How does being accused of terrorism by the Russian Federation prevent you from receiving asylum?

The Russian Rosfinmonitoring (Federal Financial Monitoring Service) maintains a List of organizations and individuals, providing information about their involvement in extremist activity or terrorism. People who end up there (if they are outside the Russian Federation) are usually congratulated on the recognition of their merits in the fight against the Russian regime; however, few people understand how this status complicates the life of a person with Russian citizenship, even outside the Russian Federation. This status often interferes with obtaining political asylum, significantly reduces the chances of obtaining humanitarian visas and creates an increased risk of extradition to the Russian Federation.

Rosfinmonitoring is one of the punitive bodies of the Russian Federation and at the same time a reliable source of information for bureaucratic machines, including European states. How did this happen?

There is an intergovernmental organization called the FATF (Financial Action Task Force). Its goal is to develop and promote standards to combat money laundering, terrorist financing, and the financing of the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction. FATF issues recommendations for individuals accused of terrorism (I emphasize, not convicted, but accused). Their essence lies in the application of preventive measures to such individuals, including freezing of assets (i.e., deprivation of the right to open and use bank accounts, the inability to dispose of property), enhanced financial monitoring (which makes it difficult to receive assistance from other people and organizations). In general, the maximum deprivation of rights is based only on the suspicion brought forward, not on the court verdict that verified it. This is why charges under terrorist articles entail consequences worse than charges of murder or pedophilia.

Russia took an active part in developing INTERNATIONAL standards for countering terrorism until 24 February 2023, its membership in FATF was suspended only a year after the full-scale invasion [1]. But the recommendations that it participated in developing continue to be in effect.

RESTRICTION OF ACCESS TO ASYLUM PROCEDURES

Thus, in 2012, the FATF stated in the Special Recommendations on Terrorist Financing:
“ Countries should also take all feasible measures to ensure that they do not provide safe havens to persons accused of financing terrorism, terrorist acts or terrorist organisations, and should have procedures in place to extradite, where possible, such persons” (Recommendation 5)[2].

Later, these special recommendations were integrated into the updated “40 FATF Recommendations” [3]. In this list, the word “safe haven” is no longer mentioned, but the organization did not recognize the previously issued recommendations as erroneous. This means that if a country has previously implemented a recommendation on preventing persons accused of terrorism from accessing safe haven procedures based on the old FATF recommendations, it can continue to operate.

Of course, it is impossible to formally prohibit everyone accused of terrorism from seeking asylum – this would contradict the 1951 Geneva Refugee Convention, EU directives, the Dublin Regulation and other international agreements, so these recommendations could well be implemented in internal regulations for handling cases of asylum seekers accused of terrorism. For example, a mandatory positive conclusion from the security service or other competent authority may be required for such a case, without which the migration service cannot make a decision on granting asylum to a person accused of terrorism.

BUT HOW IS THIS POSSIBLE? AFTER THE FULL-SCALE INVASION OF UKRAINE, RUSSIA WAS RECOGNIZED AS A TERRORIST COUNTRY!

Let’s remember who admitted what.

PACE – Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe

In the Resolution of 13 October 2022, PACE declared Russia a terrorist regime (paragraph 11.6). [4]PACE is a consultative body whose resolutions are not binding on countries. Resolutions express a political position, but do not automatically entail sanctions, automatically trigger legal procedures, or change the international status of a state.

European Parliament

In the Resolution of 23 November 2022, [5]the European Parliament recognized Russia as a state sponsor of terrorism. Resolutions of the European Parliament are political acts that do not oblige to taking of legally significant actions. Expression of a political position.

NATO Parliamentary Assembly

On 21 November 2022, the NATO Parliamentary Assembly adopted a resolution recognizing Russia as a terrorist state.[6]

OSCE Parliamentary Assembly

On 4 July 2023, the OSCE Parliamentary Assembly adopted a resolution recognizing Russia as a state sponsor of terrorism.[7]

National Parliaments

Lithuania: On 10 May 2022, the Seimas of Lithuania adopted a resolution declaring Russia a state sponsor and perpetrator of terrorism.[8]

United States: On 27 July 2022, the US Senate passed a resolution calling on the US State Department to designate Russia as a state sponsor of terrorism.[9]

Latvia: In a statement on 11 August 2022, the Latvian Saeima declared Russia a state sponsor of terrorism.[10]

Estonia: On 18 October 2022, the Estonian Parliament adopted a statement declaring the Russian regime a terrorist regime and Russia a state sponsor of terrorism.[11]

Czech Republic: On 15 November 2022, the Chamber of Deputies of the Parliament of the Czech Republic adopted a resolution recognizing the current regime in the Russian Federation as a terrorist regime.[12]

Poland: On 26 October 2022, the Polish Sejm adopted[13] resolution[14] and the declaration [15]of political characteristics on the recognition of the Russian Federation government as a terrorist regime, on December 14, 2022, adopted a resolution in which it recognized Russia as a state that supports terrorism and uses terrorist measures.[16]

Netherlands: On 24 November 2022, the lower house of the Dutch Parliament adopted a resolution calling Russia a state sponsor of terrorism.[17]

Slovakia: On 16 February 2023, the National Council of the Slovak Republic adopted a resolution declaring Russia a country sponsoring terrorism and the Russian regime as a terrorist one.[18]

