 "(File) Russian President Vladimir Putin. AP")
On April 15, 2025, a Moscow court sentenced four journalists — Antonina Favorskaya, Konstantin Gabov, Sergei Karelin and Artyom Kriger — to five and a half years in prison for their alleged involvement with the late opposition leader Alexei Navalny’s Anti-Corruption Foundation (FBK), which was designated as an extremist organisation by Russian authorities in 2021.
The closed trial reflects a growing trend of reduced transparency in politically sensitive Russian cases. The journalists were accused of producing content for NavalnyLIVE, Navalny’s YouTube channel.
All four journalists denied the charges, maintaining that they were being prosecuted solely for their professional journalistic work. Their sentencing comes amid a broader crackdown on dissent in Russia, which has intensified since the country invaded Ukraine in 2022. Authorities have increasingly used anti-extremism legislation to stifle independent journalism and suppress political opposition.
The characters: Who they are
Antonina Favorskaya
Favorskaya is a Russian journalist known for her work with SOTAvision, an independent media outlet that frequently covers opposition activities. She was one of the last journalists to extensively report on Navalny before his death in a Siberian prison. Favorskaya had previously been detained while covering a memorial event for Navalny and was later arrested again on extremism charges.
Authorities accused her of helping produce content for NavalnyLIVE, a YouTube channel operated by Navalny’s FBK, which was banned as an extremist organisation in 2021. Favorskaya has denied the charges and press freedom organisations have called her arrest part of a deliberate campaign to silence voices critical of the government.
Impact Shorts
More ShortsKonstantin Gabov
Gabov is a journalist and media producer who has worked with several major outlets, including Reuters. Though he was not a staff member at the time of his arrest, Gabov was reportedly linked to NavalnyLIVE through technical production work.
Prosecutors claimed his contributions constituted support for an extremist organisation. His case, like the others, was tried behind closed doors, preventing independent verification of the evidence presented.
Sergei Karelin
Karelin is a photo and video journalist who has worked as a freelance contributor for The Associated Press and other global media organisations. Authorities cited his alleged involvement in creating or editing content for NavalnyLIVE as grounds for his arrest.
While the AP has stated that he was not working on an assignment for them at the time of his detention, they have condemned the verdict and expressed grave concern over press freedom in Russia.
Artyom Kriger
Kriger, like Favorskaya, was affiliated with SOTAvision and has covered various anti-government protests and legal proceedings involving opposition activists. He was arrested under the same charges as the others—producing or disseminating content for NavalnyLIVE. Kriger’s reporting focused heavily on civil rights violations and state repression, which likely made him a target for surveillance.
Charges based not on violence or incitement
The April sentencing by a Moscow court sentenced these four journalists —Favorskaya, Gabov, Karelin and Kriger—to five and a half years in prison each. The charge: alleged involvement in “extremist activities” through supposed collaboration with Alexey Navalny’s banned Anti-Corruption Foundation (FBK).
The convictions, pronounced by the Nagatinsky District Court, reflect an increasingly punitive approach by Russian authorities toward independent journalism, particularly coverage connected to opposition figures such as Navalny.
According to an Al Jazeera report, prosecutors claimed that the journalists engaged in extremist activity by either reporting on or having professional associations with FBK, which was outlawed in 2021. These claims were related to violent acts or incitement, but were based on the respective journalists’ professional roles — producing videos, publishing investigative content or contributing to platforms aligned with Navalny’s team.
For instance, Karelin was accused of conducting street interviews for Popular Politics, a YouTube channel run by Navalny’s allies. Yet, as he emphasised in his court statement, this channel had not been declared extremist and operated legally at the time of his work.
Defence attorneys insist the State failed to provide any tangible evidence of wrongdoing. Irina Biryukova, representing Gabov, stated that “no evidence was presented that these guys committed any crimes”.
