UN experts concerned about adoption of laws on discrediting Russian armed forces

The experts previously engaged with Russia to express concerns about the adoption and implementation of the laws on discrediting the armed forces.

UN experts* today expressed grave concern about recent decisions by Russia’s Constitutional Court to dismiss challenges to the constitutionality of the country’s legislative provisions that criminalise all “public actions aimed at discrediting” the Russian Armed Forces. The experts previously engaged with Russia to express concerns about the adoption and implementation of the laws on discrediting the armed forces. 

“The decision to deny constitutional protection of the right to freedom of expression constitutes a new low in Russia’s clampdown on the freedom of expression and the free flow of information,” the experts said.

“The interpretation of the Constitutional Court and the rejection of complaints challenging these legislative provisions will silence all those expressing critical views regarding Russia’s so-called “special military operation” in Ukraine,” they said.

The law was adopted shortly after Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. The experts have raised serious concerns about the law in several communications to the Government of Russia and through public statements. Since the beginning of the war, Russia has arrested nearly 20,000 people for protesting the war in Ukraine, while 7000 people have been arrested for actions that allegedly “discredited” the Russian Armed Forces. 

“The law has no other objective than silencing critical expression in relation to the war in Ukraine. The legislation is a drastic step in a long string of measures over the years restricting freedom of expression and media freedom, and further shrinking civic space in the Russian Federation,” the experts said.

The Russian Constitutional Court rendered decisions in 24 cases, rejecting complaints challenging the constitutionality of the law on discrediting the armed forces. The Court based its decisions on the grounds that use of the armed forces and exercise of powers by state bodies were the prerogative of the state. The Court also referred to the citizen’s ‘duty to defend the fatherland’, and vague principles of ‘trust between society and the state’, ‘protection of citizens’ dignity’, ‘respect for defenders of the homeland’, ‘balanced rights and responsibilities of citizens’, and ’political and social solidarity’.

“The Constitutional Court decisions will exacerbate an already severe crackdown on civil society, independent media and critical voices,” the experts warned.

“We are seriously concerned about the implications of the decision for many legal cases brought against individuals for expressing themselves critically or for participating in demonstrations against the war in Ukraine,” the experts said. They warned that scores of activists, journalists and human rights defenders face harsh punishments ranging from five to 15 years imprisonment.

“We respectfully urge the Constitutional Court to change course and guarantee freedom of expression in Russia, and urge Russian authorities to repeal the legislation,” the experts said.