The Russian government has come up with a new misdemeanor offense for citizens: “deliberately seeking out and accessing extremist materials.” Once again, lawmakers are using a familiar tactic honed through other repressive laws:

  • First, they take a bill that has already passed its first reading (in this case, one on “toughening administrative penalties for certain violations in the field of transport and logistics”)
  • Then, they add amendments before the second reading that radically change the bill’s original intent.

2

Why do they use this approach? Can’t they pass whatever bill they want anyway?

This approach lets lawmakers fast-track a bill’s passage and drastically cut down the time for public debate. It also spares them from having to explain the initiative at all — after all, an explanatory note is only published when a bill is first introduced in the State Duma.

Lawmakers approved the new provision on “deliberately seeking out and accessing extremist materials” in the bill’s second reading on July 17.

3

What counts as ‘extremist materials?’

The answer isn’t so simple. The new Administrative Code article lays out two ways to determine what qualifies.

  • The first is self-explanatory: a piece of content is considered “extremist” if it’s included in the public federal list of extremist materials.
  • The second opens the door to broad and arbitrary enforcement. In this case, the authors of the amendment refer to the definition from the federal law “On Countering Extremist Activity.” This includes any documents or information that “call for extremist activity or justify or legitimize the need for such activity.”

Under Russian law, the definition of extremist activity is extremely broad. It covers everything from “terrorist activity” to the use of symbols or branding linked to organizations labeled “extremist” in Russia — such as Alexey Navalny’s Anti-Corruption Foundation and the non-existent “international LGBT movement.”

4

Is Meduza’s reporting considered ‘extremist’ content?

No. In Russia, Meduza is labeled a “foreign agent” and an “undesirable organization.” That’s unpleasant and carries its own risks (which is why, for example, we no longer accept donations from inside Russia and have no staff based there). But even under Russian law, simply searching for and reading our articles is not currently a crime.

5

What about other independent media outlets? Have any of them been labeled ‘extremist?’

Strangely enough, not yet — aside from Limonka, a now-defunct newspaper the Russian authorities banned by the Russian authorities early in Vladimir Putin’s presidency. But of course, there’s nothing stopping the government from starting to designate media outlets as “extremist,” which would effectively make it illegal to read them. This is what’s known as the criminalization of reading — and this new bill is a step in that direction.

6

So where exactly is it now illegal to search for ‘extremist’ content? Just online?

For now, yes — though it’s unclear what might come next. The law specifically states that a violation only applies to searches for “extremist” content specifically on the Internet.

7

Will people really be punished just for searching?

It’s hard to say for sure, but it doesn’t seem so. To be held liable, a person will likely have to do two things: search for the banned content and access it (for example, by clicking a link).

In other articles of the Administrative Code, when any one of several actions is enough to constitute a violation, the word “or” is used. For example:

  • Article 5.12: Producing, distributing, or publishing campaign materials in violation of election and referendum laws
  • Article 7.17: Destroying or damaging someone else’s property
  • Article 8.5: Concealing or falsifying environmental information

But the new article, 13.53, begins with the phrase: “deliberately seeking out extremist materials and accessing them.” The phrase in the bill’s original version was even more straightforward: “seeking out and accessing extremist materials.”

8

So does that mean pro-Kremlin activists who search for ‘extremist’ content to report others could be breaking the law too?

Technically, yes. The new article doesn’t specify any exceptions based on a person’s motive for seeking out “extremist” materials.

It’s unclear whether activists who report others for offenses related to banned materials will be charged themselves — but they’re already getting nervous. For instance, Yekaterina Mizulina, head of the censorship lobbying group Safe Internet League, criticized the amendment and said her organization would have to stop monitoring “extremist communities” and passing information about them to Russia’s Interior Ministry.

9

What will the penalty be?

Each offense will carry an administrative fine of 3,000–5,000 rubles ($33–$55).