At the same time, Yelena Sheremetyeva, Kriger’s lawyer, dismissed the sentences as “unlawful and unjust”, Al Jazeera reported. The defence’s position, echoed by international watchdogs like the Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ), is that these convictions are nothing more than retaliation for doing the work of journalism.
All four journalists intend to appeal. Their legal teams argue not only procedural injustice but the broader constitutional violation against freedom of speech.
Not a standalone case
The case of these four journalists is not something that happened out of the blue — it is part of a much bigger and more serious pattern. It shows how the Russian government is tightening its control and cracking down on any form of dissent.
Since President Vladimir Putin launched a full-scale invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, the Russian state has increased its pressure on journalists, human rights activists and independent organisations. According to Al Jazeera, this has created an environment where speaking the truth can now be considered a crime.
Several journalists have fled the country to avoid being arrested or harassed for their work, reports say. Those who stayed, like Favorskaya and Kriger, have chosen to keep reporting even though it puts their safety at serious risk.
Al Jazeera reported that Favorskaya had recorded the last known video of Alexei Navalny before he died in February 2024 in a remote Arctic prison. She was arrested shortly after Navalny’s funeral after she published reports on the poor treatment he faced in prison. The Russian state responded by labelling her journalism as extremism.
The Russian government, critics have alleged, appears to be systematically using the legal system to suppress independent journalism. Protests, criticism and free speech are being turned into crimes.
For example, a law passed in 2022, called the “fake news” law and often cited by critics, allows the State to sentence people to up to 15 years in prison if they publish anything that contradicts the official version of events about the war in Ukraine. The Associated Press reported that this law was being used to silence journalists who refused to repeat the Kremlin’s propaganda.
Another major part of this crackdown is how the Russian authorities labelled Navalny’s FBK as an extremist group. According to the CPJ, this was not because the group posed any real security threat, but because it was exposing corruption at the top levels of power.
By branding it as extremist, the government created a legal ground, critics say, to treat anyone who interacted with FBK as a criminal. This allowed them to arrest and charge journalists like the four recently sentenced, simply for reporting on Navalny’s work or sharing information from sources linked to his foundation.
Putin versus press: A timeline
Putin became acting president in 1999. His critics say the state pressure on the media intensified almost immediately, especially on coverage of Chechnya. Journalist Andrei Babitsky was detained for reporting from rebel sides.
2000-01
Tax police raid NTV, a major independent broadcaster critical of the Kremlin. It was followed by a hostile government takeover of NTV in 2001.
2002-2009
A new law was enacted in 2002, punishing the media for “extremist” messages. Several accusations were levelled including the killing of at least six journalists from Novaya Gazeta, including investigative journalist Anna Politkovskaya (murdered in 2006), apparently over their reporting on Kremlin policies and corruption. Forbes Russia journalist Paul Klebnikov murdered in 2004, BBC Russian Service Radio taken off FM in 2007 and Novaya Gazeta’s Anastasiya Baburova murdered in 2009.
2012–2016
Another law was passed in 2012, allowing authorities to label NGOs, the media, and individuals as “foreign agents”. Putin’s critics say it was used to target those criticising Kremlin and independent outlets.
Another law was enacted in 2013 to ban “propaganda of nontraditional sexual relations” to minors, restricting media and fueling attacks on LGBTQ+ activists. Putin signed one more law allowing authorities to block websites without court order. Some sites critical of the Kremlin and linked to opposition leaders were allegedly targeted.
A 2015 law prohibited “undesirable organizations”. It was allegedly used to shut down NGOs and critical news outlets like Dozhd TV and Meduza. One more law was brought to limit foreign ownership of Russian media to 20 per cent.
Several journalists faced prolonged court cases, imprisonment, or suspended sentences on trumped-up charges such as “inciting hatred” or extortion, including Nadira Isayeva (2008), Sergey Reznik (2013-14), Aksana Panova (2014), Dmitriy Shipilov (2015), and Aleksandr Tolmachyov (2014).
