An oil-sponsored environmental organisation, the Russian Ecological Society (RES), asked the Ministry of Justice of the Russian Federation whether Greenpeace and WWF could be labelled as “foreign agents”. This could be done under the Federal Law “on non-governmental organisations” (NGOs) (“NGOs Law”). This would require those organisations to have expressed a negative public opinion of the Russian environmental policy. Previously, Greenpeace and WWF publicly criticised [in Russian] the NGOs Law for targeting environmental human rights defenders. Furthermore, Greenpeace and WWF were constantly challenging the Russian government [in Russian] for its negligence in the investigation of environmental crimes.
According to Sergey Tsyplenkov (Greenpeace's Executive Director in Russia), RES’ request was intended to ease the pressure on independent eco-NGOs, as the proposed bill aimed to simplify the requirements for environmental impact assessments in industrial construction. It is not the first time that the NGOs Law has been invoked against environmental organisations and human rights defenders to hinder their daily functioning. Although the government claims that the NGO's Law is required to counter threats to national security, it is apparent that it is actually being used to filter information that criticises the government, which is typical of authoritarian regimes.
CONSEQUENCES OF BEING LABELLED A FOREIGN AGENT
According to the 2012 NGOs Law [in Russian], any Russian NGO involved in politics and financed by overseas funds can be labelled as a foreign agent, which carries a negative connotation as a traitor or a spy. Additionally, in 2014, the Ministry of Justice of the Russian Federation got the authority to forcibly list any NGO as a foreign agent without a filing application. In 2017, another Federal Law was introduced containing the definition of a “Foreign Agent Media” [in Russian], particularly targeting independent mass media. In 2018, new amendments to the law entered into force regarding individuals [in Russian]. The foreign agent status also began being granted to NGOs that function without incorporation, or even without obtaining official registration.
Once being labelled a foreign agent, each organisation must add a statement on every public message advising the public that they are a foreign agent. They must also report quarterly and annually to the Ministry of Justice on their financial activity. Any violation of these requirements means the NGO’s website and media may be blocked. They could also be hit with large fines, and they could even be criminally liable for up to 5 years in prison. The result of the introduction of the NGOs Law was that 200 various NGOs were labelled foreign agents from 2013 to 2021.
In 2013, the Russian government completed the first wave of reviews of individuals and organisations under the NGOs Law. As a result, four environmental protection organisations received a prosecutor’s warning, which retrospectively accused them of receiving international grants for wildlife conservation and eco-educational projects. For instance, the Russian Bird Conservation Union [in Russian] was registered as a foreign agent for accepting a grant from the United Nations. The United Nations receives financial contributions from many countries, including Russia. This means that the Russian Bird Conservation Union was labelled a foreign agent, despite receiving a grant which is partially funded by Russia.
The writer compiled a list of the 45 eco-NGOs that have been reviewed by the General-Prosecutor of the Ministry of Justice as of April 2022. Seven of these NGOs received a warning, and the remaining 38 NGOs (including two individuals) were added to the foreign agent list. Once a NGO has received a foreign agent status, there are four possible futures for them. The first option is for the NGO to refuse foreign funding grants in the future, which means they will be taken off the list. Seven Russian NGOs have been removed from the list in this way. However, this approach is risky as it may decrease the amount of donations that the NGO receives from Russian sources, which then threatens the NGO’s existence. The second option is that the NGO will be sanctioned with fines and conduct activities as a “foreign agent” (there are 6 eco-NGOs, including a criminally prosecuted one operating remotely – "Ecodefence!”). The third outcome is that a NGO will have to go into liquidation, and to date, 18 Russian NGOs have shut-down as a result of being labelled a foreign agent. Finally, the fourth option is to liquidate the old organisation and create a new one under another name, which seven eco-NGOs have done successfully.
