https://observatoryfordefenders.org/es/ Sun, 14 Sep 2025 19:38:10 +0000 es-ES hourly 1 https://wordpress.org/?v=6.9.4 https://observatoryfordefenders.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/06/cropped-OB-eye-orange-32x32.png https://observatoryfordefenders.org/es/ 32 32 https://observatoryfordefenders.org/es/alert/turkey-stop-throttling-social-media-platforms-and-messaging-services/ Thu, 11 Sep 2025 19:37:54 +0000 https://observatoryfordefenders.org/?post_type=alert&p=23951 Turkey is increasingly throttling social media platforms and messaging apps to silence online communication at moments of profound political or social importance. The undersigned human rights and press freedom organisations, including the Observatory for the Protection of Human Rights Defenders (FIDH-OMCT), condemn Turkey’s actions, which isolate people from vital information, and stifle democratic participation. Turkey must correct course and uphold its international human rights obligations. Paris-Geneva, 11 September 2025 - On 7 September at 23:45, major social media platforms and messaging services X, Instagram, YouTube, TikTok, Facebook, WhatsApp, Telegram, and Signal became inaccessible in Istanbul for approximately 21 hours. The bandwidth throttling coincided with a police blockade of the main opposition Republican People’s Party (CHP) Istanbul headquarters. The blockade triggered a call from CHP’s Istanbul Youth Branch to gather in front of the building at 23.00 on 7 September, in protest against a temporary injunction by an Istanbul court suspending the Party’s provincial leadership and replacing it with ‘trustees’, a decision some legal experts say was beyond the court’s jurisdiction. On 11 September, a court in Ankara rejected the case for the annulment of the Party’s İstanbul provincial congress on substantive grounds. The throttling of platforms was accompanied by attacks on peaceful assembly and growing pressure on media reporting on the tense situation. On 8 September, the police forcibly entered the CHP headquarters together with the court-appointed trustee, deploying tear gas against demonstrators, journalists, party members and staff both outside and inside the building. At least 10 people were reportedly detained and handcuffed. The Istanbul Governor’s Office had already issued a ban on public gatherings in six districts starting at 20:00 on 7 September and lasting until 11 September. In addition, the president of the Radio and Television Supreme Council (RTÜK) warned on X that outlets ‘undermining social peace and public safety’ would face administrative fines, broadcasting suspensions and, ultimately, license revocations. This comes after major independent broadcasters TELE1, Halk TV, and SZC TV were hit with broadcast bans in recent months. No official explanation has been provided for the throttling as of 11 September. Under Article 60/10 of the Electronic Communications Law (Law No. 5809), the Presidency may order the Information and Communication Technologies Authority (BTK) to restrict communications without a court order where there is peril in delay, citing national security, public order, or other grounds listed under Article 22 of the Constitution. These administrative restrictions are temporary and have to be brought to the judiciary within 24 hours. The competent court is required to render a decision within 48 hours thereafter. This means that communication can be cut for up to 72 hours without judicial approval. Article 60/10 was added to the Electronic Communications Law in August 2016 with a State of Emergency Decree, and codified into law in November of the same year. Turkey has a documented pattern of throttling social media platforms and messaging apps during critical events, including the February 2023 earthquakes when Twitter was throttled for about 12 hours despite urgent rescue efforts relying on it. Another example is the throttling of Instagram, YouTube, Facebook and Twitter after a bombing in November 2022. The latest shutdown marks the second one in recent months. When CHP’s 2028 presidential candidate and then-Istanbul Mayor was detained in March 2025, X, TikTok, YouTube, Instagram, and Telegram were throttled in Istanbul for 42 hours. This time around, the government escalated its repression by including Signal, and Whatsapp, the most widely used mobile application in the country. Accessing throttled platforms and messaging services through VPNs is not a reliable alternative in Turkey, as most major providers have already been blocked for several years. These restrictions are often imposed with little to no explanation. Platforms and messaging services are throttled and then quietly restored, leaving the public in a state of uncertainty. They limit the ability of journalists to report developing events of intense public interest, restrict access to vital information and stifle political dissent during moments when the public most needs open and free communication. Turkey’s actions