6. Ukraine

The Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine did not limit itself to political statements but adopted the Law of Ukraine “On Defence” propaganda Russian Nazi totalitarian regime, aggressions Russian Federation as a terrorist power against Ukraine, symbols military invasion Russian Nazi totalitarian regime in Ukraine”, that is, legally recognized Russia as a terrorist state.[19]

7. FATF

On 24 February 2023, the RF temporarily suspended its membership [20], but did not blacklist the RF. (High-Risk Jurisdictions subject to a Call for Action) or at least a grey list ( Jurisdictions under Increased Monitoring) [21]for failure to comply with the organization’s standards, as requested by the Ministry of Finance of Ukraine.[22]

So, what do we see? Statements by PACE, OSCE, the European Parliament, NATO PA, and national parliaments of EU countries are political statements and have no legal consequences. The FATF is the only organization with the authority at the international level to make a legal decision that Russian authorities are sponsoring terrorist activities, which effectively means recognizing Russia as a terrorist state. The only national jurisdiction in which the Russian Federation is legally recognized as a terrorist state is Ukraine.

Does the EU understand that its resolutions have no legal consequences for Russia and that Ukraine has called for legal actions, not political statements? They do. Thus, at a plenary session of the European Parliament in October 2022, EU Commissioner for Home Affairs Ylva Johansson noted that the EU currently lacks a specific legal basis for designating a third country as a state sponsor of terrorism. [23]Similar comments from other European politicians can be found in news publications about resolutions adopted by national parliaments. The lack of legally significant decisions was explained by the lack of relevant legislation. And if, as of February 2022, the lack of relevant legislation was explained by the suddenness of the full-scale invasion of Russia into Ukraine, then in May 2025, this can only be explained by the fear of making responsible decisions.

There is no publicly available information that the adopted resolutions were sent to FATF with a request to include the Russian Federation in the black or grey list. Only Ukraine addressed such a request to the relevant international organization.

HOW DOES ALL OF THIS AFFECT A SPECIFIC ASYLUM REQUEST?

The absence of the Russian Federation in the black or grey list of FATF jurisdictions creates a presumption of good faith in the activities of Russian state bodies authorized under Russian legislation to counter terrorism. That is, the decisions of the Investigative Committee of the Russian Federation, the FSB of the Russian Federation, courts and Rosfinmonitoring, legally have a presumption of good faith in all national jurisdictions except Ukraine. The Rosfinmonitoring terrorist list is a formally and legally reliable source of information for migration services and security services of European states. And if you are included there, then you have the reverse burden of proof. You are obliged to prove that in your particular case, this happened within the framework of politically, ethnically or religiously motivated persecution. But the fact that you have proven this specifically does not affect the assessment of the reliability of the Rosfinmonitoring list as a whole. Each defendant under a terrorist article must again prove that his inclusion in this generally reliable source of information about terrorists was a mistake. This applies to all countries except Ukraine, which has officially refused to recognize this list as reliable at the legislative level.

Many people are still surprised by the situation in which a person without any confirmed persecution in the Russian Federation, only based on a potential threat of persecution, receives a humanitarian visa or refugee status, while a person included in the Rosfinmonitoring list is refused. But there is nothing to be surprised about, since this situation is a direct consequence of the architecture of international legislation on countering terrorism, which enshrines the presumption of guilt of the accused and the presumption of good faith in the activities of state bodies.

IS IT POSSIBLE TO CHANGE THIS STRUCTURE?

Is it possible to apply Ukraine’s progressive approach to the development of international legislation to exclude the possibility of using international counter-terrorism mechanisms for politically, ethnically or religiously motivated persecution and repression?

It is possible, but very difficult to implement. First of all, because of the structural inequality of FATF. FATF has 40 members, of which 2 are international organizations (European Commission, Gulf Cooperation Council) and 38 are states. The membership of the Russian Federation is suspended, but it is not completely excluded from the membership. There are also Associate Members. FATF – FATF Regional Groups. These organizations are created to cover the FATF standards worldwide. Examples:

MONEYVAL — for the Council of Europe countries (this includes Ukraine)
EAG (Eurasian Group) – Belarus, China, India, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Russian Federation, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan.
GAFILAT – Latin America
MENAFATF – Middle East and North Africa
ESAAMLG – East and Southern Africa

Countries that are only members of regional groups do not have voting rights in the FATF itself when developing FATF standards. Even one FATF member country (for example, Russia until 24.02.2023) had many times more leverage than an entire regional group like MONEYVAL or EAG. This creates inequality when countries that are not directly members of the FATF (like Ukraine) are forced to obey mechanisms that they themselves cannot change.

Ukraine today is the leader in the fight against terrorism, for which it pays every day with the lives of its best people. Ukraine’s absence among FATF members is absurd. Therefore, when reforming international legislation in the area of countering terrorism, we must begin by including Ukraine in the FATF.

Nina Belyaeva

[1][20] FATF Statement on the Russian Federation

[2] FATF Special Recommendations 2012

[3] FATF Recommendations

[4] PACE Resolution of 13 October 2022

[5] European Parliament resolution on recognizing the Russian Federation as a state sponsor of terrorism (2022/2896(RSP)