][26][27] Open
Memorial One of Russia's oldest organizations dedicated to preventing a return to authoritarianism, also refused to register under the law. They were officially audited, and provided 8,776 pages of information documenting their activities.[28] It was placed on the registry in 2015.[29] Open
Nasiliu Domestic Violence Center Added to the “foreign agent” list in December 2020. Nasiliu.net is one of Russia’s leading organizations addressing domestic violence.

The ministry is asking a court to fine Nasiliu.net from 300,000 to 500,000 rubles ($4,000 to $6,800). The ministry is seeking a fine of up to 300,000 rubles against the NGO's director, Anna Rivina. It was founded in 2015 and was registered as an NGO in 2018. In December 2020, it was listed as a "foreign agent" organization, a designation that it is appealing in court.[3]

Open
Phoenix PLUS Oryol Region in Russia.[1][30] Open
Radio Free Europe In 2017, the Russian government placed Radio Free Europe Russian Service, six other Radio Free Europe Russian-language news services, and Current Time TV on the list. The fines against Radio Free Europe amount to about 70 million rubles ($950,000).[31] Open
Transparency International (TI-R) Transparency International was declared eligible for the label in 2013. The reason given was TI-R receiving money from foreign sources, and being a part of the Expert Commission for Open Governance in Russia, which deals with political activities.[32] TI-R believes that their position on the Expert Commission for Open Governance in Russia should preclude them from being forced to register as a foreign agent, seeing as it is a status appointed by the Russian Government. They also claim that the phrase "political activity" is too broadly defined in the law, and that it needs to have narrow, specific definitions.[33] Despite TI-R objections, in April 2015, the Russian Ministry of Justice placed Transparency International on its list of 'foreign agents'.[34] Open