LEGAL CHALLENGE TO THE NGO LAW
In 2013, Vladimir Lukin, a Commissioner for Human Rights in Russia, together with various NGOs (including an environmental NGO), initiated proceedings in the Constitutional Court, claiming that the NGOs Law does not comply with the Constitution of the Russian Federation [in Russian]. The applicants argued that the NGOs Law was inconsistent with the articles of the Russian Constitution, which prohibit discrimination and humiliation of personal dignity and protect the right to freedom of speech, freedom of association, and availability of legal remedies. The applicants highlighted that being labelled a foreign agent resulted in discrimination, stigmatisation, and disproportionate sanctions.
On 8 April 2014, the Constitutional Court ruled on the NGOs Law. It stated that being labelled a foreign agent does not result in discrimination or stigma of NGOs or their members. The Court clarified that the law only applies to NGOs that receive foreign funding and participate in political decision-making. However, since the court’s verdict, there have been several cases before the Prosecutor-General and regional courts which did not follow the decision.
APPLICATION OF THE NGO LAW
The Constitutional Court ruled on the definition of “political activity”, stating that the individual political activity of the NGO’s members cannot be attributed to the NGO itself. However, several eco-NGOs received foreign agent status after the Constitutional Court’s ruling only because of the participation of their members in environmental protests. Firstly, the NGO “Friends of the Siberian Forests” [in Russian] was labelled a foreign agent in October 2015 because its members signed a collective appeal with other environmentalists to support Greenpeace activists against drilling on the Arctic shelf. Secondly, the NGO “Northern Conservation Coalition” [in Russian], whose members were seen among the protesters in Petrozavodsk against cutting down the Karelian forest, was also deemed to be a foreign agent in July 2015.
Additionally, the Court emphasised that the activities of NGOs in such areas as science, culture, health, and ecology cannot be considered political, even if they are aimed at influencing state bodies or policy-making. Despite the Court clarifying this as the legal position, several eco-NGOs were later listed as foreign agents because they collaborated with authorities on ecological projects or events. The NGO "Green World" became a foreign agent in July 2015 because it organised a trip for Rosatom employees (a state-owned nuclear energy company) and government officials to Norway, Finland, and Sweden to visit nuclear waste repositories and other facilities. Another NGO "ISAR-SIBERIA" [in Russian], together with the Department of Natural Resources, held a competition for environmental projects and later received the foreign agent status in August 2015. The NGO Environmental Center "Dront" [in Russian] was also labelled a foreign agent in May 2015 because its members assessed the draft law on amendments to the Code of Administrative Offences of the Russian Federation.
Moreover, several eco-NGOs were added to the foreign agents list only because they accepted international grants, and they were not engaged in any political activities. For instance, the Siberian Ecological Centre became a foreign agent in February 2015 for receiving a grant under the UN Development Program through the Ministry of Natural Resources of Russia. Further, ECO-LOGIKA [in Russian] was labelled a foreign agent in April 2015 for receiving funding from the National Endowment for Democracy Foundation USA, and from the Dutch Embassy from 2007 to 2013. Tuba kalyk [in Russian] also received the foreign agent label in February 2022 after it received a WWF grant to save the Altai forests from "black loggers".
IMPACT OF THE NGOS LAW ON ENVIRONMENTALISM
The existence of the Russian Constitution indicates it is a constitutional state. However, the lack of debates on the NGOs Law and its amendments represents a step away from constitutionalism. The current law holds eco-NGOs financially and criminally accountable for different opinions and for actions they have taken to try and enforce the right to a healthy environment. Many international organisations condemned the NGOs Law, such as the United Nations, the Council of Europe, the International Commission of Jurists [in Russian], the European Union, and many other international and regional human rights advocates. If the government continues to restrict how eco-NGOs operate, eventually we will see the deterioration of national environmental conditions in the long run. The most active organisations challenging environmental legislation and bringing to light ecological issues will be forced to liquidate, while the loyal and government-supported ones will exist formally without any significant contribution to environmental protection.
Daria is an eco-blogger and an environmental human rights defender covering stories on environmental conflicts and violations of the right to a healthy environment. She seeks to commence a professional career in this field.