It outlaws “the spreading of information which shows blatant disrespect for society, the government, official state symbols of the Russian Federation, the Constitution of the Russian Federation or authorities exercising governmental authority in the Russian Federation”. Free thinking and criticism can result in blocking of the resource and fines lower than those for fake news, up to 100,000 roubles (approx. $1500) initially; but particularly zealous members of the public who do not quieten down after the first occasion and go on criticising the authorities can be fined up to 300,000 roubles (approx. $4500) or be placed in administrative detention for up to 15 days.[4]
The ban not only applies to editorial staff of media agencies but also affects any active internet user. It therefore potentially affects not only journalists, but any online member of the public. And now, just over three months after the laws entered into force, we can already see how they have begun to be applied, for example to ordinary internet users who have published posts critical of President Putin on social networks. The first internet purge began with publications about the head of state.
The amendments provided by the Federal Law of 18 March 2019 No. 30-FZ “On Amendments to the Federal Law ‘On Information, Information Technologies and Information Protection’” concerns an even more interesting range of issues and, in essence, restricts people’s constitutional right to express their opinions about the authorities (paragraphs 4 and 5, Article 29 of the Constitution). This is unprecedented. A number of protected entities which were not previously protected by law have appeared in the legislation. For example, there were previously no penalties for criticising the Russian Federal Constitution or authorities exercising governmental power – neither individual officials, nor entire departments. The latter include all federal and regional government agencies, probably their departments, the prosecution service, the courts, and so on. The definition in the new law does not yet extend to local authorities, but it is not impossible that a broad interpretation which will also punish criticism of local authorities will be applied later on.
The way in which the prohibited information is defined is itself rather unclear, so it is completely impossible to know how the Prosecutor-General who will personally, by law, take decisions on blocking) will decide that an utterance shows blatant disrespect towards, for example, the Constitution. First of all, he is not a linguist who could take decisions on linguistic expressions. Secondly, even in the legal part of this decision, there is not just a loophole, but a gaping hole which allows virtually any criticism to be arbitrarily blocked using excessively vague legal criteria, if they can be categorised as such at all.