Telegram Messenger Inc. now faces renewed legal pressure in Russia over data handling and localization rules. The case centers on the company’s reluctance to store Russian users’ data within the country and to ensure that personal information remains governed by domestic laws. Prosecutors and regulators argue that repeated noncompliance with Russian data protection requirements justifies scrutiny and a substantial financial penalty, potentially reaching multi‑million rubles. The matter is linked to the judicial district of the justice of the peace number 422 in the Tagansky district of Moscow, where case materials have been moved to a presiding judge for further consideration. A decision on the exact date of the hearing has not yet been announced. The investigation underscores the state’s insistence on sovereign data governance and the consequences for international tech platforms that operate inside Russia without fully conforming to the local framework.
Earlier in the proceedings, the Tagansky district court imposed a four million ruble fine on Telegram for refusing to remove 32 information channels. These channels were alleged to disseminate material about the military operation in Ukraine and its participants that authorities deemed false or misleading. The court’s verdict reflects the state’s broader effort to curb what it views as disinformation and to compel platforms to take down content deemed inaccurate or destabilizing under domestic law.
In response to the prosecutor’s office, Roskomnadzor has repeatedly requested the messenger service to remove the 32 channels. The list includes outlets such as Radio Liberty, which is labeled a foreign agent by the Ministry of Justice, as well as Dozhd TV, which has been deemed an unwanted organization within Russia. Meduza, represented in Russia by the Medusa Project SIA and similarly classified as a foreign agent and unwanted entity, is also cited in the regulator’s communications. The ongoing tensions illustrate Russia’s stringent stance on information control and the responsibilities of international platforms operating within its borders.
There is also a broader international dimension to the situation. While the legal actions unfold, discussions continue in European circles about Russia’s sovereign assets and their status within the European Union. The situation highlights how geopolitical and regulatory developments intersect with technology companies’ operations across borders, prompting policy considerations for both data sovereignty and freedom of information. The outcome of these legal and political debates will likely influence how foreign platforms balance compliance with local laws and the protection of user data as well as how regulators in other jurisdictions approach similar issues.