are in clear violation of international human rights law. As emphasised by the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR), ‘given their indiscriminate and disproportionate impacts on human rights, States should refrain from the full range of internet shutdowns’. Any restriction on freedom of expression, including the blocking of certain platforms, must be based on a clear legal basis, necessary to achieve a legitimate aim, and proportionate to the legitimate aim pursued. According to the OHCHR, any internet shutdown, including targeted ones, must further be subject to prior authorisation by a court or other independent adjudicatory body and communicated in advance to the service providers with a clear legal explanation and details regarding scope and duration. In addition, governments must provide redress mechanisms, including through judicial proceedings, to those whose rights have been affected. Turkey repeatedly violates these requirements. It instead uses throttling measures as convenient tools in its arsenal to block people’s access to information in politically sensitive times and to limit scrutiny of its actions. The undersigned human rights and press freedom organisations urge Turkey to refrain from throttling social media platforms and messaging services. Turkey must stop its consistent crackdown on dissenting voices and the media, and uphold its international human rights obligations.]]> Turkey is increasingly throttling social media platforms and messaging apps to silence online communication at moments of profound political or social importance. The undersigned human rights and press freedom organisations, including the Observatory for the Protection of Human Rights Defenders (FIDH-OMCT), condemn Turkey’s actions, which isolate people from vital information, and stifle democratic participation. Turkey must correct course and uphold its international human rights obligations. Paris-Geneva, 11 September 2025 - On 7 September at 23:45, major social media platforms and messaging services X, Instagram, YouTube, TikTok, Facebook, WhatsApp, Telegram, and Signal became inaccessible in Istanbul for approximately 21 hours. The bandwidth throttling coincided with a police blockade of the main opposition Republican People’s Party (CHP) Istanbul headquarters. The blockade triggered a call from CHP’s Istanbul Youth Branch to gather in front of the building at 23.00 on 7 September, in protest against a temporary injunction by an Istanbul court suspending the Party’s provincial leadership and replacing it with ‘trustees’, a decision some legal experts say was beyond the court’s jurisdiction. On 11 September, a court in Ankara rejected the case for the annulment of the Party’s İstanbul provincial congress on substantive grounds. The throttling of platforms was accompanied by attacks on peaceful assembly and growing pressure on media reporting on the tense situation. On 8 September, the police forcibly entered the CHP headquarters together with the court-appointed trustee, deploying tear gas against demonstrators, journalists, party members and staff both outside and inside the building. At least 10 people were reportedly detained and handcuffed. The Istanbul Governor’s Office had already issued a ban on public gatherings in six districts starting at 20:00 on 7 September and lasting until 11 September. In addition, the president of the Radio and Television Supreme Council (RTÜK) warned on X that outlets ‘undermining social peace and public safety’ would face administrative fines, broadcasting suspensions and, ultimately, license revocations. This comes after major independent broadcasters TELE1, Halk TV, and SZC TV were hit with broadcast bans in recent months. No official explanation has been provided for the throttling as of 11 September. Under Article 60/10 of the Electronic Communications Law (Law No. 5809), the Presidency may order the Information and Communication Technologies Authority (BTK) to restrict communications without a court order where there is peril in delay, citing national security, public order, or other grounds listed under Article 22 of the Constitution. These administrative restrictions are temporary and have to be brought to the judiciary within 24 hours. The competent court is required to render a decision within 48 hours thereafter. This means that communication can be cut for up to 72 hours without judicial approval. Article 60/10 was added to the Electronic Communications Law in August 2016 with a State of Emergency Decree, and codified into law in November of the same year. Turkey has a documented pattern of throttling social media platforms and messaging apps during critical events, including the February 2023 earthquakes when Twitter was throttled for about 12 hours despite urgent rescue efforts relying on it. Another example is the throttling of Instagram, YouTube, Facebook and Twitter after a bombing in November 2022. The latest shutdown marks the second one in recent