
If you take a breath and say the commission’s full name aloud, you’ll have a pretty good idea of what it’s all about: Russia’s Provisional Commission on Protecting State Sovereignty and Preventing Foreign Interference. Convened in June 2017, the group “monitors foreign activity aimed at interfering in the Russian Federation's internal affairs” and formulates legislative proposals designed to protect Russia from encroachment.
In addition to these prohibitions, the commission’s members are also asking the government to codify a legal definition of the term “foreign interference in Russia’s internal affairs.” Law enforcement agencies, the commission says, should immediately get the extrajudicial authority to block information that shows “clear signs of defamation capable of inciting mass unrest or ethnic, religious, or social hatred.” To ensure that these police powers aren’t abused, the lawmakers suggest criminal penalties for blocking information without good reason.
It’s still too soon to say! In a report last year, the commission took credit for several legislative initiatives, listing different laws it said were adopted “in accordance with the commission's recommendations and with the participation of its members.” At the time, however, the commission hadn’t yet published its legislative proposals, and it’s unknown to what degree its members actually influenced the passage of those laws.
The evidentiary basis for the commission’s new report does not hold up: The text contains plenty of sweeping conclusions but says almost nothing about how the commission reached them. The document’s allegations are conspiratorial, arguing both implicitly and explicitly that a vast “pro-Western group” is responsible for any virtually public criticism of Vladimir Putin. The report attributes sinister meaning to several trivial coincidences. For example, it says it was “no accident” that U.S. Vice President Joe Biden visited Moscow on March 9, 2011 — “exactly a year before the Russian presidential election.”
The commission also takes issue with news coverage, warning that it was “no accident” that “practically every story about Alexey Navalny” (whose name came up just 20 percent less often than Vladimir Putin's, according to the report) was “remarkably positive.” “Throughout the presidential campaign, anti-Russian propaganda presented Alexey Navalny, a suspect named in administrative and felony criminal cases, as a leading Russian politician (equal to Putin) without any apparent flaws,” the report says, pointing out that all of Putin’s official campaign rivals also got favorable media coverage.
Despite the report’s shortcomings, the Federal Council is treating the commission’s work very seriously. Senate Chairwoman Valentina Matviyenko says the document exposes “incontrovertible facts showing efforts to destabilize Russia,” and Senator Konstantin Kosachev, who chairs the International Affairs Committee, praised the commission’s work, saying the government can now embark on the important task of formulating proposals for the improvement of existing legislation on protecting Russian sovereignty.
In other words, it’s perfectly possible that some of the commission’s proposals will be adopted as future laws.
Text by Alexander Borzenko, translation by Peter Marshall