2021 Results. Laws of the year

This is a translated overview by Roskomsvoboda. Original text may be found here.

The passing year built on legislative trends of the previous one and even brought about many innovations in censorship, limitations of online activities, and infringements on privacy. Such provisions include multiple prohibitions related to the Great Patriotic War, the 'law against Anti-Corruption Foundation', and infamous QR codes.

In 2021, the government displayed an outstanding will to triumph over the freedom of expression and web comments, which affected the history of the country as well as the activities of opposition politicians and organizations. The year saw numerous examples of applying the previously passed laws banning censorship circumvention and calls for joining unauthorized protests. While courts and security bodies were busy carrying out the existing restrictive norms, legislators worked on developing and passing new ones.

Due to the large number of new amendments that will surely influence RuNet (Russian segment of the Internet – REM), in some cases, we decided to group some laws into topics around a certain author or trend.

Ten years for 'incitement to drugs'

Lawmakers passed quite a severe law in February. The State Duma added an article to the Criminal Code of Russia on up to 10 years imprisonment for incitement to use drugs 'with a use of ICT, including the internet'. Interestingly, the State Duma Commission on Meddling of Foreign States in Russia's Domestic Affairs developed the bill after discovering a 'Western trace' in articles allegedly instilling an idea that it was harmless to use such substances for the young generation and even pregnant women. As is customary, the new phrasing ended up being vague and, if need be, applicable to any mentioning of drugs, including in the framework of a mere discussion.

The toughening of anti-drug legislation was established back in 2019, with an active contribution from Russian President Vladimir Putin.

The practical application of the existing legal provisions includes blocking articles quoting well-known musicians about drugs and prosecution of rappers for songs; numerous fines against independent media that allowed discussions on forbidden substances in their publications; and the prohibition of encyclopedia articles on this topic. The authorities see 'drug propaganda' in all this, and it is virtually impossible for the owners of publications to prove in court that there is nothing illegal in their materials. It is unlikely that the new law will become an exception to the established law enforcement rules.

Speculation on the Great Patriotic War

The authorities have been devoting special attention to the Great Patriotic War (World War II) and to the historical memory of the heroic pages of our country's past for quite some time; however, 2021 was probably one of the most eventful years in terms of changing Russian legislation to suit this tone.

In March-April, a package of laws was adopted which, inter alia, introduced criminal liability of up to five years imprisonment for the public dissemination of knowingly false information about World War II veterans. Such actions are now recognized as a form of Nazi rehabilitation. Administrative liability for public dissemination of information expressing clear disrespect for society on the Days of Military Glory and commemorative dates in Russia related to the defence of the Fatherland is strengthened. In addition, administrative liability is introduced for legal entities for the public dissemination of information denying facts established by the Nuremberg Tribunal.

The adopted package of laws was informally called the 'law against Navalny' because its drafting began after an opposition politician's tweet regarding a video promoting constitutional amendments featuring a veteran of the Great Patriotic War, Ignat Artemenko.

In addition, the authorities have also banned the publication of images of Nazi criminals. Such materials are now considered extremist unless they do not advocate or justify Nazism or if they create a negative attitude towards that ideology. Bookstores were the first to be affected, as they were ordered to remove books with such images. The decision to adopt these amendments may have been prompted by the case of the prosecution of citizens who posted photographs of Nazi criminals on the website of the Immortal Regiment movement.

A law has been passed that actually bans discussion of not the most pleasant facts from the history of the USSR. The list of facts 'denying the decisive role of the Soviet people in the defeat of Nazi Germany and the humanitarian mission of the USSR in the liberation of Europe' includes the identification of the goals and actions of the Soviet leadership with the actions and goals of Nazi Germany. The new measure would involve administrative fines and arrests; the relevant bill has already been submitted to the State Duma but has not yet been adopted.

All of the above amendments can hardly be called aimed at protecting historical memory as well as veterans. They constitute just new tools for censorship and repressions to squeeze historical research and discussion out of the public sphere, legalize speculative techniques in political propaganda, and other purposes that are not the most acceptable to modern society.

The taboo on investigative journalism about security forces

Criminal liability has been introduced for the publication of data of law enforcement or supervisory officials. This can now lead to heavy fines and even to actual imprisonment for up to two years. A key innovation of the law is the possibility of a criminal liability irrespective of the motivation. Previously, such responsibility was imposed if the aim of the disclosure was to obstruct official activities. Media and public activists believe that the new amendments are aimed at banning investigative reporting on corruption and abuses in the security services. The law is a kind of an upgrade of last December's law on a 'right to LSDU3' (a right to conceal data about the property of public officials, as was done to personal data of Artyom Chaika, a character of Navalny's investigation about allegedly corrupted officials, whose name in official sources was replaced with a special coding 'LSDU3' – REM).

