Russian Expert Agency Blocks Complaint over Lago-Naki Environmental Threat

Is anything at all capable of stopping the destruction of Russia’s nature reserves? Take the Lago-Naki Plateau, a treasured haven of wildlife that some bluntly want to “develop as quickly as possible” for colossal profit. And in this frantic race for money, it seems no one can bring it to a halt.

Earlier I wrote that Russia’s Glavgosexpertiza issued a positive opinion clearing the way to destroy the Lago-Naki Plateau. In doing so, they relied on completely biased data, outright falsification (where calculations were taken from other regions), and the concealment of critically important facts. I produced a large, detailed analysis of this problem!

Our allies, defenders of the Lago-Naki Plateau, are doing everything they can to stop this madness. The task here is one: PROTECT THE WILDLIFE REFUGE. Meanwhile, the task of officials together with big business is the opposite — to “develop” the protected territories and extract as much profit from them as possible.

After Glavgosexpertiza issued its positive opinion, our team prepared a civil complaint and sent it to them. A few days later we received the following letter.

Quoting in full:

“Good afternoon! The appeal received by FAU ‘Glavgosexpertiza of Russia’ on 27.05.2025 cannot be registered due to the absence of a signature (please send it in writing by post, signed personally) or submit it via the Unified Public Services Portal (EPGU) (requirements of Federal Law No. 59-FZ of 02.05.2006, as amended on 28.12.2024, ‘On the Procedure for Considering Appeals of Citizens of the Russian Federation’).

Article 4. Basic terms used in this Federal Law

1. citizen’s appeal (hereinafter — appeal) — proposals, statements or complaints addressed to a state body, a local self-government body or an official in written form or in the form of an electronic document using the federal state information system ‘Unified Portal of State and Municipal Services (Functions)’ (hereinafter — the Unified Portal), another information system of a state body or local self-government body, or the official website of a state body or local self-government body on the Internet information-and-telecommunications network that ensures the identification and/or authentication of citizens (unless otherwise established by this Federal Law), as well as an oral appeal of a citizen to a state body or local self-government body.”

The letter is signed by a certain “chief specialist” named Vladislav Igorevich Alexandrov, “Document-Flow Organization Department, Administrative Directorate, FAU ‘Glavgosexpertiza of Russia’.”

Sadly, this is the systemic absurdity we live in today. To avoid being accountable to society for issuing positive opinions that destroy Russia’s protected areas, officials simply ignore any dialogue.

Let me explain.

Since 30 March 2025, new amendments have come into force in Russia: sending appeals by ordinary email is no longer considered an official channel; they are accepted only through the Public Services Portal or forms on the agency’s website.

As we see in the reply above, Glavgosexpertiza justifies its refusal to engage with the public on three points: “no signature — not registered,” “send us the paper original,” and references to Law 59-FZ.

To lend weight, they even quote Law 59-FZ itself — apparently to give a “serious look” to their reluctance to communicate with citizens.

To act within the law, we submitted a control complaint, including via the official FAU ‘Glavgosexpertiza’ website. I am well aware that under the new amendments claims can be sent only: 1) through the EPGU (Public Services Portal); 2) through another information system or the official website of the body that ensures identification and/or authentication of the citizen.

Thus we did everything correctly, because the Glavgosexpertiza site is exactly that “other information resource of the body” referred to in the law.

Since the officials cite Law 59-FZ, let’s look at it more closely.

Article 8 of Law 59-FZ states that any written or electronic appeal must be registered within three days. In our case it was not registered at all!

Article 7 of Law 59-FZ sets out the requirements for an appeal. For an electronic appeal, a full name and a reply address are sufficient. A signature is mentioned only for a paper letter. Yet the officials demand a paper letter, knowingly dragging the process out for weeks, perhaps months!

Article 11 of Law 59-FZ lists the reasons why citizens’ appeals may be left unanswered. There is no clause about a “wet signature”; the only grounds are when no surname is given, no means of feedback is provided, or insults are present.

Thus Glavgosexpertiza cites grounds that simply do not exist in the law. Interestingly, on its own website (the Glavgosexpertiza online reception) the rules say: “electronic appeals are registered within three days.” They openly and brazenly violate even their own rules.

But … why worry? Under Article 5.59 of the Code of Administrative Offenses, the maximum penalty is a fine of 5 000 – 10 000 rubles for an official. Meanwhile they will not have to answer for handing one of the planet’s most amazing places — the protected Lago-Naki Plateau — over to COLOSSAL PROFIT.

Glavgosexpertiza has thus fully demonstrated allegiance to the lobbying circles now trying to tear Lago-Naki apart, and has shown the utmost disrespect for society!

• Deadlines for registering the appeal (our complaint) were violated;
• Grounds for refusal were arbitrarily expanded;
• Non-compliance with their own regulations (the rules published by the “Internet Reception” on the Glavgosexpertiza website constitute a public offer of the body);
• An administrative offense was committed (Article 5.59 of the Code of Administrative Offenses).

I suspect the officials have never even held the Constitution. But what about Article 33, which guarantees the right to appeal and obliges a body to respond on the merits? That body has no right to complicate a constitutional right with arbitrary barriers.

Allies!

We will keep fighting for change and will not retreat from protecting wildlife. The only real force today is your activity. Support, spread the word, speak about the problem. Constant public resonance is vital.

I understand that Glavgosexpertiza’s position is now fully formed, and any appeals, even through the Public Services Portal or other bodies, will receive a standard brush-off. Just a brush-off! With exactly the same wording they sent us when refusing to register the complaint.

In the near future we will decide what steps to take next.

• Click here to learn more about how Glavgosexpertiza issued a positive opinion to destroy the Lago-Naki Plateau

© PAVEL PASHKOV