
Law enforcement operatives have always worked to recruit potential informants in a variety of areas. After the full-scale invasion of Ukraine, such cases became even more numerous.
Who is at risk? Under what circumstances do security forces usually offer to cooperate? What should I do if they are trying to recruit me? What happens if you refuse? We answer these questions in the memo.
As a rule, recruitment is carried out by operatives of law enforcement agencies - the police (including the "E" center), the FSB.
The main goal is to obtain information about specific people, movements, organizations, events, and sources of funds.
This depends on the goals of specific departments of the FSB and the Ministry of Internal Affairs - they can recruit not only oppositionists, but also employees of industrial organizations, officials, entrepreneurs, students and even homeless people.
If we are talking about recruitment in order to obtain information about the opposition, security forces will look for potential informants and provocateurs among activists, journalists, volunteers, human rights activists, and students. Recruitment is not done so often abroad - usually people with whom they have established contact in Russia are sent on “business trips”.
“The security forces have a whole methodology for drawing up psychological portraits. Often they involve psychologists who literally choose from a list of people who, in their opinion, are easier to approach with a proposal for cooperation. People are different, if you collect some information from a person, it is not very difficult to find out how malleable he is, whether you can put pressure on him, what he is afraid of.
After observing a person for even a few days, it is easy to see his weaknesses. For example, he drives carelessly or buys drugs every Friday, goes to clubs whose purpose he would like to hide. Before recruiting, security forces look for a person’s weak points,” says First Department lawyer Evgeniy Smirnov.
He is given a document to sign about voluntary confidential cooperation and non-disclosure. Afterwards, the operational officer explains the details - how communication will be carried out, under what conditions cooperation will take place, etc.
Legally - none.
Trying to persuade a person to cooperate, they may threaten him. Or, conversely, promise to solve problems, guarantee generous rewards, etc.
Often this is simply intimidation to deter a potential informant.
“Azamat (FSB officer - Note) said that they have enough materials for several criminal articles for me and that now I better start talking to them normally. <…> “Azamat” stated that I would be under their protection if I helped. He said: you need to return to Georgia. I replied that yes, I have an apartment there, a cat, things - my whole life for the last three and a half years. And then he said: you will come back. But if you leave, you may not come back. It got me. I still have my mother in Russia. I burst into tears. He saw this, took me out into the corridor, gave me water, began to calm me down, and then sat me down at the table and dictated the text of an obligation for voluntary confidential cooperation. I had to write it by hand and choose a pseudonym for myself,” anti-war emigrant Roman Evseev, whom they tried to recruit after crossing the Russian border from Georgia, told the First Department.
If a person agreed to cooperate and then changed his mind, the consequences will depend only on the operative who recruited him. It is impossible to predict how he will behave in such a situation, but most often this does not lead to serious problems.
If the situation allows, try to firmly refuse.
“It’s easier to let a person go, not waste time on him, but find a new one. If a person starts to break down and says, “I wouldn’t want to, I need to think about it,” then difficulties may arise. Security forces are able to physically threaten a person because they see that he can still be persuaded to cooperate. Those who clearly refuse are most often left alone,” says Evgeny Smirnov.
If you can’t immediately say “no”, immediately contact human rights activists.
There are cases when people agreed to be informants in order to remain free, and then left the country. This was the case with Kirill Parubets, who, during his administrative arrest, was threatened with a case of “treason” if he did not transfer information about his friend to the security forces. Parubets decided that he had to agree and then figure out how to proceed. Soon they brought him a confidential cooperation and non-disclosure agreement. The parties agreed that when 15 days of arrest expire, Kirill will contact the security forces and receive new instructions. Three days later, Kirill and his wife were indeed released, and then left the country. Details of this story are in our text .
It is important to remember that each situation is unique and the possible consequences consist of many factors. If they are trying to persuade you to cooperate, contact human rights activists. They will help you assess risks and think through a further plan of action.
It is impossible to predict such a situation. But you can minimize the risks.