Photo: Ivan Vodopyanov/Kommersant
My Novaya Gazeta colleague Leonid Nikitinsky tells in his column about the round table of the Moscow Helsinki Group, where those who advocate the complete abolition of the legislation on «foreign agents» and those who » proposes, in the window of opportunity that opens, the amendment of this legislation.”
And he comes to the conclusion that «wide public discussion creates a certain pressure, which can be taken into account in the presidential administration.»
Moreover, President Vladimir Putin, following a December meeting with members of the Human Rights Council, instructed to analyze the legislation on regulating the activities of NGOs and the media that perform the functions of a “foreign agent” and the practice of its application, and submit proposals to improve this legislation.
But I would not be in a hurry to rejoice at the Kremlin’s liberalism, thinking that they finally understood that it was necessary to end the shameful story with the regular recognition of journalists and public organizations as “foreign agents” (even those that are engaged in protecting the rights of the small peoples of Siberia).
Firstly, the repressive departments will be responsible for the analysis of legislation and law enforcement:
The Ministry of Justice (which includes foreign agents in the register) and the Prosecutor General’s Office (which includes “undesirable organizations” in the register — another label stuck on structures that the authorities do not like).
By the way, the President did not indicate in which direction it is necessary to «improve» — they may well offer to tighten it even more. Moreover, Putin does not get tired of repeating (including at a meeting with members of the HRC) that the Russian law on «foreign agents» is supposedly «much more liberal than the similar one in the United States.» Although anyone who receives information not only from Channel One, Vesti and Russia Today, it is not difficult to find out that, according to the American FARA law, only those who directly represent the interests of foreign governments, parties, organizations, companies or private persons (“foreign principals”) and acts on their orders, requests and directions. And not those who, as in Russia, received at least a cent from foreigners, for any purpose — from a fee for an article to rent for housing …
Secondly, after previous meetings with HRC members, the President also gave many instructions. For example, he ordered to prepare proposals for the creation of an archaeological museum-reserve on the Okhtinsky Cape in St. Petersburg. How did it end? The fact that, in order to please the interests of Gazprom, which wants to build up the cape, instead of a full-fledged archaeological reserve, it was proposed to create a museum in the Menshikov bastion of the Peter and Paul Fortress. And put under the knives of bulldozers almost all the unique archaeological sites discovered on the cape.
But there is an even more striking example: following the meeting of the President with members of the Human Rights Council in 2019, it was instructed to consider the creation of a unified database of victims of political repression and submit relevant proposals. But no one ever heard about the creation of this base. Instead, as Alexander Shishlov, my colleague from the Yabloko faction in the Legislative Assembly, and earlier the Commissioner for Human Rights in St. Petersburg, Alexander Shishlov, recalled at the MHG round table, Memorial*, which collected this data, was destroyed using the legislation on “foreign agents” ..
And now — about the essence of the dispute at the round table — about what to do.
There are two points of view, the supporters of each of which have their own arguments that deserve attention.
According to one — it was represented at the round table by A Just Russia and New People — we need to try to liberalize the legislation on “ foreign agents.» Eliminate its most flagrant shortcomings, leading, in particular, to the infringement of the rights of the media and journalists.
For example, to introduce a judicial (instead of the current extrajudicial) procedure for assigning the status of “foreign agents”. Introduce preliminary (before trial) notification of those who want to be classified as «foreign agents» and give them the opportunity to submit objections. To oblige the Ministry of Justice to prove in court that the «agent» does not just receive money from abroad, but at the same time fulfills direct instructions from the foreign «principal». Exclude “foreign agents” from the register if the organization has not received foreign funding for a certain period of time.
But there is another point of view — Yabloko (it was voiced at the round table by Alexander Shishlov) and OVD-Info *: completely delete the concept of «foreign agents» from the legislation. As having one and only goal: discrimination of objectionable, only for it the law was created. And therefore, referring to the “foreign agents” of the most famous media and NGOs, which are absolutely no one’s “agents”, and even more so foreign, is not a law enforcement error, but a completely conscious action that realizes the true goals of the authors of the law.
