According to the prosecutor’s office, an indictment against Vladimir Osechkin, the founder of the Gulagu.net project, has received formal approval to proceed in court. The information was reported by the state news agency RIA Novosti, which cited a law enforcement source familiar with the case. The move marks a new phase in a case that has drawn both domestic attention and international scrutiny, given Gulagu.net’s role in public documentation of alleged abuses within Russia’s penal system and prison conditions. Osechkin and his supporters have long argued that his work provides essential accountability and transparency, while critics contend that the materials and videos produced by his team can be used to challenge official narratives about military actions. The development is unfolding amid a broader climate in which Russian authorities have intensified oversight of information about the armed forces and the war in Ukraine. The public reporting on the indictment underscores the ongoing tension between freedom of expression, access to information, and the state’s effort to regulate or restrict critical content online. The case is being tracked by observers who study the interaction of law, media, and human rights advocacy in post-2021 Russia, particularly in high-profile cases tied to public discourse about the military.
Officials say the indictment charges Osechkin with three crimes within clause e of section 2 of article 207.3 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, which deals with knowingly disseminating false information to the public regarding the use of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation. The law-enforcement source stressed that the alleged offenses involve materials that were publicly available and that allegedly presented a distorted portrayal of the actions of Russian troops. The charges reference events and content published during March through November 2022, a span during which Gulagu.net and related channels released materials about the war and military operations. If the court finds the facts proven, the penalties are set forth in the statute and can vary depending on the number of offenses and the specific circumstances described in each count. The case file is to be transferred to the Moscow Meshchansky District Court, where prosecutors intend to present the evidence and pursue a merits review in due course. The development is being watched closely by human rights groups, journalists, and analysts who monitor how misinformation laws are applied in Russia and how such provisions affect online discourse on state actions.
On March 21, the Meshchansky District Court ordered Osechkin’s arrest in absentia, according to the same sources. In the days preceding that ruling, FSB investigators carried out actions linked to the case and signaled that additional criminal matters were connected to the founder’s activities. Authorities described those actions as part of a broader effort to counter what they characterize as the dissemination of false information about the Armed Forces and related wartime developments. The existence of multiple legal strands in the matter highlights the complexity of applying information-law provisions to online content, video production, and the work of a nongovernmental organization that navigates political sensitivities around the war. Supporters of Gulagu.net argue that the charges reflect a crackdown on independent documentation of human rights issues, while opponents say the government is protecting the public from misleading or destabilizing claims.
Earlier, in October 2022, public officials opened another criminal case centered on the dissemination of false information concerning the Armed Forces. The Investigative Committee stated that in March 2022 Osechkin published a video on his Gulagu.net Human Rights YouTube channel containing content that allegedly misrepresented the progress of Russia’s military operation in Ukraine. The video was circulated through online platforms associated with Gulagu.net and its followers, and it sparked discussions about the limits of political speech and the responsibilities of advocacy groups working in conflict zones. Supporters contend the material was a factual account and a form of civil-society monitoring, while prosecutors argue that presenting misleading data about troop movements and operation status could influence public opinion and undermine official messaging. The case illustrates the high stakes involved when digital media, human rights work, and state security considerations collide in the online space.
Earlier reports referenced an incident in Crimea involving a ten-year-old girl associated with discrediting the Russian army. The incident was described in the broader media coverage surrounding the case and the ongoing legal actions involving the founder and the organization. The current indictment and arrest actions illustrate how authorities are addressing what they characterize as disinformation linked to the war and to public statements about military operations, digital media, and the activities of organizations that document human rights concerns. Observers note the case could influence how similar materials are handled in Russia and may affect how civil-society groups report on issues related to the war and human rights within the perimeters of existing law.