The penalty for publishing the law enforcement officers' data will be up to two years of imprisonment. The law also provides for a fine of 200,000 roubles (approx., 2,300 Euro – REM) or up to 18 months' wages of the convicted person. Other possible punishments include compulsory labor for up to four years, compulsory labor for 480 hours, or detention for up to four months.

As the authors of the initiative pointed out, the disclosure of the personal data of law enforcers is now widespread on the Internet. This is done 'for the purpose of revenge, gain, or PR.' Special responsibility would reduce the number of such unlawful actions.

Bellingcat and The Insider journalists have previously published several investigations based on data of FSB (Federal Security Bureau – REM) officers. According to them, the security forces were involved in the poisoning of Alexei Navalny, among others. Many human rights activists and journalists suggest that these investigations may have led to the drafting and adoption of this law.

'Piskaryov's laws'

Vasily Piskaryov, a United Russia MP, was one of the most active in 'investigating the foreign influence' on political processes in Russia in the outgoing year. At his suggestion, the so-called 'laws against the Anti-Corruption-Foundation' were passed:

• The first one prohibits citizens affiliated with extremist organizations from running in elections, with a potential to establish the involvement 'retrospectively', i.e., in contradiction with the country's Constitution;
• The second one provides for up to five years in prison for donating to an 'undesirable organization', as well as criminal charges for any association with such a group.

As early as when the draft laws were introduced in the State Duma by Vasily Piskaryov and a group of MPs, they provoked a mixed reaction on the Internet. Many saw them as an indication of authorities' desire to remove from the legal field the organizations whose activities do not fit into the 'framework of what is allowed', and to marginalize and intimidate all sympathizers of such organizations.

Khinshtein's 'matryoshkas'

Another active participant in the development and adoption of censorship laws was the Head of the State Duma's Information Committee, Alexander Khinshtein of the United Russia Party. This year, he was responsible for the tendency of introducing completely unexpected amendments to draft laws for the second reading; there were so many of them that experts have not always had time to react to the emergence of new norms in Russian legislation. At times, many of the novelties were unexpected, even for the initial authors of the bills. In this process, Khinshtein was often aided by his faction colleague, deputy Sergei Boyarsky.

One of the first bills to be passed this year was the law on fines for violating the law 'On Sovereign Runet,' which was suddenly amended for the second reading to include the responsibility of information resources (especially foreign ones) for 'censoring the Russian media'. By censorship, the Russian authorities mean that platforms moderate content posted by pro-government news companies that violate the rules of the respective community.

The new law forces telecom operators and traffic exchange point owners to comply with the 'Sovereign RuNet law', while foreign service providers are expected to tolerate violations of their rules by Russian media outlets. Both norms impose fines on violators, which can be as high as six digits.

The law on forcing foreign IT companies to open representative offices in Russia, 'copied from Turks' (as some experts put it), is aimed at service providers with a daily audience of at least half a million people in Russia. The requirements will affect, among others, hosting providers, messengers, advertising system operators, and 'organizers of information distribution' on the Internet. At the same time, services subject to this regulation will be required to install 'one of the programs offered' by Roskomnadzor to determine the number of users of information resources from Russia.

The Roskomnadzor will maintain a special register, which will contain information on the compliance of resource owners with the introduced requirements and sanctions applied to them in connection with violations, such as a ban on their advertising and Russian advertisers placing their own advertising on the offending resources, and a ban on money transfers. The law provides for a number of ‘enforcement measures’ to force the owners of foreign Internet resources to comply with its norms, the extreme measure being total blocking in Russia.

Khinshtein calls it a 'law on grounding,' but in essence, it is a law 'on hostage companies,' which will be obliged to send or hire their own representatives in Russia, on whom the authorities will retaliate for violations found.

Khinshtein's efforts resulted in a ban on the use of unverified online platforms and digital resources in schools. As noted by Oleg Smolin, a Communist MP, the bill had changed beyond recognition by the second reading. While at first, it dealt with additional funding for nutrition and life-long learning, it then included a series of ideas on distance learning technologies, which had nothing to do with the law passed in the first reading. At first, the Federation Council rejected the law because of several mistakes in the text, after which the State Duma 're-adopted' it.

A law on biometric identification and the expansion of extrajudicial blocking has been passed, and here again, the State Duma, thanks to the efforts of Khinshtein, has mixed hardly interrelated amendments into one document. While one part of the document proposes to ban links with forged documents, false ‘bomb reports’, and justification of extremist and terrorist activities, the other one says that Russians should put their biometric data into a single biometric system and have it processed by state agencies.

Experts see the first part of the law as a desire to force Russians to submit their biometric data exclusively to the state, thus establishing a monopoly on the market. The second part only legitimizes what is happening at the moment, as the Prosecutor General's Office is already blocking internet services without court decisions for false bomb reports that come from them, and the Russian authorities are often unwilling to cooperate with the resource owners in a legal way.