For repeat offenses, there’s currently no steep increase in the fine or any criminal charges. But it’s worth stressing that this could change in the future.

10

Who’s responsible for catching offenders?

Police officers and FSB agents will be responsible for filing misdemeanor violation reports.

However, police can only issue a report if they directly find clear signs of an offense — for example, if an officer personally discovers “extremist” search queries or visits to “extremist” pages in your phone or computer’s browser history. FSB agents won’t have that limitation. They’ll have the authority to gather such information remotely.

But in any case, it will be the courts that review these cases and decide on any punishments.

11

Wait — what does ‘remotely’ mean?

The FSB can use data from information systems they have access to in order to hunt for offenders.

For example, thanks to close cooperation with the Russian social media service VK (and several other so-called “information distribution organizers”), security agents can see who searched for banned content on social media and then clicked links or downloaded related files.

12

If I’m in Russia, is there any way to protect myself from this all-seeing eye?

At the moment, we can only offer some general advice.

  • Always use a VPN to make it harder for the authorities to track the sites you visit.
  • Try to use search engines that don’t cooperate with the Russian authorities, or — better yet — ones that don’t collect any user data at all (like DuckDuckGo).
  • Don’t save your browsing history, or clear it regularly.
  • Keep your phones and computers protected from unauthorized access.

It’s also worth looking at what happened in Belarus for signs of what’s coming to Russia.

13

What does Belarus have to do with this?

In Belarus, the “criminalization of reading” is widespread and has long been applied to independent media. Aliaksan Pushkina, communications director at the independent outlet Zerkalo, explained how it works as follows:

In Belarus, you can be arrested simply for reading the “wrong” news. This isn’t an exaggeration. Over the past three or four years, amid the authorities’ media crackdown and the regime’s paranoia, persecution for consuming information has become the norm.

All it takes is being subscribed to a Telegram channel that the authorities have added to the list of “extremist materials.” Or saving a screenshot of a post. Or forwarding news to a friend. That’s enough to get you arrested. Or, sometimes, even jailed.

At first, the repressions targeted only authors and editorial teams. Then they extended to readers who shared content. Now, it can be anyone who has such content on their phone — even without any evidence they shared it. This has become a separate form of control: the reader is already a suspect.

It’s not just media outlets that are labeled “extremist” — it can be a person’s personal page (for example, the legendary Belarusian basketball player Katsiaryna Snytsina), a book, or a TikTok account. Practically anything. Officially, the list of extremist materials now includes more than 7,000 items. Many are completely ordinary. Nobody knows when the next account will be added. Users aren’t notified.

Courts handle these cases in minutes. A screenshot is evidence. A subscription is grounds for suspicion. There’s no presumption of innocence. Having a VPN means “you’re hiding something.” There have already been convictions for watching a video, for a comment in a chat, or for a saved story.

How does this control work? Through raids, random checks, and phone searches on the street. Detainees are asked to unlock their devices — and their subscriptions, likes, and browser history are inspected. Informants play a role too: in an atmosphere of fear, people turn on each other. Sometimes in hopes of saving themselves.

We see a new culture of digital self-protection emerging. People read content through the Tor browser, use VPNs, store information on separate devices. They encrypt their phones. Delete their chats. Open news sites in incognito mode. This isn’t just information hygiene — it’s a survival strategy.

This isn’t abstract fear. If you’re caught with content from an “extremist group” (there are also “extremist materials” — the difference is in the severity of potential punishment), the best-case scenario is a fine of several hundred euros. You might be held in a detention center for up to 24 hours. Or face criminal charges — with sentences of up to seven years behind bars. For financing (read: donations), you can get up to eight years. In Belarus today, people are prosecuted for screenshots, likes, or for having once been in the “wrong” chat group. These cases number in the thousands.

In these circumstances, simply subscribing to independent sources, reading the news, or trying to stay informed is already an act of resistance. Not out of heroism — but just to remain a person who wants to understand the world they live in.