Roskomnadzor denies retroactive substitution of the order on blocking rules on the website of draft regulations

Roskomnadzor called the information that the regulator retroactively replaced an order clarifying the procedure for blocking resources, published on the website of draft regulatory legal acts, untrue. This is stated in the department’s response, which was sent to the editor.

Representatives of the regulator report that the draft order of Roskomnadzor was posted on the official website regulation.gov.ru to undergo the procedure of public discussion and anti-corruption examination on September 25, which was supposed to be completed by October 20.

“Upon completion of the public discussion, the order and summary report were sent to the Russian Ministry of Economic Development to prepare a conclusion on the assessment of the regulatory impact,” the department writes.

Then Roskomnadzor received a negative opinion from the Ministry of Economic Development, revised it and re-sent it to the department. After this, the project received a positive conclusion, was signed and sent for state registration to the Ministry of Justice.

“Please note that Roskomnadzor has fully complied with the procedure for developing, conducting regulatory impact assessments and publishing draft departmental acts <...> Finalizing the document based on comments and suggestions is an absolutely normal practice for preparing and approving regulations. Accordingly, the draft order and conclusion on the regulatory impact assessment were not “replaced” on the official website regulation.gov.ru , but replaced with current versions,” the department claims.

The day before, CNews published an article in which it reported that the regulator had replaced a draft order clarifying the procedure for blocking access to prohibited Internet resources by providers. The project was created in September 2017 on the website regulation.gov.ru . On February 2, the Ministry of Economic Development issued a negative review of its initial version.

CNews wrote that after this, a few days later, a new version of the project and a new positive review from the Ministry of Economic Development were published on the website. According to the publication, the old project and review disappeared from the site on February 9, but after publication of the article they appeared on it again. At the same time, the existence of the first version of the project is not reflected in the history of the project. The publication claimed that the project developer, if revised, should have sent the project for re-discussion. In reality, this is not the case .