CEDH · CASELAW;JUDGMENTS;CHAMBER;ENG — 22 octobre 2024

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .s5E1364CA { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .sC7D66CED { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:14pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .s34DFC730 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .s339D85E6 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:14pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s59272B2C { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:6pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s780F5245 { border:0.75pt solid #000000; clear:both } .s71604A6B { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:justify; padding-top:1pt; padding-right:4pt; padding-left:4pt; font-size:10pt } .s2D1013D { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:justify; padding-right:4pt; padding-left:4pt; font-size:10pt } .s54452357 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify; padding-right:4pt; padding-left:4pt; font-size:10pt } .s4009AD63 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:center; padding-right:4pt; padding-left:4pt; padding-bottom:1pt; font-size:8pt } .s10950C61 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify } .s598389FB { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; font-size:14pt } .sF5E1C6CF { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; text-decoration:underline; color:#ff0000 } .sFE10DC93 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center } .sE208486F { font-family:Arial; color:#ff0000 } .s598389F8 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; font-size:11pt } .s4ACA9207 { page-break-before:always; clear:both; mso-break-type:section-break } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .sB9D5CABB { width:28.35pt; display:inline-block } .s3AAE10DF { margin-top:14pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .s3CA22BA { font-family:Arial; text-transform:uppercase } .s6B505E72 { margin:0pt; padding-left:0pt } .s28F0D84C { margin-top:14pt; margin-left:11.67pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; padding-left:6.78pt; font-family:Arial; text-transform:uppercase } .s2058AE06 { font-variant:small-caps; text-transform:none } .sDA7B489D { margin-top:14pt; margin-left:15pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; padding-left:3.45pt; font-family:Arial; text-transform:uppercase } .s5C5C410E { margin-top:14pt; margin-left:18.34pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; padding-left:0.11pt; font-family:Arial; text-transform:uppercase } .sFBAE5208 { margin-left:11.67pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; padding-left:6.78pt; font-family:Arial } .s743F3A55 { margin-right:0pt; margin-left:0pt; padding-left:0pt } .sC725E288 { margin-left:7.05pt; margin-bottom:12pt; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-weight:bold } .s5E8F5A28 { margin-top:14pt; margin-left:25.5pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .sB25A0399 { margin-top:14pt; margin-left:24.84pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; padding-left:0.66pt; font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .s807BA660 { margin-top:14pt; margin-left:24.16pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; padding-left:1.34pt; font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .s879C130D { margin-left:7.05pt; margin-bottom:12pt; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-weight:bold; text-transform:none } .s9D48DD53 { margin-top:6pt; margin-left:21.25pt; margin-bottom:6pt; text-indent:7.1pt; text-align:justify; font-size:10pt } .s8B983D37 { text-transform:none } .s67CAFE05 { margin-top:14pt; margin-left:18.45pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-family:Arial; text-transform:uppercase } .sDECD9755 { margin-left:11.67pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; padding-left:6.78pt; font-family:Arial; text-transform:uppercase } .s3A692EA6 { margin-top:14pt; margin-bottom:6pt; text-align:center; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:10pt } .s2044A09A { margin-left:6.51pt; margin-bottom:6pt; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; padding-left:1.99pt; font-weight:normal; font-style:italic } .sF54F3725 { margin-top:0pt; margin-left:42.55pt; margin-bottom:6pt; text-indent:-17.05pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:10pt } .sDBC81028 { width:4.83pt; font:7pt 'Times New Roman'; display:inline-block } .s65DDED6B { margin-top:14pt; margin-left:42.55pt; margin-bottom:6pt; text-indent:-17.05pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:10pt } .s7AE800C3 { width:4.28pt; font:7pt 'Times New Roman'; display:inline-block } .sAE6FB95D { margin-top:14pt; margin-left:32.01pt; margin-bottom:6pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; padding-left:1.99pt; font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .sCD82236A { margin-top:14pt; margin-left:51.05pt; margin-bottom:6pt; text-indent:-17.05pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; line-height:113%; font-size:10pt } .s3970C00F { width:8.17pt; font:7pt 'Times New Roman'; display:inline-block } .s320E5A8E { width:5.95pt; font:7pt 'Times New Roman'; display:inline-block } .sD051EF8 { width:3.72pt; font:7pt 'Times New Roman'; display:inline-block } .s4196892D { width:3.17pt; font:7pt 'Times New Roman'; display:inline-block } .sC47DA4E2 { margin-top:14pt; margin-left:18.34pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; padding-left:1.51pt; font-family:Arial; text-transform:uppercase } .s7CAC83C { margin-top:14pt; margin-left:19.67pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; padding-left:0.18pt; font-family:Arial; text-transform:uppercase } .s7C22C014 { margin-top:14pt; margin-left:16.34pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; padding-left:2.11pt; font-family:Arial; text-transform:uppercase } .s448F0C15 { margin-top:14pt; margin-left:18pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-indent:-18pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .s74818F78 { margin-top:14pt; margin-bottom:3pt; text-align:justify; font-family:Arial; list-style-position:inside } .sE7B3A78A { width:1.99pt; font:7pt 'Times New Roman'; display:inline-block } .sFBC99493 { font-style:italic } .sD11CFAB7 { margin-top:14pt; margin-left:15.01pt; margin-bottom:3pt; text-align:justify; padding-left:1.99pt; font-family:Arial } .s51DFF5CF { margin-top:0pt; margin-left:34pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:-17pt; text-align:justify } .sE5BF05B1 { width:2.33pt; font:7pt 'Times New Roman'; display:inline-block } .s2D9C6089 { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s69DCC830 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .sC986E16F { font-family:Arial; color:#ffffff } .sB00DFE03 { width:22.87pt; display:inline-block } .s1B7C2278 { width:122.41pt; display:inline-block } .s5D826FD4 { width:25.88pt; display:inline-block } .s1B61D60 { width:156.43pt; display:inline-block } .s7ED160F0 { text-decoration:none } .s33165EBA { font-family:Arial; font-size:8pt; vertical-align:super; color:#0069d6 } .s2571CC02 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify; font-size:14pt } .s4B4B41EE { font-family:Arial; font-size:12pt } .s16DC539 { font-family:Arial; font-size:12pt; font-style:italic } .s33F27DF4 { margin-right:7.05pt; margin-left:7.05pt; border:0.75pt solid #949494; border-collapse:collapse; } .sD271F6F6 { border-right:0.75pt solid #949494; border-bottom:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .s5FFF0A7F { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:9pt } .sEECE831 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; color:#474747 } .s3E08F9CA { border-right:0.75pt solid #949494; border-left:0.75pt solid #949494; border-bottom:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .sE3DA80B3 { font-family:Arial; font-size:6pt; font-weight:bold; vertical-align:super; color:#474747 } .sC54D2024 { border-left:0.75pt solid #949494; border-bottom:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .sDF42CB81 { border-top:0.75pt solid #949494; border-right:0.75pt solid #949494; border-bottom:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .sE8934522 { border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s1418C143 { border-top:0.75pt solid #949494; border-right:0.75pt solid #949494; border-bottom:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt 1.02pt 5.4pt; vertical-align:middle } .sD7287D91 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; font-size:9pt } .sECD123DC { font-family:Arial; font-size:6pt; vertical-align:super; color:#000000 } .s5AE0EB7 { border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:middle } .sE0216679 { border-top:0.75pt solid #949494; border-left:0.75pt solid #949494; border-bottom:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:middle } .sE562DE71 { border-top:0.75pt solid #949494; border-bottom:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt 1.02pt 5.4pt; vertical-align:middle; background-color:#e7e6e6 } .s3DE46EBF { border-top:0.75pt solid #949494; border-right:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s6E2BCD0B { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; page-break-after:avoid; widows:0; orphans:0; font-size:9pt } .sD3B88E32 { border-top:0.75pt solid #949494; border-right:0.75pt solid #949494; border-left:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .sCC5A0B9C { border-top:0.75pt solid #949494; border-right:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt 1.02pt 5.4pt; vertical-align:middle } .sFBFAA905 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; page-break-after:avoid; widows:0; orphans:0; font-size:9pt } .sE3A39478 { border-top:0.75pt solid #949494; border-right:0.75pt solid #949494; border-left:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:middle } .sD86556 { border-top:0.75pt solid #949494; border-left:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:middle } .sF6A12959 { width:33%; height:1px; text-align:left } .sF9FEBB8B { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:21.25pt; text-align:justify; font-size:10pt } .s653E6C45 { font-family:Arial; font-size:6.67pt; vertical-align:super; color:#0069d6 } .s61D97F80 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:21.25pt; text-align:justify } .s4B8D41EE { font-family:Arial; font-size:10pt } .s2CE7C1B9 { font-family:Arial; font-size:10pt; font-style:italic } .sF8D072D8 { font-family:Arial; font-size:10pt; background-color:#ffffff } .s2EB42ED2 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:10pt } .sB343B0AA { font-family:Arial; font-size:6.67pt; vertical-align:super; color:#000000 } THIRD SECTION CASE OF KOBALIYA AND OTHERS v.   RUSSIA (Applications nos.   39446/16 and 106 others – see appended list)   JUDGMENT   Art 10 and Art 11 • Freedom of expression • Freedom of association • Expanded application of "foreign agents" legislation to media organisations, journalists, activists and other individuals • Vague and unpredictable criteria for "foreign agent" designation leading to arbitrary application • Absence of “relevant and sufficient” reasons for designating applicants as “foreign agents” • Lack of “pressing social need” for burdensome labelling requirements on all public communications • Stigmatising effect of mandatory “foreign agent” label chilling public discourse and civic engagement • Disproportionate and excessive fines for non-compliance with labelling rules • Forced dissolution of NGOs as extreme sanction for alleged violations • Expanded "foreign agents" framework incompatible with pluralism and "not necessary in a democratic society" Art 8 • Private life • Multiple and unjustified repercussions on individual applicants’ private and professional life as a result of their designation as “foreign agents” • Publication of applicants’ personal data on Ministry of Justice website not serving any public interest • Obligation to submit frequent and detailed reports on personal income and expenses exceeding what could be considered necessary to ensure transparency • Broad restrictions on the exercise of certain professions including teaching minors and writing for the youth unjustified   Prepared by the Registry. Does not bind the Court.   