How to use Telegram after adding Durov to the list of terrorists. Answers to the main questions

Pavel Durov, the founder of the Telegram messenger, was added to the Rosfinmonitoring list of terrorists and extremists. The day before, the FSB announced that he was accused of facilitating terrorist activities in Ukraine and was wanted. The reason for the case was the investigation of the activities of the chatbot for dating "Diver". What awaits the popular messenger now and whether Russians can make purchases in it is in the analysis of Izvestia.

How will this affect Telegram users?

• As long as Telegram is not recognized as a terrorist or extremist organization, there are no restrictions on its activities. The criminal prosecution concerns Pavel Durov personally, and the use of the messenger is not prohibited. Texting, commenting, reading feeds, and creating groups are still legal.

• Some financial transactions may become a risk area. Due to the fact that from now on any transfer of funds to Durov personally can be considered as financing terrorism (despite the fact that this requires the presence of legally prescribed signs of financing and a proven purpose, this is a risk area), it is not necessary to make payments addressed to Pavel Durov. There are no such payments inside Telegram, all paid funds are credited to the accounts of the company that owns the messenger.

What can and cannot be bought on Telegram?

• Telegram Premium subscription remains legal. The current regulations do not contain provisions that would prohibit or restrict the purchase of a subscription or establish liability for its payment. Until an appropriate regulatory act is passed explicitly prohibiting payment for the service or establishing liability for such actions, the purchase of a subscription remains legal.

Like with consequences: how online dating leads teenagers to crimes

The UK puts Pavel Durov on the international wanted list in the case of the recruitment of minors

• The same applies to the payment of advertising – it is officially allowed until the end of 2026. By law, advertising cannot be placed on sites that are restricted in Russia, and Telegram is one of them. However, the FAS acknowledged that businesses need time to rebuild their operations, and therefore stated that they would not be fined for advertising on this platform until the end of this year. Putting Durov on the terrorist list does not affect these decisions.

• It is also not prohibited to use TON (Telegram's own blockchain platform) and make other purchases in the service. However, despite all of the above, some lawyers recommend waiting for official explanations from regulators on this topic.

What will be the consequences for Pavel Durov?

• Inclusion in the Rosfinmonitoring list automatically triggers a number of restrictions for citizens operating in Russia. All bank accounts and deposits are being frozen. Banks are required to stop conducting most operations and freeze all financial assets. The exceptions relate to certain social benefits, taxes, and fines. Transactions involving real estate, transportation, corporate rights, and securities are significantly complicated.

• The activities of Russian-linked businesses come under close scrutiny. If Durov officially remains at the head of Telegram, then, despite the fact that the company has no representative offices or subsidiaries in Russia, if its activities pass through the Russian financial system, banks will strictly monitor it, in some cases suspending operations. Messenger users will not be affected by this.

One in the field is not a coin: Durov's new platform has attracted a record number of scammers

What methods of deception are associated with the increasingly popular Cocoon service?

• Being included in the terrorist list does not automatically mean arrest abroad, but Pavel Durov is officially wanted. He is a citizen not only of Russia, but also of France, Saint Kitts and Nevis and the UAE. France does not extradite its citizens to other countries, but Russia has a bilateral extradition treaty with the UAE. However, it provides for the possibility of refusing to extradite their own citizens. The decision is made by the local court in case of arrest. Even if Durov is arrested in the UAE at Russia's request, it is highly unlikely that the court will decide on extradition.

Why is this happening?

• Pressure on the owners and founders of messengers has already become a global trend. In the 2010s, social media platforms were considered by countries solely as intermediaries that provide a platform for communication and are not responsible for the information posted there. If a user posted illegal content, claims were made against the company, and if ignored, fines were imposed. However, over time, more and more countries began to conclude that such measures were not effective enough. So, in the UK, India and Australia, top managers of social networks can be personally responsible for non-compliance with the requirements of the regulator. There are no such rules in the European Union yet, but there the company that owns the messenger must pay hefty fines of up to 6% of revenue in case of violation of the new law on digital services. This document sets out requirements for the moderation of posts containing disinformation or extremist content.

• This did not prevent the French prosecutor's office from opening a criminal case against Pavel Durov. In August 2024, he was detained at Le Bourget airport on several charges, including those related to drug trafficking and cybercrime (we discussed this precedent in more detail here). According to the French prosecutors, he personally had to be responsible for the crimes that were planned in Telegram. A few days later, he was released, and later he flew to the UAE. The case against him in France remains open.

• In addition, France is making claims to the owner of the social network X, Ilona Mask, also related to insufficient moderation. Brazil and India are also putting pressure on X.

• All these processes are part of a global trend in which regulators first fined companies for inaction (that is, for not removing illegal content), and if there is no result, they proceed to hold the company's owner personally responsible for its activities or violations.