Wikedneeded (talk) 14:06, 16 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ a b c d Russia Slaps Foreign Media, NGOs with 'Foreign Agent' and 'Undesirable Org' Labels (December 25, 2020).
  2. ^ Legal entity associated with the Yekaterinburg LGBT Center recognized as a foreign agent, (23 December 2020).
  3. ^ a b c Russia Adds Alliance Of Doctors To 'Foreign Agent' List, Radio Free Europe, (March 03, 2021).
  4. ^ Rape Crisis Network Europe
  5. ^ "Prominent Russian anti-torture NGO to shut down". meduza.io. Retrieved 2015-07-10.
  6. ^ "Indignant Over 'Foreign Agent' Label, 2 Russian NGOs Shut Their Doors | News". Retrieved 2015-07-10.
  7. ^ Harding, Luke; Moscow, agencies in. "Russian science foundation shuts down after being branded 'foreign agent'". the Guardian. Retrieved 2015-07-10.
  8. ^ Roth, Andrew (2015-07-11). "Unlikely Targets in Cross Hairs as Russia Aims to Expose Foreign Influence". The New York Times. ISSN 0362-4331. Retrieved 2015-07-12.
  9. ^ "OSCE media representative deplores stigmatization of oldest media freedom NGO in Russia, Glasnost Defence Foundation | OSCE". www.osce.org. Retrieved 2016-06-10.
  10. ^ ""Институт прав человека" включен в реестр нко-иностранных агентов" [Human Rights Institute added to 'foreign agent' NGO register]. www.ng.ru (in Russian). Nezavisimaya Gazeta. 2015-11-23. Retrieved 2016-06-11.
  11. ^ Barry, Ellen (2011-12-01). "Russia Puts Pressure on Election Monitor, Golos". The New York Times. ISSN 0362-4331. Retrieved 2013-06-04.
  12. ^ a b "Legal actions against Golos violates human rights - Den norske Helsingforskomité". nhc.no. Retrieved 2016-04-12.
  13. ^ Barry, Ellen (2013-04-25). "For Nearly 5 Hours, a Confident Putin Takes Questions". The New York Times. ISSN 0362-4331. Retrieved 2013-06-01.
  14. ^ "Russia NGO law: Election watchdog Golos suspended". BBC News. 26 June 2013. Retrieved 1 July 2013.
  15. ^ "Russian police crack down on election monitors and watchdogs". ABC News. Retrieved 2015-07-10.
  16. ^ Meet the ‘foreign agents’ Drawing on their own pasts, Russian charity workers at Humanitarian Action are helping thousands overcome drug addiction, (March 6, 2021). Meduza.
  17. ^ a b "Russia pollster 'is foreign agent'". BBC. 2013-05-20. Retrieved 2013-06-04.
  18. ^ a b "Russia's Levada Centre polling group named foreign agent - BBC News". BBC. 2016-09-05. Retrieved 2016-09-05.
  19. ^ Рустамова, Фарида; Макутина, Мария (2016-09-05). "Минюст включил Левада-центр в список иностранных агентов". rbc.ru (in Russian). RBC. Retrieved 2016-09-06.
  20. ^ RFE/RL (2016-09-05). "Russia Declares Respected Pollster 'Foreign Agent'". RadioFreeEurope/RadioLiberty. Retrieved 2016-09-05.
  21. ^ "Statement of MacArthur President Julia Stasch on the Foundation's Russia Office — MacArthur Foundation". www.macfound.org. Retrieved 2015-07-22.
  22. ^ "Russia Labels Meduza Media Outlet As 'Foreign Agent'". Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty. 2021-04-23. Retrieved 2021-04-24.
  23. ^ "Минюст внес «Медузу» в список «иностранных агентов»" [Ministry of Justice added Meduza to the list of "foreign agents"]. Ministry of Justice (Russia) (in Russian). Meduza. 2021-04-23. Retrieved 2021-04-24.
  24. ^ Yun Chee, Foo (2021-04-24). "EU rejects Russian decision to label media outlet Meduza as 'foreign agent'". Reuters. Retrieved 2021-04-27.
  25. ^ "EU 'Rejects' Russian Labeling Of Meduza Media Outlet As 'Foreign Agent'". Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty. 2021-04-21. Retrieved 2021-04-24.
  26. ^ "«Обязанность властей — обеспечить журналистам возможность заниматься своей работой в атмосфере, свободной от страха и принуждения»" ["The duty of the authorities is to ensure that journalists are able to do their work in an atmosphere free from fear and coercion."]. Meduza (in Russian). 2021-04-24. Retrieved 2021-04-24.
  27. ^ "Russia: Statement by the Spokesperson on labelling Meduza as "foreign agent"". European External Action Service. 2021-04-24. Retrieved 2021-04-24.
  28. ^ Cite error: The named reference WP1 was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
  29. ^ Service, RFE/RL's Russian (2015-11-10). "Russian Justice Ministry Accuses Memorial Of Calling For Regime Change". RadioFreeEurope/RadioLiberty. Retrieved 2016-09-06.
  30. ^ ECOM’s Statement on Assign the Status of “Foreign Agent” to the “Phoenix PLUS” NGO, Russia, December 1, 2020.
  31. ^ RFE/RL's Russian Bank Accounts Frozen Following Bailiffs' Visit to Moscow Bureau
  32. ^ "Transparency International пожаловалась в Конституционный суд". Газета коммерсантъ. 2014-02-28. Retrieved 2014-02-20.
  33. ^ "Правозащитники встают на третью сторону". Газета коммерсантъ. 2014-02-28. Retrieved 2014-02-20.
  34. ^ "The Ministry of Justice has placed Transparency International – R on its list of 'foreign agents'". transparency.org.ru. Retrieved 2016-05-18.

POV tag

[edit]

