Russian press slams internet restrictions and decision to ban a street protest

(MOSCOW) – Russian newspapers including Nezavisimaya Gazeta, Moskovsky Komsomolets and Komsomolskaya Pravda have criticised restrictions on internet access and the refusal to permit a local protest, reflecting limited but notable dissent within a tightly controlled media space.

A morning press review noted that while criticism of the Russian dictator Vladimir Putin or the war against Ukraine remains off limits, some commentary on domestic governance continues to appear.

An editorial in Nezavisimaya Gazeta argued that Article 31 of Russia’s constitution, which guarantees the right to peaceful assembly, is being ignored in practice. The criticism followed a case in the Kaliningrad region, where residents of a village applied to hold a rally over local concerns but were denied permission.

The proposed protest aimed to question delays in the construction of a kindergarten and school while an industrial project was proceeding. Authorities reportedly rejected the request on the grounds that it contained information discrediting state bodies and did not comply with constitutional provisions or legal restrictions.

The editorial suggested that such reasoning may relate to laws prohibiting the discrediting of the armed forces or the spread of false information. It reiterated that the constitution guarantees citizens the right to assemble peacefully and express opinions on political, economic and social issues.

The author observed that earlier refusals to permit protests were often justified with clear explanations, whereas authorities now appear more inclined to threaten legal consequences. The piece questioned whether officials believe existing channels such as regional digital platforms, social media accounts of governors, opinion polls and elections are sufficient for public engagement.

Drawing a historical comparison, the article noted that similar systems of managed communication existed in the Soviet Union before its collapse, suggesting that past mistakes should not be repeated.

Another article in Moskovsky Komsomolets criticised efforts to tighten control over cyberspace and promote a state backed messaging service. It argued that the authorities have communicated poorly about the initiative, offering vague and infrequent statements that leave citizens reliant on unofficial sources for information.

The commentary stated that this lack of transparency has led to public frustration and a sense of disrespect, potentially encouraging reciprocal distrust towards the authorities.

The writer cited Iran as an example where attempts to control the internet did not ultimately protect the leadership, arguing that technological isolation can create vulnerabilities rather than security.

The article concluded with a warning that excessive control could lead to stagnation, recalling how the Soviet Union once led in space exploration but later fell behind in computing and other technological fields.

Meanwhile, survey data reported by Nezavisimaya Gazeta indicated that three quarters of Russians view Belarus as a model of stability. Interest in relocating there is reportedly increasing, driven not by economic incentives but by fewer restrictions on internet access.

In lighter coverage, Komsomolskaya Pravda marked the anniversary of Vladimir Lenin’s birth with a series of unusual features, including hypothetical questions addressed to the Bolshevik leader and a purported interview conducted through a psychic medium.

The segment included claims attributed to Lenin that the Soviet Union would not return, alongside reflections on its collapse. The piece stood out as an example of unconventional content still appearing in parts of the Russian press.

A separate humour column in Komsomolskaya Pravda closed with a satirical exchange between Russian and Egyptian tourism authorities.