STRASBOURG 22   October 2024   FINAL   22/01/2025   This judgment has become final under Article 44 § 2 of the Convention. It may be subject to editorial revision. In the case of Kobaliya and Others v.   Russia, The European Court of Human Rights (Third Section), sitting as a Chamber composed of:   Pere Pastor Vilanova , President ,   Jolien Schukking,   Georgios A. Serghides,   Peeter Roosma,   Ioannis Ktistakis,   Oddný Mjöll Arnardóttir,   Diana Kovatcheva , judges , and Olga Chernishova, Deputy Section Registrar, Having regard to: the one hundred and seven applications against the Russian Federation lodged with the Court under Article   34 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (“the Convention”) by individual applicants and applicant organisations (“the applicants”) on the dates listed in the appendix; the decision to grant interim measures under Rule   39 of the Rules of Court in applications nos.   49654/20 and 53756/20 (see Ecodefence and Others v.   Russia , nos.   9988/13 and 60 others, §   11, 14   June 2022); the decision to give priority under Rule   41 of the Rules of Court to applications nos.   27874/19, 49654/20, 53756/20 and 19659/21; the decision to give notice to the Russian Government (“the Government”) of the complaints concerning the applicants’ designation as “foreign agents”, the applicable additional requirements, the ensuing restrictions on the individual applicants’ private life and the related issues, and to declare inadmissible the remainder of the applications; the observations submitted by the parties; the comments submitted by the Latvian Government under Article   36 §   1 of the Convention in applications nos.   52486/22 and 33425/23; the comments submitted by ARTICLE 19, who was granted leave to intervene by the President of the Section in applications nos.   27874/19 and 19659/21 (Article   36 §   2 of the Convention); the decision by the President of the Section to appoint one of the elected judges of the Court to sit as an ad hoc judge, applying by analogy Rule   29 §   2 of the Rules of the Court (see Kutayev v.   Russia , no.   17912/15, §§   5-8, 24   January 2023); Having deliberated in private on 1   October 2024, Delivers the following judgment, which was adopted on that date: INTRODUCTION 1.     The present case concerns restrictions on the rights of Russian non ‑ governmental organisations (NGOs), media organisations and individuals designated as “foreign agents”. The applicants complain that the statutory requirements introduced by the “foreign agent” legislation and the practice of its application have constituted restrictions on their freedom of expression and association, which are impermissible under Articles   10 and   11 of the Convention. They further allege that these measures have violated the individual applicants’ right to respect for private life under Article   8 and that all applicants have been discriminated against and subjected to restrictions for purposes other than those prescribed in the Convention, in breach of Articles   14 and 18 of the Convention. THE FACTS 2 .     The facts of the case may be summarised as follows. “Foreign-agent” NGO s 3.     In 2012, a series of amendments to Russian legislation concerning NGOs was enacted. They required Russian NGOs which were deemed to engage in “political activity” and receive “foreign funding” to seek registration as “foreign agents”, under the threat of administrative and criminal sanctions. Additionally, these NGOs were required to label their publications with a notice indicating that they originated from a “foreign ‑ agent” organisation, to publish information regarding their activities online and to comply with more extensive accounting and reporting obligations (see, for details, Ecodefence and Others , cited above, §§   15-35). 4.     The first group of applicants comprises civil society organisations that were fined under Article   19.34(1) of the Code of Administrative Offences (“the CAO”) for failing to register as a “foreign agent” or to apply for inclusion in the register of foreign agents. These applicants include, among others, Esvero Partnership for Support of Public-Health Initiatives (no.   14380/18), Kolsky Environmental Centre (no.   15236/18), Silver Taiga Sustainable Development Foundation (no.   21409/18), Russian Lorry Drivers Association (no.   4100/19), Vybor Association (no.   16148/19) (see the appendix for details). In certain cases, the directors or chairpersons of these organisations were also personally fined under the same provision, such as the domestic-violence organisation Nasiliyu.Net and its director, Anna Valeryevna Rivina (no.   12583/22), and an HIV-service organisation We Are against AIDS and its chairperson, Yuliya Burdina (no.   31314/22). The fines were imposed notwithstanding the organisations’ arguments that their activities did not amount to “political activity” as defined by the Foreign Agents Act or that they had undertaken reasonable measures to avoid receiving foreign funding (see, for instance, the case of independent election monitor League of Voters Foundation, no.   49411/21). 5.     