Moscow, June 24, 2025, Freedom Person
In June 2025, the Rostov Region branch of the Russian Federal Security Service (FSB) announced the initiation of a criminal case against Russian citizen Aleksandr Anderson. According to Russian authorities, while on U.S. territory, Anderson published posts on Instagram — a social network banned in Russia — in which he expressed critical views regarding the actions of the Russian Armed Forces and government agencies in Ukraine. The FSB statement specifically highlighted his references to events in the cities of Bucha and Izium — incidents that Russian officials officially describe as “information provocations.”
Investigators classified Anderson’s actions under Article 207.3 of the Russian Criminal Code — public dissemination of knowingly false information about the use of the Russian Armed Forces, allegedly committed out of political or ideological hatred (Section “d,” Part 2). This provision was added to the Russian Criminal Code in March 2022, during the early weeks of the full-scale conflict in Ukraine, and has since been actively used against journalists, activists, bloggers, and ordinary citizens critical of Russia’s military actions.
The maximum penalty under the applicable statute is up to 10 years of imprisonment. The investigation claims that Anderson disseminated “knowingly false, negative information,” thereby undermining the authority of the military and the state. However, specific excerpts from the publications in question have not been publicly disclosed.
As Anderson resides in the United States, the case has been initiated in absentia. In such cases, Russian law typically allows for in absentia indictment, a court order for arrest in absentia, and subsequently — placement on the international wanted list through INTERPOL. In practice, cases of this nature rarely result in extradition, particularly when the individual resides in countries with strong democratic institutions.
In Anderson’s case, the alleged acts were committed within U.S. jurisdiction and are protected under the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution — one of the nation’s core legal safeguards of freedom of speech. Therefore, the real risk for him lies not in U.S. jurisdiction, but in the possibility of arrest when traveling to third countries, particularly those that cooperate with Russia in legal matters.
The Anderson case exemplifies the expanding practice of Russian authorities pursuing criminal charges against citizens residing abroad. The Russian government is increasingly demonstrating its intent to apply the principle of extraterritoriality: punishing citizens for online speech made outside the country, if it contradicts the official narrative.
This has raised concern among human rights advocates. International organizations emphasize that such prosecutions may be politically motivated — particularly when involving criticism of armed conflict that affects the public interest.
For now, Aleksandr Anderson remains free in the United States. However, the criminal charges brought under a serious statute make him effectively “non-exitable” in the broader sense: any travel outside the U.S. now carries a potential risk. His case reflects a broader trend of repressive actions against dissent — not only within Russia, but beyond its borders.
In this context, the Anderson case may become symbolic: it raises questions about the limits of state jurisdiction in the digital age and where the state’s right to protect its interests ends and internationally recognized individual rights to freedom of opinion begin.
By Vitali Ivaneko
