Russian Official Expands Definition of Foreign Agents to Include Third Parties
A senior justice official in Moscow is outlining a broader approach to the law on foreign agents. Oleg Sviridenko, who serves as a deputy minister of justice, spoke about adding a new, distinct category described as the “third party” to the legislation governing foreign agents. The statements were reported by TASS, the Russian state news agency, and have sparked discussion about how the law will differentiate between direct foreign influence and ancillary actors.
According to Sviridenko, ongoing legislative activity is taking place in the context of adopting what he calls an anti-law regime. He indicated that the political process is actively moving forward, with the State Duma committee showing support for the initiative. The core idea is to cast a wider net beyond individuals or entities that are outright designated as foreign agents to include other actors who may exert influence without formal designation.
In practical terms, the deputy minister argued that third parties could play a significant role even if they do not have formal ties to foreign agents. These actors might still contribute to the goals of foreign agents by shaping events, swaying opinions, or facilitating activities that circumvent existing legal constraints. The objective, as described, is to prevent any gaps where non-affiliated individuals could enable or assist activities that undermine national law and order through foreign influence channels.
The discussion also touched on the criteria used to classify someone as a foreign agent. Sviridenko noted that there are multiple possible reasons for recognizing a person as a foreign agent, and it is not limited to visible external funding. He emphasized a shift away from a narrow, money-centered definition of foreign support toward a more comprehensive framework. The idea is to move beyond a one-dimensional understanding of external influence and to acknowledge a spectrum of activities that could raise questions about alignment with foreign interests.
Supporters of the broadened framework argue that the unified law on foreign agents should provide clearer guidance on what constitutes foreign influence, while allowing authorities to address subtler forms of involvement. Critics, meanwhile, contend that expanding the category could increase regulatory risk for individuals and organizations that are not directly connected to foreign funding yet might still be perceived as channels for foreign interests. The evolving debate reflects broader concerns about transparency, sovereignty, and the balance between security measures and civil liberties in a modern information environment. (Source: TASS)
As this legislative effort progresses, observers note the potential implications for how civil society groups, researchers, and other non-governmental actors operate within Russia. The stakes revolve around defining boundaries between permissible collaboration and actions that could be construed as attempts to influence policy or public opinion from abroad. The discussion highlights the ongoing tension between safeguarding national interests and preserving a space for legitimate, lawful activity within the country’s regulatory framework. In public discourse, the emphasis remains on closing gaps that could be exploited by foreign entities, while ensuring due process and a transparent, enforceable standard for designation under the foreign agents regime.