The second group of applicants comprises NGOs and their staff members who were fined pursuant to Article   19.34(2) of the CAO for alleged violations of the “labelling requirements”, which mandate that “foreign ‑ agent” NGOs must indicate that any published or shared content originates from a “foreign-agent” organisation. For example, Yuriy Shirokov (no.   41535/17) was fined 50,000 roubles (RUB, approximately 750   euros   (EUR)) for sharing two reports from an international environmental conference on an ecology website without the “foreign agent” label. Man and Law Regional Association (no.   18995/17), along with Woman’s World (no.   14412/20) and its director, were fined RUB   150,000 (approximately EUR   4,000) for posts on their directors’ private blogs and social media accounts. Andrey Rudomakha (no.   51487/18), the coordinator of North Caucasus Environment Watch, was fined RUB   100,000 (approximately EUR   1,500) for publishing an unlabelled obituary. Yekaterinburg Memorial (no.   19160/21) was fined RUB   300,000 (approximately EUR   3,300) for allegedly failing to label banners and information stands at a public event commemorating victims of political repression. International Memorial (no.   49654/20) and its chairman were fined RUB   500,000 and RUB   300,000 (approximately EUR   6,400 and EUR   3,800), respectively, for distributing books without the “foreign agent” notice at a book fair. 6.     Repeated or accumulating violations of the labelling requirements resulted in larger fines. International Memorial received nine fines totalling RUB   2,800,000 for unlabelled social media posts, while its chairman was fined an additional total of RUB   900,000 for the same violations. Memorial Human Rights Centre (no.   53756/20) was fined a total of RUB   1,200,000 in four separate cases for unlabelled accounts on various online platforms and its chairman, Aleksandr Cherkasov, was fined an additional total of RUB   400,000 for the same violations. The largest fines were imposed on Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty (“RFL/RE”, no.   19659/21) and its director general, who were fined a total of RUB   948.8 million (approximately EUR   16   million) in 1,044 cases for violations of labelling requirements. 7.     The domestic authorities invoked alleged violations of labelling requirements to seek and obtain the dissolution of the applicant NGOs. On 28   and 29   December 2021 the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation and the Moscow City Court, respectively, granted the prosecutor’s applications for the liquidation of the applicant organisations, International Memorial and the Memorial Human Rights Centre, along with their field offices. The courts found that the organisations had committed “gross and repetitive” violations of the “foreign agent” labelling requirements. By “concealing [their] foreign ‑ agent status,” the organisations had failed to ensure the “transparency of [their] activities,” hindered “proper public scrutiny of [their activities],” and infringed upon “the right of citizens to receive reliable information about [their] activities,” thereby flagrantly violating Russian law (see Ecodefence and Others , cited above, §§   10-14). Alleged non-compliance with labelling requirements was also cited among the reasons for the liquidation of other applicant organisations, including the Movement For Human Rights (no.   64060/19) and the League of Voters Foundation (no.   49411/21). “Foreign-agent” media organisations 8.     In 2017 a new category of “foreign-agent media organisations” was created, granting the Ministry of Justice the authority to designate any foreign media organisation as a “foreign agent” if it has received funds or other assets from any foreign entity or national, directly or via another Russian entity. Media organisations designated as “foreign agents” were subject to the same requirements as NGOs designated as “foreign agents”, including additional reporting and labelling requirements. The first organisations to be included in the new register were Voice of America, the Current Time television channel and RFE/RL (no.   19659/21) and six of its media projects. 9.     This was followed by a new amendment in 2019 that allowed for the designation of individuals, such as journalists, bloggers, content creators, human rights campaigners and opinion makers, as “foreign agents” if they distributed materials from “foreign agent” media organisations or participated in their creation while receiving funds or assets from abroad or from the “foreign agent” media organisations themselves. Individuals designated as “foreign agents” were required to label all disseminated messages and materials, including on personal social media, with a “foreign-agent” notice. Additionally, they were required to submit reports on their activities and financial expenditure reports, including personal expenses, to the Ministry of Justice. 10.     The first individuals to be designated as “foreign agents” were journalists involved with RFE/RL and its media projects: Lyudmila Savitskaya (no.   47149/22), Denis Kamalyagin (no.   57022/22) and Sergey Markelov (no.   47602/22). The Ministry of Justice cited their receipt of funds from RFE/RL, their involvement with media projects already labelled as “foreign agents” and their activities on social media as grounds for their designation. Furthermore, Darya Apakhonchich (no.   46439/22), a women’s rights advocate, was designated for her feminist activism, along with Lev Ponomarev (no.   64060/19), a prominent human rights defender and executive director of the Movement for Human Rights, which was fined and ultimately liquidated for alleged breaches of the “foreign-agent” legislation. 11.     