Russia’s Supreme Court Bars Yabloko Ahead of Scheduled Duma Election

On Monday, Russia’s Supreme Court ruled that the liberal opposition party Yabloko could not stand in the upcoming State Duma election, citing alleged illegal donations from abroad. The decision comes as the election is scheduled to be held over three days from 18 to 20 September, with 450 deputies to be chosen, including 11 seats allocated to occupied territories in Ukraine.

iNews

The Kremlin has long presented a façade of pluralism, allowing parties that largely echo government positions to run. Duma speaker Vyacheslav Volodin has described deputies’ function as “confined to voting,” emphasizing loyalty over legislative initiative. Communist Party leader Gennady Zyuganov, in theory the head of the main opposition, praised President Vladimir Putin’s “flawless genius.” Yabloko was the only party with a realistic chance of surpassing the 5 percent threshold needed for representation before the court’s intervention.

iNews

Several deputies are noted for extensive personal fortunes. According to the newspaper *Komsomolskaya Pravda*, A Just Russia member Vitaly Belousov owns property valued at more than the entire Principality of Monaco. United Russia’s Nikolay Goncharov reportedly holds assets more than six times larger than Belousov’s. The family of Chechen MP Bekkhan Agayev controls investment funds with €100 million (£86 million) in property across Germany, Luxembourg, and other European countries. A Just Russia’s Konstantin Aydakov maintains a fleet of 38 vehicles, while fellow deputy Andrei Efimov owns nine, ranging from Russian Kamaz trucks to Swedish Scania lorries. Other deputies, such as Aleksey Zhuravlyov, have made sensational statements—he claimed Denmark hosts a zoo where people can legally rape turtles.

iNews

While the election outcome is widely expected to be predetermined, the removal of Yabloko narrows the limited space for genuine opposition and may heighten public skepticism. Analysts note that a larger gap between official results and any observable public support could reduce the election’s utility as a legitimising ritual and increase the risk of protest, recalling the 2011-13 Bolotnaya demonstrations triggered by perceived electoral fraud. The Supreme Court’s action thus reinforces the perception of a tightly managed electoral process, even as the Kremlin seeks to preserve a veneer of competition.

iNews