On January 10, 2006, Russian president Vladimir Putin signed a bill that will limit and regulate the activities of NGOs operating in the Russian Federation. This new legislation requires all Russian NGOs to disclose their finances and sources of funding, and it also requires that their activities comply with Russian “national interests.” Putin has claimed that the law is necessary “to prevent financing political activities from abroad,” but human rights groups and foreign governments have expressed concerns that this law will be used as a tool to crush political opponents. The new law may also hinder the work of legitimate human rights groups, many of them being funded by the U.S. government or American foundations.
Is this law consistent with international practices and NGO transparency laws in other countries? What role do NGOs play in the Russian democratization process, and will the new law impact civil society and civil rights there? How will it affect foreign aid to Russia? These and other questions will be the subject of a panel discussion organized by “NGO Watch,” a joint collaboration of AEI and the Federalist Society.
| Noon | Registration and Luncheon | |
| 12:15 | Panelists: |
Natalia I. Bourjaily, International Center for Not-for-Profit Law |
| | | Maureen Greenwood, Amnesty International |
| | | Andrew Kuchins, Carnegie Endowment for International Peace |
| | | Nikolas K. Gvosdev, The National Interest |
| | Moderator: | Leon Aron, AEI |
| 2:00 | Adjournment | |
March 2006
The New NGO Law in Russia: Weakening Civil Society or Strengthening the Rule of Law?
On January 10, 2006, Russian president Vladimir Putin signed a bill that will limit and regulate the activities of nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) operating in the Russian Federation. This new legislation requires all Russian NGOs to disclose their finances and sources of funding, and it also requires that their activities comply with Russian “national interests.” Putin has claimed that the law is necessary “to prevent financing political activities from abroad,” but human rights groups and foreign governments have expressed concerns that this law will be used as a tool to crush political opponents. The new law may also hinder the work of legitimate human rights groups, many of them being funded by the U.S. government or American foundations. Is this law consistent with international practices and NGO transparency laws in other countries? What role do NGOs play in the Russian democratization process, and will the new law impact civil society and civil rights there? How will it affect foreign aid to Russia? These and other questions were the subject of a panel discussion organized by “NGO Watch,” a joint collaboration of AEI and the Federalist Society, on March 1.
Andrew Kuchins
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
The origins of the new legislation go back much further than the colored revolutions to the legacy of the 1990s and the breakdown of Russian state control. During Putin’s presidency, the loss of state control has been effectively addressed (as seen in the cases of oligarchs) and state control strengthened. The new law should therefore be seen against the background of continuing power consolidation by the Kremlin, addressing the state’s concern of losing its control over civil society.
While the timing was surprising, the legislation was created so as to effectively provide tools to deal with any groups that might make it more difficult for the current administration to “manage” the 2008 elections.
The legislation, by limiting foreign-funded NGOs, also reflects a new ideology of Russia as a sovereign democracy, stressing sovereignty over democracy. While Russia was looking to integrate with the West in the 1990s, the same cannot be said today. Rather, Russia is looking to regain its great power status.
Natalia I. Bourjaily
International Center for Not-for-Profit Law
The new Russian legislation has three interesting aspects. First, the denial of registration: the reasons for denial include NGOs creating a potential threat to sovereignty, political independence, territorial integrity, national unity, unique character, cultural heritage, national interests, etc. The question of interpreting these vague categories remains.
Second, the extensive power of the Russian authorities: The law will increase the burden of reporting on all NGOs. It also opens questions of privacy, as the law gives the government the invasive power to participate in any internal event of an NGO. Also, the government has the authority to request any internal document from an organization.
Thirdly, limitations on who can be considered a founder, participant, or member of an NGO: the adopted law requires a foreigner or a stateless person to be legally present in the Russian Federation in order to be a founder.
Maureen Greenwood
Amnesty International
The new legislation clearly undermines the authority of NGOs in Russia and marks yet another step towards increasing hostility towards NGOs. While Amnesty does not oppose any effort to ensure accountability and transparency, this legislation clearly stifles independent civil society.
Three areas of the legislation are particularly problematic: the ability to deny registration to Russian and foreign NGOs for a wide number of reasons; the unlimited power of Russian authorities to send representatives to NGO events; and the obligation for NGOs to declare, in advance, projects and funding to the Russian authorities.
Nikolas Gvosdev
Nixon Center
The new legislation has to be seen in the Russian context, especially given its vague provisions. Considering the absence of established precedent or case law, the question remains how arbitrary the new regulation will be. The monitoring of the implementation therefore remains crucial.
The new legislation should also be viewed against the background of a rising middle class, which does not identify a vibrant NGO sector with the preservation of personal freedom or view the strengthening of state regulation as a positive development.
In response to the new legislation, the United States should underline that it does not oppose an effort to create greater accountability and transparency in the NGO sector, since even in the United States the NGO sector is regulated.
AEI researcher Bjoern Seibert prepared this summary.