After the grounds for designating individuals as “foreign agents” were further expanded in late 2020 to include not only media publications but also political activities, the Ministry of Justice, over the following two years, added over one hundred individuals to the register of “foreign agents”. This included more than thirty applicant journalists, editors and media managers, many of whom were employed by RFE/RL media projects or engaged in political or investigative journalism: Yelizaveta Mayetnaya (no.   55462/22), Ilya Rozhdestvenskiy (no.   56066/22), Olga Churakova, Yuliya Apukhtina, Roman Badanin, Sofya Groysman, Yuliya Lukyanova, Mikhail Rubin, Daniil Sotnikov and Mariya Zheleznova (no.   10368/23), Dmitriy Velikovskiy (no.   41296/22), Yelizaveta Surnacheva (no.   19848/23), Roman Perl (no.   25731/23), among others; see the appendix for further details. The grounds for their designation included receiving grants or salary from “foreign agent” media organisations such as RFE/RL, social media activity aimed at disseminating information to wide audiences and alleged instances of sharing materials from, and participating in creating content for, “foreign agent” media outlets. 12.     Another group of applicants designated as “foreign agents” included independent election monitors and regional coordinators of the Golos movement: Artem Vazhenkov (no.   26751/22), Vladimir Zhilinskiy (no.   34158/22), Veronika Katkova (no.   34737/22), Inna Karezina (no.   41298/22), Mikhail Tikhonov (no.   19395/23), Aleksandr Grezev (no.   19423/23), Aleksandr Lyutov (no.   21786/23), Lyudmila Kuzmina (no.   22965/23), Yekaterina Kiltau (no.   28961/23), Vladimir Zhilkin (no.   33050/23), Vladimir Yegorov (no.   35789/23) and Vitaliy Kovin (no.   578/24). Their activities in election monitoring, blogging, media appearances and social media presence were deemed “political activities”. The Ministry of Justice also noted instances where they shared or participated in the creation of content for media outlets already designated as “foreign agents”. 13.     The other designated applicants included lawyers Galina Arapova (no.   33592/23), Ivan Pavlov (no.   36815/22), Valeriya Vetoshkina (no.   31356/23) and Viktor Vorobyev (no.   19172/23); women’s rights campaigner Veronika Nikulshina (no.   30434/23); and prominent individuals with a significant social media presence, such as contemporary art collector Marat Gelman (no.   54396/22), political scientist Yekaterina Shulman (no.   19394/23), playwright and satirist Viktor Shenderovich (no.   28810/23) and interviewer Yuriy Dud (no.   40243/23), among others. Immediately after their designation, many of them were issued fines for non-compliance with the labelling requirements. 14.     Following the enactment of the requirement that any public mention of “foreign agent” organisations or individuals be accompanied by an indication of their “foreign agent” status, three applicants – Galina Chudinova (no.   36373/22), Sergey Mameyev (no.   40319/22) and OOO Memo (no.   49822/22) – were fined for either mentioning “foreign agent” organisations without such indication or reposting their materials. Codification and extension of “foreign-agent” restrictions 15.     In 2022 a new law on control over the activities of persons under foreign influence established a comprehensive framework for defining and regulating “foreign agents” in Russia. This framework applied to all previously designated entities, including non-governmental organisations, media organisations and individuals, encompassing all the applicants so designated. The law dispensed with the previously used official term of an organisation or individual “performing the functions of a foreign agent”, replacing it with the term “foreign agent”. 16.     The law expanded the scope of limitations placed on “foreign agents” concerning their ability to participate in various aspects of public, professional and economic life. Firstly, it restricted their political and civic participation by banning them from holding any public office, whether in an elected, appointed or advisory role, supporting any candidates or campaigns and financing or organising any public events. Secondly, it imposed professional and occupational restrictions, prohibiting them from operating critical information infrastructure, accessing jobs involving State secrets, teaching in State and municipal educational institutions or providing any instruction to minors. Books and publications by “foreign agents” should be sold in opaque packaging marked with “18+” age restriction label, owing to a prohibition on producing information products for minors. In addition to the pre-existing ineligibility for State financial and other property support, the law has excluded “foreign agents” from participating in public procurement and has introduced a ban applicable to all entities under Russian jurisdiction, both public and private, on placing advertising in media products created by “foreign agents”, such as their YouTube channels. RELEVANT LEGAL FRAMEWORK AND MATERIAL DOMESTIC LAW “Foreign-agent” NGOs 17.     For the original version of the “foreign-agent” legislation applicable to NGOs and its initial evolution, see Ecodefence and Others v.   Russi a , nos.   9988/13 and 60 others, §§   15-40, 14   June 2022. “Foreign-agent” media organisations and individuals 18.     Federal Law no.   327-FZ of 25   November 2017 amended section   6 of the Mass Media Act, no.   2124-1 of 27   December 1991, by introducing the definition of a “foreign media organisation performing the functions of a foreign agent”. A “foreign-agent” media organisation was defined as a foreign entity, whether incorporated or not, that “distributed printed, audio, audiovisual or other communications and materials intended for an unrestricted audience” and received funding or assets from foreign sources, either directly or through Russian entities. “Foreign-agent” media organisations were subjected to the same obligations as “foreign-agent” NGOs. 19.     