Russia’s attempt to curb Telegram-related protest activity has unfolded as a patchwork of shifting rationales from local authorities, even as frustration with internet controls remains widespread, according to an Associated Press report. The report described how officials in different regions stopped planned demonstrations or interfered with them, sometimes citing reasons unrelated to the protests themselves.
Instead of a single, consistent explanation, authorities referenced a variety of local issues, including an alleged “tree inspection,” disputes tied to snowfall removal, and claims that COVID-19 restrictions still applied. In one case described by the report, officials also said the reason given for the protest did not exist.
Alexander Sustov, a lawmaker from Primorie in Russia’s Far East, said the situation has changed and laws have tightened, but that the desire to protest has continued. “Está claro que la situación ha cambiado, las leyes se han vuelto más estrictas, pero la protesta no ha desaparecido”, he said, adding that “El descontento persiste. Y cualquier prohibición no hace más que alimentar ese descontento”.
The Associated Press linked the Telegram protests to a broader campaign to control online communications. It said authorities have blocked thousands of websites and limited access to only a small set of sites during mobile internet shutdowns, while virtual private networks that allow users to bypass censorship have also been restricted. The report described Telegram as among the most used messaging apps in Russia, second only to WhatsApp, and noted Telegram’s use by government bodies and pro-Kremlin commentators as well as by military bloggers.
Within the Kremlin’s narrative, the report said restricting Telegram is the latest step in placing internet communications under tighter state oversight, and it described calls for users to switch to MAX, an app supported by the government that critics say functions as a tool for state surveillance. Military bloggers, according to the report, argued Telegram is indispensable for communication used by Russian troops in Ukraine and by activists running online fundraising campaigns supporting Moscow’s forces.
The AP report also described how Russian officials have publicly characterized Telegram as dangerous in wartime conditions. It cited a remark made in a meeting with President Vladimir Putin for International Women’s Day in which a military figure described Telegram as “una herramienta de comunicación del adversario” and agreed when Putin said that using communication systems “que no son nuestros, que no están bajo nuestro control, supone un peligro para el personal” in combat.
The protest pressure has not been limited to liberal or opposition circles. The report said the blockade of Telegram prompted political groups across the spectrum to take action, including groups that support the war and groups aligned with the Kremlin more generally. It also said analysts and organizers described a wider sense that people feel able to protest when they think the authorities cannot easily justify restrictions.
Abbas Gallyamov, a political analyst quoted by the report, described how the lack of a clear narrative for restrictions left room for broader public sentiment, saying the “la gente sienta que aquí puede permitirse protestar”. Another organizer described how local authorities often try to manage pressure by allowing limited outlets rather than allowing larger demonstrations tied to Telegram.
The Associated Press described attempts to protest in several regions, including actions by ultranationalist activists aligned with the group La Otra Rusia. In Moscow, the report said members of La Otra Rusia blocked entry to Roskomnadzor, the state media and internet regulator, with a bicycle cable and a banner reading “Dennos un internet sin supervisión (y) una Rusia sin la vergüenza de Roskom”. It said the group later staged another banner action at Roskomnadzor’s office in St. Petersburg, leading to arrests and subsequent criminal charges for activists.
In Siberia, the report described a Telegram protest planned in Novosibirsk that ended with arrests. It said 16 people were arrested this month at the location where a Telegram demonstration was scheduled, even though the activists did not require permission for that specific kind of protest. According to the AP report, when they arrived, the site was cordoned off with police tape due to a supposed “tree inspection,” and Roman Malozyomov, an activist, described how that led to detentions. The report said Malozyomov and other people involved were later released within hours, and that he carried out a solo protest at Lenin Square with a sign that had the Roskomnadzor logo crossed out.
In Perm, organizers received permission for a demonstration scheduled for March 15, but the report said authorities informed activists two hours before it began about a “posible situación de emergencia” that made the event unsuitable to hold. Even after that notification, the AP report said some people came to the site. It described Viktor Gilin, an 80-year-old, who held a sign demanding that Vladimir Putin return “libertad de pensamiento y de expresión” and was quickly detained and fined.
The report also described planned protests for March 29 in multiple regions, saying some were rejected immediately. It characterized the broader environment as one where protest options have narrowed further since the brutal suppression of demonstrations against the war in 2022, alongside rising legal restrictions on dissent.
Beyond Telegram, the Associated Press reported that small protests have continued in different contexts with varying levels of authorization, including demonstrations by relatives of soldiers and regional protests tied to specific grievances. It also said that some activists kept challenging internet and messaging restrictions through courts, including a case in which Konstantin Larionov and other plaintiffs pursued legal action against Roskomnadzor and other government officials, alleging that restrictions on Telegram and WhatsApp violated rights to freedom of expression and privacy—an effort the report said was rejected by a court and that Larionov later planned to appeal to Russia’s Supreme Court.