In 2014, TV Rain was removed from cable for critical coverage, while Lenta.ru staff was exiled but they founded Meduza.
2016–2020
Journalists and opposition figures like Alexey Navalny face legal harassment, fines, and in Navalny’s case, poisoning. In 2018, journalists covering protests faced raids and arrests.
In 2019, “sovereign internet” law was passed to tighten state control over internet infrastructure and media.
Post-Ukraine invasion: After 2022
After the Ukraine invasion in February 2022, Putin signed laws criminalising “fake news” about the military. Those guilty could be jailed up to 15 years in prison. The law also bans use of “war” or “invasion”. The new laws allow authorities to force closure of foreign media for “hostile actions”.
Dozens of journalists charged, detained, or sentenced for coverage of Ukraine, including much-debated cases of Ivan Safronov (jailed for 22 years) and Maria Ponomarenko (jailed for six years) in 2022. Some other journalists who were sentenced for their job-related charges included Mikhail Afanasyev (jailed for five and a half years), Maria Ponomarenko (six years), Ilya Krasilshchik (jailed for eight years in absentia), Marina Ovsyannikova (eight and a half years in absentia), and Roman Ivanov (seven years).
The conviction of four more journalists adds to the long list of scribes who were found to be on the wrong side of the law in Putin’s Russia.
The harsh sentencing did not go unnoticed beyond Russia’s borders.
Backlash from the international community
The international reaction to the verdict has been quick and strongly critical. Groups that support press freedom and human rights have spoken out against the sentencing calling it a clear attack on the rights of journalists. The CPJ in a statement said the punishment shows “blatant testimony to Russian authorities’ profound contempt for press freedom”. They demanded that all charges be dropped and the four journalists released right away.
The International Federation of Journalists also spoke out against the verdict. They said that the trial and the harsh sentencing are part of a wider pattern where the Russian government tries to silence any voices that disagree with it. These organisations believe the case reflects how the government treats independent media not as something important for society, but as a threat to its control.
Inside Russia, people reacted with strong emotions too. In the courtroom, supporters and fellow journalists stood in solidarity with the reporters, applauding them as they were taken away. According to SotaVision, Kriger showed no fear even after being sentenced.
A larger meaning and message
The implications of this case extend far beyond the fates of the four journalists involved. Critics say labelling investigative journalism as extremism is Kremlin’s message to journalists that reporting on sensitive topics, especially about opposition figures like Navalny or exposing government abuses, will result in severe personal consequences.
Russia has passed a number of laws since 2012 to restrict various freedoms. The Associated Press reports that these laws include the “foreign agent” designation, the “undesirable organisations” law, the “gay propaganda” law and the censorship of “extremist” websites, with the most recent being wartime propaganda controls introduced after Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. These laws, framed as protective measures, have in reality been used to silence dissent and ensure that the government controls the narrative.
According to the CPJ, as of December 2024, Russia is the world’s fifth-worst jailer of journalists, with at least 30 reporters imprisoned. The broader consequence of these actions is the collapse of an informed public. As independent investigative journalism is driven underground or into exile, Russian citizens are left increasingly dependent on state-controlled media. This media serves more as a tool for propaganda than as a legitimate source of information.
A Soviet standard?
This shift becomes particularly evident when contrasted with the post-Soviet period of journalistic openness and reform. In the early 1990s, following the collapse of the USSR, Russian journalism experienced a brief period of growth. According to John Kampfner in Foreign Policy, investigative outlets like NTV and newspapers such as Sevodnya challenged the government, exposing uncomfortable truths. Reporters had access to archives, government officials spoke freely and the press served as a check on power.
Many say this freedom was short-lived. As Putin consolidated his power, critical media faced increasing pressure. Media owners like Vladimir Gusinsky were forced into exile and many independent outlets were either absorbed by state interests or shut down. Critics say Kremlin, under Putin, is restoring Soviet-era freedoms including of speech.