Federal Law no.   426-FZ of 2   December 2019 further amended section   6 of the Mass Media Act by expanding the definition of “foreign ‑ agent” media organisations to include individuals (“natural persons”, физические лица ). Additionally, it introduced a new ground for the “foreign-agent” designation: individuals or Russian legal entities could be designated as “foreign agents” if they were involved in the creation or dissemination of publications produced or distributed by “foreign media” organisations or by Russian legal entities established by “foreign-agent” media organisations. The law also added a new section, section   25.1, which requires designated foreign entities and individuals to establish a Russian legal entity within one month of their designation; this entity would be entered into the “foreign agents” register and must comply with the obligations applicable to a “foreign agent” NGO. Furthermore, all materials distributed by a “foreign-agent” media organisation or its Russian legal entity must be clearly labelled as originating from a “foreign agent” and any distribution without the required labelling is prohibited. 20.     On 23   September 2020 the Russian telecoms and media regulator Roskomnadzor issued Order No. 124, establishing requirements for labelling materials produced or disseminated by “foreign agent” media organisations. The Order mandated that all such materials were to be accompanied by a text or audio notice indicating that “the content was created and/or disseminated by a foreign media outlet or Russian legal entity performing the functions of a foreign agent”. The notice was to be prominently displayed, using the font size being twice that of the main text for print and online materials and covering at least twenty per cent of the image for audiovisual content. It had to be placed at the beginning of each message or material, and for audio and audiovisual content it also had to appear after any interruptions, lasting at least fifteen seconds. “Foreign-agent” unregistered associations and individuals 21.     Federal Law no.   481-FZ of 30   December 2020 included unregistered public associations that engaged in “political activities” and received money from “foreign sources” alongside “foreign-agent” NGOs (section   3, adding new section   29.1 to the Public Associations Act, no.   82-FZ of 19   May 1995). The law also extended the regulations applicable to individual media professionals to any individual, regardless of nationality, who engages in political activity in Russia or deliberately collects information concerning its military capabilities and receives money or assets from foreign sources (section   5, adding new section   2.1 to the Federal Law on Measures in respect of Persons Involved in a Breach of Fundamental Human Rights and Freedoms, Rights and the Freedoms of Nationals of the Russian Federation, no.   272-FZ of 28   December 2012). Individuals designated as “foreign agents” were required to submit a report on their activities and personal expenditure every six months and to label all their communications with the “foreign agent” notice. 22.     The law further amended section   4 of the Mass Media Act to prohibit mass media and internet publications from mentioning any “foreign-agent” organisations, entities or individuals or from sharing their materials, without including a notice indicating their “foreign-agent” status (section   1). Foreign Agents Act of 2022 23.     Federal Law No. 255-FZ of 14   July 2022 repealed and replaced all previous “foreign agent” legislation. 24.     A “foreign agent” was defined as any Russian or foreign entity, whether incorporated or not, or any Russian or foreign natural person who “has received support and/or is under foreign influence in other forms” and has engaged, in particular, in “political activities, the purposeful collection of information in the field of military and military-technical capabilities of the Russian Federation, the creation and dissemination of any information intended for an unrestricted audience or participation in the creation of such information”. Forms of political activity included, among others, participation in public events, making appeals to public authorities, conducting opinion polls and expressing opinions about the decisions and policies of the authorities (sections   1 and 4). 25.     “Foreign influence” was defined to include “support from a foreign source”, which could encompass the provision of money, assets or assistance in organisational matters, methodological guidance, scientific and technical support and “the exercise of influence, including by means of coercion, persuasion and other methods” (section   2). 26.     “Foreign sources” were defined to include foreign States and their bodies, international and foreign organisations, foreign nationals and stateless persons, unincorporated foreign entities, Russian entities and individuals receiving money or other assets from such foreign sources, Russian entities with foreign beneficiary owners and “any person under the influence” of the aforementioned entities or individuals (section   3). 27.     The Ministry of Justice maintains a public register of “foreign agents”. The information from the register concerning “foreign agent” individuals that was to be published online included their full names, pseudonyms, previous names, dates of birth, taxpayer identification numbers, social security numbers and the grounds for their inclusion in the register (section   5; Order of the Government of the Russian Federation no.   3417-r of 10   November 2022, as amended on 18   May 2024; and Order of the Ministry of Justice no.   307 of 29   November 2022). 28.     “Foreign agents” were required to disclose their status when engaging in political activities, including when addressing public authorities, educational institutions or other organisations. All materials produced or disseminated by “foreign agents” or their founders, members or participants, whether through mass media or online, must be labelled as originating from a “foreign agent” (section   9, paragraphs   1 to 5). The label must indicate that “this material (information) is produced, disseminated, and/or directed by foreign agent [name] or relates to the activities of foreign agent [name]” (Order of the Government of the Russian Federation no.   2108 of 22   November 2022). 