Scientists and academics in Russia are protesting against a proposed law change that they
say will damage academic freedom and free speech. The amendment to Russia’s law on educati
on, which lawmakers say is intended to stop anti-Russian propaganda, would require academi
cs and educators to get permission from state authorities to do public outreach for educat
ional activities, including those involving science. A petition against the change — which
Russia’s lower house of parliament, the State Duma, is scheduled to vote on next week — h
as drawn more than 200,000 signatures, and threats from researchers of civil disobedience
because it could curb efforts to grow scientific literacy.The presidium of the Russian Aca
demy of Sciences — the nation’s primary basic-research organization — has called on Duma m
embers to reject the bill. The suggested changes run counter to efforts to modernize Russi
an science, academy leaders say. “Activities that enlighten society about scientific achie
vements are developing rapidly in Russia and scientists consider this mission useful for t
he whole society,” says Alexei Khokhlov, vice-president of the academy. “The proposed law
doesn’t support these activities, it gives only restrictions. Any form of restrictions are
not helpful for the development of society.”The proposal would grant the government “exce
ssive control” of a range of public teaching and outreach activities that scientists condu
ct outside formal educational programmes, says Sergei Popov, an astronomer at Lomonosov Mo
scow State University who launched the online petition. These might include efforts to inc
rease scientific literacy through popular lectures, podcasts and online courses on platfor
ms such as YouTube.Foreign partners“The proposed amendments are intolerably repressive,” s
ays Mikhail Gelfand, a biology lecturer at the Skoltech Center of Life Sciences in Moscow,
and a member of the London-based Academia Europaea, which aims to advance science and sch
olarship.Scientists are particularly worried about an amendment that would require them to
get permission from federal authorities before signing agreements with foreign education
partners. The rule would pose unacceptable hurdles for efforts to attract foreign instruct
ors to teach in Russia, says Popov. “I’d need to beg for allowance each time I want to inv
ite a foreign lecturer to a meeting or a summer school,” he says. “This is ridiculous, and
I will not obey.”Many scientists and educators might stop reaching out to the public for
fear that what they say could be against the law, says Alexandra Borissova, co-founder of
the Russian Association of Science Communication in Moscow.But the law should not affect o
rdinary research activities that involve international collaboration, says Kirill Dmitriev
, chief executive of the Russia Direct Investment Fund, the country’s sovereign wealth fun
d, which backed the development of the Sputnik V COVID vaccine. “This law would not preclu
de typical collaboration that is part of regular scientific discourse and regular scientif
ic operation, so I think it will have very limited use,” he says. “Most scientists in Russ
ia would understand that scientific collaboration is the core of success.”Free-speech conc
ernsThe bill was introduced in November by members of the Duma and comes as Russia’s forei
gn relations hit a low, following oppression of the opposition leader Alexei Navalny. Acco
rding to a supplementary note on the bill, the aim of the change is “to counteract the spr
ead of illegal information and anti-Russian propaganda in the school and student environme
nt”. The draft law refers explicitly to ethnic- and religious-hate propaganda.But critics
view the change as part of growing efforts by the Russian government to suppress free spee
ch. Hate speech is banned by existing Russian laws, so the amendment is superfluous, says
Gelfand. Instead, this change will add extra bureaucracy to Russia’s science, which is alr
eady stifled by red tape.The move mirrors the growing nervousness among Russia’s rulers an
d lawmakers over dissident voices and foreign agents, says Sergei Guriev, an economist at
Sciences Po in Paris, who left Russia in 2013. “This is extremely worrying,” he says. “The
law is certainly designed against social scientists. Modern economics, political science,
sociology and history are very dangerous for the regime, so they are trying to devise too
ls to selectively censor criticism.”Borissova agrees. If approved, the rules would clearly
violate the constitutionally guaranteed freedom of speech, she says. “The presumption is
that spreading scholarly knowledge in public could serve ‘anti-Russian’ interests,” she sa
ys. “This is state interference with the freedom of opinion, and blatantly contrary to eff
orts to improve scientific literacy.”Hundreds of scientists say they will not follow the n
ew rule, no matter what sanctions they might expect. Some could risk losing their jobs, sa
ys Popov.