I added the POV tag today, as I believe the article gives undue weight to defenders of the law and insufficient weight to the universal international condemnation, resulting in a WP:FALSEBALANCE. I'm also concerned that the notable cases list may be an attempt to "name and shame" opposition groups that have had the foreign agent label slapped onto them, particularly as some of the text seems to be loaded. Jr8825 • Talk 10:49, 31 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Jr8825: According to page stats, a very large amount of content was added between July–September 2021 by the Novosibirsk-based IP 5.129.59.116 (talk · contribs · WHOIS), which also added substantial content to various other Russian politics topics. These edits collectively account for approximately one third of the current article. Wikedneeded (talk · contribs), who was blocked as a suspected sockpuppet, is also a major contributor to the Notable persons section, and authored approximately one ninth of the current content. Does the content look substantially worse than this version, the last before either of these users started editing the article? –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 07:50, 3 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@LaundryPizza03: thanks for spotting this. I'll have a look through the diffs on Wednesday and let you know. Jr8825 • Talk 17:18, 3 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Jr8825: @LaundryPizza03: In this message, I’m replying to you both.
I’m surprised you believe the current version of the article gives undue weight to defenders of the law and insufficient weight to the universal international condemnation. I don't see anything that could be regarded as a "defence of this law" at all. Also I think you’re wrong if you really see in notable cases list "an attempt to "name and shame" opposition groups". I myself am dissident, I have the friend who works in one of the organizations labeled as "foreign agents" by Russian authorities, and I will try to explain my side of the story.
I believe that English Wikipedia describes current political processes in Russia insufficiently detailed. The lack of attention to details contributes to failure to recognize the true man-eating nature of these processes. It looks very strange, when you cite examples of criticism of the phenomenon but not describe this phenomenon by itself; such approach may seem manipulative and could cast doubts on readers about cited criticism. That is why Russian opposition groups themselves always draw attention to these legal details.
Until recently, I was a lawyer (I had to leave my legal practice due to occupational burnout that pushed me to the conclusion that a continuation the practice is pointless in the present circumstances), so I think I know something about Russian laws and enforcement practices and I’m able to describe the legal (or rather illegal) mechanism of Putin’s repressive acts.
Now let me proceed to make a review of separate points:
1. The article is devoted to the law (legislative act). It means this article should give an idea how this law works. I've added the section “Varieties of "foreign agents"” to the article in order for readers to comprehend the preposterous and repressive nature of this law conflicted with international law and common sense (for example, it's remarkable that Russian authorities attach transboundary nature to this law, using the "foreign agent" label for foreign media even it doesn’t have branches or representative offices in Russia, as was the Meduza case). The readers should understand that everybody regardless citizenship and residence are covered under this law, and serious criminal sanctions are provided for violation of this law.
2. As for notable cases, I identified specific details that were used as a basis for designation natural and juridical persons as "foreign agents" by Russian authorities. In this case, I was guided by the same goal - to demonstrate the repressive nature of this law. For example, I wrote that Russian independent TV-channel Dozhd was included in the list of "foreign agents" due to Lev Ponomaryov's participation in the TV-broadcast (it clearly illustrates that in Russia it's better to not contact with persons labeled as "foreign agent", otherwise you run a risk of also becoming one of them - therein lies the real purpose of Russian authorities). Also I used as an example the Anti-Corruption Foundation, which was designated as "foreign agent" due to small money transfers from some Spanish provocateur; and the fact the Anti-Corruption Foundation gave the money back immediately has not caused any changes in the position of Russian authorities. These details are important because it demonstrate the kafkaesque reality of modern Russia.
3. I’ve added the position of the Venice Commission of 6 July 2021 in the text of the article. I consider this document is the key in the criticism of the law because this document was made by the group of highly qualified lawyers and it is legal conclusion, not political opinion.
In general, I think current version of the article is better than previous, although it’s not perfect. I would remove the section “'Undesirable organizations' law” because the article includes see also link to separate article devoted to the Russian undesirable organizations law. Also, I would remove the section “Media law” because this law is already described in the subsection “Foreign media” of the “Varieties of "foreign agents"”. Also, I would add the description of degrading conditions in which natural persons labeled as “foreign agent” are forced to live (separate section is needed).
If you have a specific questions you may ask me. But it should not be the "like-dislike" kind of conversation. 5.129.59.116 (talk) 21:46, 4 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry I forgot to look into this. I'll try and have a look soon. Jr8825 • Talk 15:58, 26 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Jr8825 Renat 16:11, 15 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Jr8825 Renat 16:34, 6 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the reminders, it's genuinely appreciated! Will take a look in the next day or so. Jr8825 • Talk 18:49, 6 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
OK, so following through on this I agree with the IP that their edits have mostly added helpful detail, and I don't think my initial concerns were the result of their changes. Looking more carefully at the article, it's not as bad in terms of false balance as my initial skim read led me to think, it was the previous lead in particular which gave equal weight to the law's defenders in 2012 as it did to the widespread criticism. I've taken a stab at rewriting the lead. I think it's still in a poor shape overall and there's lots of scope for improvement. Also, the "foreign agents" section needs to be reworded so there isn't a really long section header, which messes up the contents list. I'll remove the POV tag and keep working on improvements over the medium term. Jr8825 • Talk 18:05, 9 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Sources

[edit]

Jr8825 • Talk 13:24, 10 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 14:53, 11 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The article should be rewritten

[edit]

The article should be rewritten completely taking into account the fact that initially this law was de facto a group of laws contained the different amendments into other laws, and only since 14 July 2022 (the date of signing) or rather since 1 December 2022 (the date of entry into force) there is one single codified act. The practice of applying the law was also changed, because since 1 December 2022 there is one single register of "foreign agents" which replaced several earlier registers. K8M8S8 (talk) 20:23, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Evolution of the foreign agent disclaimer text

[edit]

I wonder if we can collect references that document the evolution of the foreign agent disclaimer text? I assume the exact wording is officially specified, but if I am wrong, please clarify. Best, --Minoa (talk) 18:49, 31 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "http://en.wiki.x.io/w/index.php?title=Talk:Russian_foreign_agent_law&oldid=1237837949"