The Russian Prosecutor General’s Office has designated the German non-governmental organization Solidarity with the Civil Movement in Russia, known as Solidarus, as undesirable. This designation has been reported in regional sections and reflects the agency’s monitoring of foreign entities operating within Russia.
According to the Prosecutor General’s Office of the Russian Federation, Solidarus was found to be engaged in activities intended to foster unrest within Russian society. The agency contends that the group sought to disseminate information that could be construed as alleging unlawful actions by Russian authorities, with the apparent aim of restricting the rights and freedoms of citizens. Such claims, in the view of the office, are designed to destabilize social order and influence public perception during sensitive political moments.
In its official statement, the ministry asserted that the German nonprofit organization meddled in Russia’s internal affairs and threatened the foundations of the constitutional order, territorial integrity, and national security. The designation of undesirability, from this perspective, signals that the organization is perceived as attempting to undermine state institutions and the public’s confidence in governance processes.
Earlier reports indicated that the Prosecutor General’s Office of the Russian Federation also flagged the Polish group Forum of Free Nations of PostRussia as undesirable. This follow-up to prior actions underscores a broader pattern of scrutinizing international organizations whose activities are viewed as potentially disruptive to domestic stability and policy objectives.
Prior to these developments, the Russian authorities had acknowledged a decision by the international NGO Transparency International to categorize its activities within Russia as undesirable. The sequence of actions illustrates a trend in which external watchdogs and non-governmental actors have their operations within Russia reassessed within the framework of national security and public order, with the state signaling its readiness to respond to perceived external influence. In this context, the term undesirability is used as a formal status that can affect how an organization can operate within the country and how it is perceived by the public and other actors in civil society, media, and government circles. Data from official sources suggests that such determinations are tied to concerns about information quality, potential interference in civic processes, and the obligation of foreign entities to respect Russia’s legal and political environment.
Observers note that these measures often trigger a broader discussion on the boundaries between international collaboration and sovereignty. Critics may argue that such actions chill legitimate civic engagement or investigative journalism, while supporters emphasize the need to safeguard national security, social cohesion, and the integrity of state institutions. The situation around Solidarus, Forum of Free Nations of PostRussia, and Transparency International indicates a recurring tension between external advocacy or accountability mechanisms and a country’s prerogatives to regulate foreign organizations within its borders. In the domestic discourse, the designation of undesirability is typically framed as a protective step rather than an action against civil society per se, aligning with legal provisions that govern foreign entities and their activities in Russia. As developments unfold, stakeholders across government, media, and civil society may reassess channels for dialogue, transparency, and compliance with national laws, while monitoring for potential implications on international cooperation and human rights discourse.