The State Duma, in all of its scary Soviet decor, has completed its first reading of a bill that seeks to essentially halt the abilities of NGOs operating in Russia. It will forbid foreign funding, force them to register with the government, and allow the authorities to monitor every last activity that these organizations undertake. Most dreadfully, it will allow the government to brand any of them as an extremist organization, paving the way for politically motivated closings. It’s Yukos all over again, but instead of focusing on oligarchic opposition, the authorities are now focusing on civil society opposition. This means that, just as how the only good oligarch is the kind that supports the government, the only good NGO is the one that doesn’t criticize the poor state of of press freedom, corruption, or human rights in the country.

The Russian parliament has approved the bill requiring state registration for non-governmental organizations, in the first reading.

The law approved by 370 deputies with 226 required says that a regional registry should make a decision to register, reorganize or liquidate an organization not later than in a month after all necessary documents are brought in.

The proposals also would require informal groups without legal status to declare their existence to the authorities or risk being branded illegal. In addition the amendments provide for the authorities to request financial and other documents at any time from non-commercial organizations, and to send representatives to attend any event organized by the organization.

Foreign citizens and non permanent residents in Russia would be severely restricted in establishing public associations and non-commercial organizations and in becoming members or participants in such bodies, and representative offices of foreign non-commercial organizations would be required to re-register with a different legal status, potentially impacting on funding arrangements.

Under the draft law, government officials in charge of registration would be authorized to effectively rule whether the actions of an organization????????s founders constitute ???????extremist activities??????? or ???????would help to legalize illegal assets???????.

This moves comes in light of the recent colored revolutions that have swept the post-Soviet space this year. It is well-known that NGOs in places like Georgia (the youth organization Kmara, for example) blatantly received money from foreign organizations. If there is one thing the Russian government is afraid of it’s instability. The thought of huge organized protests in Russia, while the separatist conflict in the North Caucasus rages on, must be terrifying to the authorities.

The most obvious effect is the strengthening of authoritarianism in the country. And really, in such a backward country, the demands that the government is making with the near-passing of this bill are completely inverse to what the government should be doing. I like how Lev Levinson puts it: “The initiators of this law mix up public and government ÄlifeÅ,” Levinson said. “We are entitled to demand transparency from them, but they cannot demand transparency from us — it equates to demanding transparency from my private life, to demand that I don’t hang curtains at my window or present bills for food I bought in the shop to the housing administration. The same thing is being asked from NGOs, who would have to show their activities to yet another police organ.”

Exactly.