Stanislav Seleznyov, a senior partner of the Network Freedoms project, noted that:

'By the third reading, the bill turned into an interesting matryoshka doll because, in addition to the provisions on the justification of extremism, it also included provisions on biometrics, i.e., for some reason, they decided to sneak in a biometric identification system with this document. It defies the logic of legal technique. One law will regulate two completely different areas: Internet censorship on the one hand and surveillance with biometrics on the other.'

QR drama

The Cabinet of Ministers sent two bills to the State Duma in mid-November to introduce QR codes as an anti-coronavirus measure in transport, shops, restaurants, and public places. After a wave of protests swept the country, MPs decided to postpone the adoption of the amendments, sending the bills to the Federation Council and also to regional parliaments. Duma Speaker Vyacheslav Volodin enabled commenting on his Telegram to find out what his subscribers thought of the new measure, and it turned out that an overwhelming majority was against the introduction of such restrictions.

The authorities have now decided to take a much more cautious approach to the adoption of the new amendments than, for example, in relation to the other laws cited above.

Currently, only the bill on QR codes in public places has been adopted in the first reading. Volodin promised that before the second reading, it would be re-sent for discussion to the regions, the Federation Council, and the government.

Consideration of the amendment on the introduction of electronic passes for transport has been postponed.

According to the proposed amendments, the Ministry of Health will be empowered to determine the validity period of QR-codes separately for the vaccinated and for those who have recovered from the disease. A transitional period will be in force until 1 February 2022 in order to provide time to vaccinate and get a QR code. Before that date, it will also be possible to obtain a negative PCR test; after 1 February, only persons with medical clearance will be able to do so. Minors will not be affected by the coronavirus QR code measure. The rules of the new laws will be in force until 1 June 2022.

'Fan’s Passport'

In mid-December, a law was passed to introduce Fan ID for attending official sporting events. It will enter into force on 1 June 2022.

According to the law, the government will have to define a list of 'official sporting events where the identification and authentication of spectators, participants in an official sporting event, and other persons involved in holding such events is mandatory.' From now on, the sale of tickets for sports events will be carried out only 'in the presence of a valid personal identification card and in compliance with the established procedure of identification and authentication.'

The introduction of the 'fan’s passport' was another norm that was met with a largely negative reaction, especially from football fans. Many considered it redundant, discriminatory, and not fulfilling its main function of ensuring the safety of spectators.

Many major fan associations have already officially announced their refusal to obtain Fan ID, and sports experts predict a drop in attendance at stadiums.

***

'The trend towards the sovereignization of Runet and complete de-anonymization of users presses on,' Sarkis Darbinyan, head of Roskomsvoboda's legal practice, has previously described the authorities' legislative initiatives. - The space for freedom of information continues to shrink. Against this background, the "Internet for the poor" initiative, promoted for two years now, which in fact is of no use to anyone but the authorities, looks rather silly. In January, several odious laws will come into force, which will continue the policy of balkanization of the Russian segment of the Internet and introduce new requirements for international technology companies. This will further worsen the investment climate for the IT sector.'

Roskomsvoboda lawyer Anna Karnaukhova, for her part, draws attention to the intrusion into the privacy of Russians, whose data the state increasingly wants to turn into its own property. ‘The unified biometric system is becoming a state information system,’ she says. ‘The UBS was created in 2018 at the initiative of the Ministry of Communications and the Central Bank. Initially, its purpose was to provide financial services remotely through face and voice. Now, the digital platform for identifying citizens through biometrics will get increased government oversight. During the existence of the system, 164,000 records have been collected, and the authorities expect to increase this number to 70 million. People are in no hurry to voluntarily submit biometrics, even for convenience; this is why I think the status of the UBS is being changed to state-run, with de facto compulsory biometric submission down the road – of course, for some very important and good purpose.’

In an interview with Novaya Gazeta, Artyom Kozlyuk, Head of Roskomsvoboda, spoke out about the law on extrajudicial blocking of websites that advocate extremism: ‘This law legitimises the already established practice of blocking certain political or near-political content, which already happens en masse. It is already possible to block absolutely any Internet resource, regardless of its size, traffic, profile, domain zone, and jurisdiction, on a huge number of grounds. This is yet another negative legal act that does not serve the interests of society, but replaces the real fight against crime with fictitious actions or the fight against political opponents of the authorities.’

Kozlyuk is also skeptical about the Fan ID law. ‘There are big questions about the legal component of such a law. It turns out that some kind of additional passports will be introduced for entry to certain events. The next step may be a law that at the entrance to a shop we have to have some kind of a customer ID, for example. It could be taken to the point of absurdity; it is already happening here and now. I believe that such a law is wrong and restricts the rights and freedoms of our citizens. [lt]...[gt] It is on a par with other laws that limit our digital rights as well as privacy rights,’ he said on Ekho Moskvy radio station.