months. When CHP’s 2028 presidential candidate and then-Istanbul Mayor was detained in March 2025, X, TikTok, YouTube, Instagram, and Telegram were throttled in Istanbul for 42 hours. This time around, the government escalated its repression by including Signal, and Whatsapp, the most widely used mobile application in the country. Accessing throttled platforms and messaging services through VPNs is not a reliable alternative in Turkey, as most major providers have already been blocked for several years. These restrictions are often imposed with little to no explanation. Platforms and messaging services are throttled and then quietly restored, leaving the public in a state of uncertainty. They limit the ability of journalists to report developing events of intense public interest, restrict access to vital information and stifle political dissent during moments when the public most needs open and free communication. Turkey’s actions are in clear violation of international human rights law. As emphasised by the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR), ‘given their indiscriminate and disproportionate impacts on human rights, States should refrain from the full range of internet shutdowns’. Any restriction on freedom of expression, including the blocking of certain platforms, must be based on a clear legal basis, necessary to achieve a legitimate aim, and proportionate to the legitimate aim pursued. According to the OHCHR, any internet shutdown, including targeted ones, must further be subject to prior authorisation by a court or other independent adjudicatory body and communicated in advance to the service providers with a clear legal explanation and details regarding scope and duration. In addition, governments must provide redress mechanisms, including through judicial proceedings, to those whose rights have been affected. Turkey repeatedly violates these requirements. It instead uses throttling measures as convenient tools in its arsenal to block people’s access to information in politically sensitive times and to limit scrutiny of its actions. The undersigned human rights and press freedom organisations urge Turkey to refrain from throttling social media platforms and messaging services. Turkey must stop its consistent crackdown on dissenting voices and the media, and uphold its international human rights obligations.]]> https://observatoryfordefenders.org/es/alert/jordan-the-blocking-of-news-websites-is-a-grave-violation-of-freedom-of-expression-and-the-right-to-access-information/ Tue, 27 May 2025 17:49:05 +0000 https://observatoryfordefenders.org/?post_type=alert&p=23563 block at least 12 news websites, most of which are independent media outlets. The decision lacked an official detailed announcement, including the legal basis for the blocking. Instead, authorities provided vague justifications through media channels, invoking broad and imprecise terms such as “spreading media poison” and “targeting national symbols,” without specifying the facts or evidence upon which the ban was based. There has been no indication that affected outlets were offered any opportunity to appeal or challenge the decision before an independent court, raising serious due process concerns. The undersigned organizations condemn this action as a direct violation of Article 15 of the Jordanian Constitution, which guarantees freedom of opinion and states that “every Jordanian shall be free to express his opinion by speech, writing, photography, and other means of expression,” within boundaries that must not be interpreted arbitrarily or politically. The decision also breaches Article 19 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), which protects the right to freedom of expression, including the freedom to seek, receive, and impart information. Jordan acceded to the ICCPR in 1975 and is therefore bound to uphold its provisions in both law and practice. According to international standards, particularly General Comment No. 34 by the United Nations Human Rights Committee, any restriction on freedom of expression must meet three cumulative conditions: it must be provided by law, pursue a legitimate aim, and be necessary and proportionate. It is evident that the Jordanian decision to block these websites fails to meet any of these conditions. The timing of the ban strongly suggests it was in direct response to investigative reports alleging that official Jordanian institutions profited from the coordination of humanitarian aid deliveries to Gaza. Following these reports, the media outlets involved faced a smear-and-intimidation campaign.Access to some sites was gradually restricted, until, on 14 May, authorities imposed a total ban. This sequence of events suggests the ban was not the outcome of a neutral legal process, but rather a politically motivated attempt to suppress independent reporting. To date, there has been no indication that the judiciary was involved in issuing, reviewing, or upholding the blocking