29.     “Foreign agents” were prohibited from holding any public office, whether elected or appointed, from employment in civil service and from participating in election commissions. The mandates of individuals who were designated as “foreign agents” after being elected to public office were to be terminated within 180 days of such designation (paragraph   1). “Foreign agents” may not participate in public commissions or committees, advisory, consultative or expert boards established under public authorities (paragraph   3), nominate candidates to prison monitoring boards (paragraph   4), conduct independent anti-corruption assessments of draft regulations (paragraph   5), support any election campaigns or make political donations (paragraphs   6 and 8), and organise or finance public events and demonstrations (paragraph   7). 30.     “Foreign agents” were prohibited from educating minors or holding positions in State or municipal educational institutions (paragraph   9). They were also prohibited from producing any content intended for minors (paragraph   10). 31.     “Foreign agents” were made ineligible to participate in public procurement or receive any State support, financial or otherwise, including arts grants (paragraphs   11 and 12). Deposits held by “foreign-agent” entities became not insurable (paragraph   13); they were not eligible for simplified tax filing or accounting (paragraphs   14 and 15) and they could not invest in, or operate, critical information infrastructure (paragraphs   16 and 17). They were also specifically prohibited from providing expert opinions on environmental issues or engaging in environment impact assessment (paragraphs   18 and 19). Russian entities were prohibited from advertising in “foreign agent” media organisations (paragraph   20). 32 .     Violations of these rules by “foreign agents” carried criminal and administrative-offence liability, as well as the potential liquidation of a legal entity for repeated breaches, the possibility of an injunction to cease specific activities or the blocking of access to the “foreign-agent” web resources (section   12). Code of Administrative Offences 33 .     Article   19.34, in its original wording, provided for fines of RUB   100,000 to 300,000 for officials and RUB   300,000 to 500,000 for legal entities for carrying out activities as a “foreign agent” non-commercial organisation without being included in the register of “foreign agents” (paragraph   1) and for failing to label materials produced, distributed or submitted to State bodies, local authorities, educational or other organisations as originating from a “foreign agent” organisation (paragraph   2). Article   19.7.5-2 provided for a warning or fines of RUB   10,000 to 30,000 for officials and RUB   100,000 to 300,000 for legal entities for failing to submit, submitting late or submitting incomplete or distorted information required from a “foreign agent” organisation. 34.     Article   19.34.1, introduced on 16   December 2019, provided for fines of RUB   10,000 for individuals, RUB   50,000 for officials and RUB   500,000 for legal entities for failing to comply with the legal requirements applicable to “foreign agent” media (paragraph   1), committing repeated violations of those requirements (paragraph   2) and committing “gross violations” of the requirements applicable to “foreign agent” media organisations (paragraph   3). For repeat offences, the fines were increased to RUB   50,000 for individuals, RUB   100,000 for officials and RUB   1,000,000 for legal entities (paragraph   2). In cases of a “gross violation”, legal entities were liable to a fine of RUB   5,000,000 (paragraph   3). 35 .     The new Article   19.34, which replaced the above provisions from 29   December 2022, provided for fines of RUB   30,000 to 50,000 for individuals, RUB   100,000 to 300,000 for officials and RUB   300,000 to 500,000 for legal entities for carrying out activities as a “foreign agent” without being included in the register (paragraph   1); failing to submit, submitting late or submitting incomplete or distorted information required by the “foreign agent” legislation (paragraph   2); failing to disclose “foreign agent” status as required by law (paragraph   3); failing to label materials or information produced or disseminated by a “foreign agent” as originating from a “foreign agent” (paragraph   4); violating reporting requirements (paragraph   6); failing to establish a Russian legal entity as required (paragraph   7); and violating other restrictions related to “foreign agent” status (paragraph   8). 36.     Article   13.15, in paragraphs   2.1 to 2.4, which were introduced on 24   February 2021 and subsequently merged into paragraph   2.1, provided for fines of RUB   2,000 to 2,500 for individuals, RUB   4,000 to 5,000 for officials and RUB   40,000 to 50,000 for legal entities, for disseminating information about “foreign agents” or materials produced by “foreign agents” without indicating their status as a “foreign agent”. Criminal Code 37.     Article   330.1 of the Criminal Code (with latest changes of 29   December 2022) provides for criminal sanctions, including fines of up to RUB   300,000, compulsory work, correctional labour and deprivation of liberty for up to two years, that may be imposed for the repeated commission – more than twice within one year – of any “foreign-agent” offences established under Article   19.34 of the CAO. Failure to comply with obligations concerning registration as “foreign agent” by a person who collects data relating to “the field of military, military-technical activity of the Russian Federation that at their reception by foreign sources could be used against safety of the Russian Federation” is punishable by fines up to RUB   300,000, compulsory labour or imprisonment for up to five years. COUNCIL OF EUROPE Committee of Ministers 38 .     