The Kremlin has declared the Russian Antiwar Committee a ‘terrorist organization.’ Here’s what that means for its members and supporters. 

Founded in the days immediately after Moscow’s February 2022 invasion of Ukraine, the Russian Antiwar Committee sought to unite those who opposed the war. Now, it’s officially considered a “terrorist organization” in Russia. 

The Russian Supreme Court ordered the terrorist designation at the request of state prosecutors on March 2, 2026, banning the Antiwar Committee’s activities nationwide. This follows an FSB investigation launched in October 2025 against 23 individuals associated with the group, charging them with “terrorism” and “conspiring to seize power.” 

Made up of prominent opposition politicians and public figures living in exile, the Antiwar Committee has condemned Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine as a war crime and called for resistance against Putin’s “aggressive dictatorship.” Its most recent statement bears the signatures of 19 members, including former Yukos CEO Mikhail Khodorkovsky, Pussy Riot activist Maria Alyokhina, and philanthropist Boris Zimin.

According to the Supreme Court’s press release, the terrorist designation stems from a November 2025 in-absentia ruling sentencing exiled politician Leonid Gozman to 10 years in prison for “justifying terrorism.” 

However, there is a glaring legal inconsistency here. The Supreme Court specifically cited Russia’s Law on Countering Terrorism, which allows a “community” to be re-labeled as an “organization” only if a member is convicted of terrorism under Criminal Code Article 205.4 (“organizing or participating in the activities of a terrorist community”). Grozman was convicted of “justifying terrorism” (Article 205.2), a different offense entirely.

Moreover, statements on the Antiwar Committee website suggest that Gozman was no longer a member of the group when the FSB brought charges against him. In fact, the FSB charged several former Antiwar Committee members as part of the 2025 terrorism case, including opposition politician Vladimir Kara-Murza and political scientist Ekaterina Shulmann. 

The charges against the current and former members of the Antiwar Committee may be reclassified. However, this won’t change much.

You’re currently reading Meduza, the world’s largest independent Russian news outlet. Every day, we bring you essential coverage from Russia and beyond. Explore our reporting here and follow us wherever you get your news.

As previously mentioned, Russia’s Law on Countering Terrorism differentiates between a “community” and an “organization.” So while the FSB opened the case under Article 205.4, “organizing or participating in the activities of a terrorist community,” it may now be reclassified under Article 205.5, “organizing or participating in the activities of a terrorist organization.” 

If the case is reclassified under Article 205.5, defendants charged with being members of a “terrorist organization” will face more serious penalties, including up to 20 years in prison and fines up to 500,000 rubles (roughly $6,400). 

However, since the defendants also face criminal charges related to “forcible seizure of power” (under Criminal Code Article 278), the maximum sentence they could receive for combined offenses remains between 30 and 35 years in prison. And those charged as alleged “organizers,” like exiled Kremlin critic Mikhail Khodorkovsky, will still face a life sentence. 

For supporters, the terrorist designation opens the door for various felony charges, including for “justifying” or “promoting” terrorism. Furthermore, anyone who donates money to the Antiwar Committee risks prosecution for “financing terrorism.” 

There is already a legal precedent for this. In 2024, the Russian Constitutional Court dismissed an appeal by Marina Komar, who was convicted of aiding terrorist activity for sending money to her daughter in Syria. Though Komar’s daughter had been charged with terrorism in absentia and placed on an international wanted list, she had not yet been convicted.

Komar argued that without a guilty verdict against her daughter, the financing charges should be thrown out. Nevertheless, Russian courts ruled that Komar was aware that the funds were supporting terrorism, even without a final verdict in her daughter’s case. The Constitutional Court agreed.