decision, nor that the measure was subject to any form of independent oversight or legal appeal. Statements from public officials accusing the blocked sites of spreading false news further reflect the lack of any procedural framework that would enable these outlets to respond or defend themselves. There is no evidence of judicial oversight regarding the decision, nor has there been any formal publication of the list of banned sites or the legal basis for their censorship. In parallel, Cybercrime Law No. 17 of 2023 has increasingly served as a central tool to restrict digital freedoms in Jordan. Its broadly worded provisions grant administrative and security authorities extensive powers to block websites and detain individuals for online expression. During the same period, journalists and political commentators were detained for their posts, reflecting an alarming trend in the criminalization of peaceful expression and digital activity, outside the bounds of independent judicial oversight. The impact of this decision extends beyond the media sector and into Jordan’s broader civic space. Independent media constitute a vital part of civil society's infrastructure and serve as essential platforms for public accountability and the formation of public opinion. When access to information is restricted and independent outlets are silenced, the public’s ability to engage in meaningful debate, scrutiny, and collective decision-making is severely undermined. The erosion of press freedom signals a broader deterioration in the conditions for civic engagement, weakening democratic participation that is based on knowledge and awareness. These practices reflect a deliberate policy of censorship that goes beyond media regulation. They aim to monopolize public discourse and suppress the independent production and circulation of information. Blanket website bans imposed without due legal process violate fundamental rights and erode public trust in institutions, contributing to a hostile environment for journalism, one where media organizations are forced into self-censorship or closure. The undersigned organizations call on the Jordanian government to:

• Immediately reverse the decision to block the websites and lift the ban on all affected platforms unconditionally.
• Publicly disclose the legal basis and justifications for any action that restricts freedom of expression or access to information, in full transparency.
• Ensure access to effective legal remedies to challenge blocking decisions before an independent judiciary, in line with constitutional and international standards, and in accordance with Article 100 of the Jordanian Constitution, guaranteeing judicial independence.
• Undertake a comprehensive review of Cybercrime Law No. 17 of 2023 through a transparent and participatory process involving civil society organizations, media actors, and legal experts. The objective must be to revise all provisions that are currently being used to curtail freedoms and to bring the law into full compliance with Jordan’s international human rights obligations, particularly Article 19 and Article 14 of the ICCPR.

The undersigned affirm that protecting press freedom and media pluralism is not incompatible with the rule of law; it is a prerequisite for it. Disinformation cannot be countered through censorship, and public trust cannot be built by excluding independent voices. Stability is only achieved through an open, protected, and legally grounded media environment—one that guarantees the right to scrutiny and accountability and supports journalists in uncovering truth, not silencing it.]]> block at least 12 news websites, most of which are independent media outlets. The decision lacked an official detailed announcement, including the legal basis for the blocking. Instead, authorities provided vague justifications through media channels, invoking broad and imprecise terms such as “spreading media poison” and “targeting national symbols,” without specifying the facts or evidence upon which the ban was based. There has been no indication that affected outlets were offered any opportunity to appeal or challenge the decision before an independent court, raising serious due process concerns. The undersigned organizations condemn this action as a direct violation of Article 15 of the Jordanian Constitution, which guarantees freedom of opinion and states that “every Jordanian shall be free to express his opinion by speech, writing, photography, and other means of expression,” within boundaries that must not be interpreted arbitrarily or politically. The decision also breaches Article 19 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), which protects the right to freedom of expression, including the freedom to seek, receive, and impart information. Jordan acceded to the ICCPR in 1975 and is therefore bound to uphold its provisions in both law and practice. According to international standards, particularly General Comment No. 34 by the United