Recommendation CM/Rec(2007)14 of the Committee of Ministers to member states on the legal status of non-governmental organisations in Europe, taking into account “the essential contribution made by non ‑ governmental organisations (NGOs) to the development and realisation of democracy and human rights, in particular through the promotion of public awareness, participation in public life and securing the transparency and accountability of public authorities” and bearing in mind that “the existence of many NGOs is a manifestation of the right of their members to freedom of association under Article   11 of the Convention and of their host country’s adherence to principles of democratic pluralism”, recommends to the governments of member States that “NGOs should enjoy the right to freedom of expression and all other universally and regionally guaranteed rights and freedoms applicable to them” and that “the legal and fiscal framework applicable to NGOs should encourage their establishment and continued operation”. Venice Commission 39.     The European Commission for Democracy through Law (Venice Commission) issued two opinions on Russia’s “foreign agents” legislation, in 2014 and 2021. For a summary of the 2014 Opinion concerning the original legislation, see Ecodefence and Others , cited above, §   50. 40 .     The relevant parts of the Opinion on the Compatibility with international human rights standards of a series of Bills introduced to the Russian State Duma between 10 and 23   November 2020, to amend laws affecting “foreign agents”, CDL-AD(2021)027-e, adopted on 2-3   July 2021, read as follows: “50.     ... the legal definition of a ‘foreign agent’ is not sufficiently narrowly tailored to serve as a basis for restrictive measures that would be ‘necessary in a democratic society’ in order to achieve the aims of transparency or national security. With regard to the aim of transparency, the designation is more likely to undermine transparency by stigmatising entities and individuals and misleading the public about their relationship to foreign entities. With regard to the aim of national security, the designation is likely to provoke a climate of distrust, fear and hostility, instead of countering any real threat. Moreover, the reasonable fear of being designated a ‘foreign agent’ will presumably have a chilling effect on Russian civil society by dissuading entities and individuals from engaging in political activities broadly understood. ... Specifically, the notions of ‘political activities’ and ‘foreign support’ should be abandoned in favour of indicators that would reliably track objectionable forms of foreign interference. Alternatively, the Commission recommends repealing the legislation altogether ... 58.     More generally, the expansion of the ‘foreign agent’ designation to unregistered public associations and a larger subset of individuals is more likely to increase the risk of entities and individuals becoming ‘foreign agents’ inadvertently or against their will, while further decreasing the reliability with which the designation would indicate the existence of problematic foreign influence. The Venice Commission considers the expansion of the definition of ‘foreign agents’ to be in violation of the principle of proportionality and necessity in a democratic society. It therefore recommends repealing the extension of the ‘foreign agent’ designation to unregistered public associations and a larger subset of individuals. 59.     The lack of legal certainty and proportionality with regard to the scope of the ‘foreign agent’ designation is particularly problematic since the entire body of the ‘foreign agent’ legislation – including expansive obligations, restrictions and sanctions – is built upon it. Unless the prior and new breaches of the principles of legality and proportionality that stem from the current definition of the ‘foreign agent’ designation can be remedied, not only the designation but the entire body of ‘foreign agent’ legislation should be repealed ... 69.     Given that the ‘foreign agent’ designation is stigmatising and misleading, requiring entities and individuals to attach that label to the materials they produce as part of a ‘political activity’ cannot be considered ‘necessary in a democratic society’ and is consequently disproportionate. The same conclusion applies to the fact that founders, members, leaders or staff of designated unregistered public associations must label all materials they produce or distribute as part of a ‘political activity’ with the stigmatising ‘foreign agent’ label, regardless of whether they were created as part of their work with the unregistered public association. The Venice Commission reiterates that public disclosure requirements are only ‘justified in cases of political parties and entities formally engaging in remunerated lobbying activities.’ Therefore, the Commission recommends repealing all public disclosure requirements on designated ‘foreign agents’ that go beyond these specific cases.” Comparative legislation referred to by the parties 41 .     The applicants referred, by way of example, to the National Security Act 2023 (c. 32) (Part 4, Foreign Activities and Foreign Influence Registration Scheme). The Act introduced a registration scheme mandating individuals and entities within the United Kingdom to register “foreign activity arrangements” where such activities (or arrangements for such activities) are directed by a “foreign power” (Section 65). According to the UK Home Office Policy Paper Foreign Influence Registration Scheme factsheet, as updated on 19   August 2024 (“the Policy Paper”), “direction” is understood as an order or instruction to act where a power relationship exists between