Nations Human Rights Committee, any restriction on freedom of expression must meet three cumulative conditions: it must be provided by law, pursue a legitimate aim, and be necessary and proportionate. It is evident that the Jordanian decision to block these websites fails to meet any of these conditions. The timing of the ban strongly suggests it was in direct response to investigative reports alleging that official Jordanian institutions profited from the coordination of humanitarian aid deliveries to Gaza. Following these reports, the media outlets involved faced a smear-and-intimidation campaign.Access to some sites was gradually restricted, until, on 14 May, authorities imposed a total ban. This sequence of events suggests the ban was not the outcome of a neutral legal process, but rather a politically motivated attempt to suppress independent reporting. To date, there has been no indication that the judiciary was involved in issuing, reviewing, or upholding the blocking decision, nor that the measure was subject to any form of independent oversight or legal appeal. Statements from public officials accusing the blocked sites of spreading false news further reflect the lack of any procedural framework that would enable these outlets to respond or defend themselves. There is no evidence of judicial oversight regarding the decision, nor has there been any formal publication of the list of banned sites or the legal basis for their censorship. In parallel, Cybercrime Law No. 17 of 2023 has increasingly served as a central tool to restrict digital freedoms in Jordan. Its broadly worded provisions grant administrative and security authorities extensive powers to block websites and detain individuals for online expression. During the same period, journalists and political commentators were detained for their posts, reflecting an alarming trend in the criminalization of peaceful expression and digital activity, outside the bounds of independent judicial oversight. The impact of this decision extends beyond the media sector and into Jordan’s broader civic space. Independent media constitute a vital part of civil society's infrastructure and serve as essential platforms for public accountability and the formation of public opinion. When access to information is restricted and independent outlets are silenced, the public’s ability to engage in meaningful debate, scrutiny, and collective decision-making is severely undermined. The erosion of press freedom signals a broader deterioration in the conditions for civic engagement, weakening democratic participation that is based on knowledge and awareness. These practices reflect a deliberate policy of censorship that goes beyond media regulation. They aim to monopolize public discourse and suppress the independent production and circulation of information. Blanket website bans imposed without due legal process violate fundamental rights and erode public trust in institutions, contributing to a hostile environment for journalism, one where media organizations are forced into self-censorship or closure. The undersigned organizations call on the Jordanian government to:

• Immediately reverse the decision to block the websites and lift the ban on all affected platforms unconditionally.
• Publicly disclose the legal basis and justifications for any action that restricts freedom of expression or access to information, in full transparency.
• Ensure access to effective legal remedies to challenge blocking decisions before an independent judiciary, in line with constitutional and international standards, and in accordance with Article 100 of the Jordanian Constitution, guaranteeing judicial independence.
• Undertake a comprehensive review of Cybercrime Law No. 17 of 2023 through a transparent and participatory process involving civil society organizations, media actors, and legal experts. The objective must be to revise all provisions that are currently being used to curtail freedoms and to bring the law into full compliance with Jordan’s international human rights obligations, particularly Article 19 and Article 14 of the ICCPR.

The undersigned affirm that protecting press freedom and media pluralism is not incompatible with the rule of law; it is a prerequisite for it. Disinformation cannot be countered through censorship, and public trust cannot be built by excluding independent voices. Stability is only achieved through an open, protected, and legally grounded media environment—one that guarantees the right to scrutiny and accountability and supports journalists in uncovering truth, not silencing it.]]> https://observatoryfordefenders.org/es/alert/algerie-blocage-du-site-internet-de-long-riposte-internationale/ Mon, 19 May 2025 14:31:53 +0000 https://observatoryfordefenders.org/?post_type=alert&p=23468 répression croissante contre la liberté de la presse en Algérie. Depuis plusieurs années, les autorités algériennes multiplient les mesures visant à restreindre l’espace médiatique  telles que la fermeture de médias indépendants, les poursuites judiciaires contre des journalistes, la limitation du droit à l’information et le blocage de sites d’information, à l’instar du site d’information politique L’Avant-Garde, ou du journal Le Matin d’Algérie. L’Observatoire rappelle que ces actes s’inscrivent dans un contexte de musellement de la presse dans un climat de pression politique et juridique sur les journalistes. La situation de la presse en Algérie ne cesse de se dégrader et des accusations de « menace à la sûreté nationale », « atteinte à l’unité nationale » ou encore de « terrorisme » sont fréquemment utilisées pour criminaliser l’expression d’opinions dissidentes. L’intimidation s’intensifie à travers des arrestations arbitraires, des campagnes de diffamation et des procès expéditifs, comme l’illustrent les cas récents de l’écrivain Boualem Sansal et du poète Mohamed Tadjadit, tous deux condamnés à de lourdes peines de prison pour leurs prises de position publiques. L’Observatoire dénonce le blocage du site internet de Riposte internationale, qui vise à sanctionner l’exercice légitime du droit à l’information et à du droit à la liberté d’expression de l’organisation, et appelle les autorités algériennes à garantir un environnement sûr et propice à l’exercice du journalisme et à la défense des droits humains. L’Observatoire appelle également les autorités algériennes à garantir le droit à la liberté d’expression, tel que consacré par les standards internationaux relatifs aux droits humains, et particulièrement à l’article 19 du Pacte international relatif aux droits civils et politiques des Nations Unies.]]> répression croissante contre la liberté de la presse en Algérie. Depuis plusieurs années, les autorités algériennes multiplient les mesures visant à restreindre l’espace médiatique  telles que la fermeture de médias indépendants, les poursuites judiciaires contre des journalistes, la limitation du droit à l’information et le blocage de sites d’information, à l’instar du site d’information politique L’Avant-Garde, ou du journal Le Matin d’Algérie. L’Observatoire rappelle que ces actes s’inscrivent dans un contexte de musellement de la presse dans un climat de pression politique et juridique sur les journalistes. La situation de la presse en Algérie ne cesse de se dégrader et des accusations de « menace à la sûreté nationale », « atteinte à l’unité nationale » ou encore de « terrorisme » sont fréquemment utilisées pour criminaliser l’expression d’opinions dissidentes. L’intimidation s’intensifie à travers des arrestations arbitraires, des campagnes de diffamation et des procès expéditifs, comme l’illustrent les cas récents de l’écrivain Boualem Sansal et du poète Mohamed Tadjadit, tous deux condamnés à de lourdes peines de prison pour leurs prises de position publiques. L’Observatoire dénonce le blocage du site internet de Riposte internationale, qui vise à sanctionner l’exercice légitime du droit à l’information et à du droit à la liberté d’expression de l’organisation, et appelle les autorités algériennes à garantir un environnement sûr et propice à l’exercice du journalisme et à la défense des droits humains. L’Observatoire appelle également les autorités algériennes à garantir le droit à la liberté d’expression, tel que consacré par les standards internationaux relatifs aux droits humains, et particulièrement à l’article 19 du Pacte international relatif aux droits civils et politiques des Nations Unies.]]> https://observatoryfordefenders.org/es/alert/20156/ Thu, 06 Jan 2022 00:00:14 +0000 https://observatoryfordefenders.org/?post_type=alert&p=20156 United Nations Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights. It therefore calls upon social media enterprises, and notably Twitter, Facebook, Instagram, Vkontakte and Telegram, to refrain from blocking OVD-Info’s social media accounts. On December 25, 2021, Roskomnadzor, Russia’s media regulator, requested the blocking of OVD-Info’s website, without sending any official notification to the organisation. On the same day, Roskomnadzor requested social media enterprises (in particular Twitter, Facebook, Instagram, Vkontakte and Telegram) to block accounts of the organisation. The website’s blocking was ordered on the basis of a decision issued by the Lukhovitskiy District Court of the Moscow Region on December 20, 2021, recognizing that OVD-Info’s work “aimed at promoting terrorism and extremism”. The organisation was not informed of these proceedings, nor invited to enter the proceedings as a party. Moreover, the Court failed to deliver a copy of the decision to the organisation. On December 29, 2021, Mr. Grigory Okhotin, the co-founder and director of OVD-Info, appealed the decision and requested a copy of it. The proceedings are currently pending. The December 20 decision follows an administrative claim filed by Lukhovistkiy Town Prosecutor on December 15, 2021 to the Lukhovitskiy District Court of the Moscow Region upon examination of materials posted on OVD-Info’s website. The organisation was neither informed about the reasons for the inquiry nor about the specific online materials that were deemed offending. On September 29, 2021, the Ministry of Justice of the Russian Federation had declared OVD-Info a “foreign agent” thus including the organisation in the Registry of unregistered public organisations foreign agents. This decision has been challenged by Grigory Okhotin and the proceedings are ongoing. The Observatory strongly condemns the decision of blocking OVD-Info’s website, which seems to be only aimed at sanctioning the organisation for its legitimate human rights activities and its exercise of the right to freedom of expression. It seems to appear also as reprisals for OVD-Info’s recent active campaign for the abolition of the notorious Russian law on "foreign agents", deemed contrary to international and national law. The Observatory notes with further concern that the harassment against OVD-Info takes place in the context of an increased crackdown on the Russian civil society in recent weeks and is the latest example of the systematisation of the abusive use of the "Foreign Agent” Law to hinder the work of organisations and individual defending human rights in the country. On December 28 and 29, 2021, International Memorial and HRC Memorial were both respectively liquidated for alleged violation of the “Foreign Agent” Law. In 2021, 131 organisations, independent media and individuals were added to the “foreign agents” registries. The Observatory urges the Russian authorities to immediately repeal the decision leading to the blocking of the website of OVD-Infoand to put an end to any act of harassment against OVD-Info, as well as against all organisations defending human rights in the country.]]> United Nations Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights. It therefore calls upon social media enterprises, and notably Twitter, Facebook, Instagram, Vkontakte and Telegram, to refrain from blocking OVD-Info’s social media accounts. On December 25, 2021, Roskomnadzor, Russia’s media regulator, requested the blocking of OVD-Info’s website, without sending any official notification to the organisation. On the same day, Roskomnadzor requested social media enterprises (in particular Twitter, Facebook, Instagram, Vkontakte and Telegram) to block accounts of the organisation. The website’s blocking was ordered on the basis of a decision issued by the Lukhovitskiy District Court of the Moscow Region on December 20, 2021, recognizing that OVD-Info’s work “aimed at promoting terrorism and extremism”. The organisation was not informed of these proceedings, nor invited to enter the proceedings as a party. Moreover, the Court failed to deliver a copy of the decision to the organisation. On December 29, 2021, Mr. Grigory Okhotin, the co-founder and director of OVD-Info, appealed the decision and requested a copy of it. The proceedings are currently pending. The December 20 decision follows an administrative claim filed by Lukhovistkiy Town Prosecutor on December 15, 2021 to the Lukhovitskiy District Court of the Moscow Region upon examination of materials posted on OVD-Info’s website. The organisation was neither informed about the reasons for the inquiry nor about the specific online materials that were deemed offending. On September 29, 2021, the Ministry of Justice of the Russian Federation had declared OVD-Info a “foreign agent” thus including the organisation in the Registry of unregistered public organisations foreign agents. This decision has been challenged by Grigory Okhotin and the proceedings are ongoing. The Observatory strongly condemns the decision of blocking OVD-Info’s website, which seems to be only aimed at sanctioning the organisation for its legitimate human rights activities and its exercise of the right to freedom of expression. It seems to appear also as reprisals for OVD-Info’s recent active campaign for the abolition of the notorious Russian law on "foreign agents", deemed contrary to international and national law. The Observatory notes with further concern that the harassment against OVD-Info takes place in the context of an increased crackdown on the Russian civil society in recent weeks and is the latest example of the systematisation of the abusive use of the "Foreign Agent” Law to hinder the work of organisations and individual defending human rights in the country. On December 28 and 29, 2021, International Memorial and HRC Memorial were both respectively liquidated for alleged violation of the “Foreign Agent” Law. In 2021, 131 organisations, independent media and individuals were added to the “foreign agents” registries. The Observatory urges the Russian authorities to immediately repeal the decision leading to the blocking of the website of OVD-Infoand to put an end to any act of harassment against OVD-Info, as well as against all organisations defending human rights in the country.]]>