Press release
16.3.2026
Backgrounder: Czech draft law on the “registration of foreign influence”
What is happening
A coalition of Czech lawmakers are drafting a law to create a register for entities with “foreign ties” or “foreign influence”. If passed, this law would require a wide range of organisations and individuals to register themselves before engaging in certain activities involving foreign support or foreign links. Additionally, it is proposed that non-compliance would trigger fines of up to CZK 15 million or, for some organisations, up to 10% of annual turnover. Reporting suggests that the proposal is aimed above-all at civil society organisations and mirrors Russian legislation that the Putin regime has used to undermine civil society organisations by deeming them “foreign agents”.
The proposal has triggered immediate backlash from civil society, opposition parties, and legal experts, who argue that it would stigmatise legitimate international cooperation, chill civil society activity, and give the state sweeping supervisory powers without sufficient judicial safeguards.
A “Russian-style” law
Critics have compared the proposal to similar laws in Russia; they do not do so lightly. The concern is that the draft law appears to borrow the same legislative mechanism used in Russia and other illiberal systems. Such mechanisms segregate organisations with foreign support into a public register of “foreign agents”, subject them to intrusive reporting duties, and attach heavy penalties and possible operational bans for non-compliance.
The draft would reportedly require registered entities to disclose extensive information about their foreign links, staff, and activities; it would allow authorities to punish failures with severe sanctions. The draft includes the possibility of banning “foreign ties” for up to five years.
The broader European context matters here. Russia’s “foreign agents” regime is a tool to stigmatise and crush independent public-interest groups. Human rights and watchdog organisations have long documented how the label was used against NGOs, environmental organisations, and human rights defenders. The reason critics in the Czech Republic are alarmed is that the same basic architecture is being proposed under a different name.
What the draft reportedly does
Based on public reporting on the working version, the proposal contains several especially dangerous aspects:
It would require registration for entities with broadly defined foreign links, rather than targeting covert lobbying undertaken on behalf of a foreign state. Thus, the draft has the capacity to reach far beyond classic national-security scenarios and into ordinary civil society, academic, and professional cooperation.
It would impose harsh financial penalties. The working draft threatens fines of up to CZK 15 million or up to 10% of revenues or turnover.
It would also create a preventive registration duty, meaning registration is not necessarily tied to proven wrongdoing but could be a precondition for activity. Critics say that this flips the democratic presumption of innocence: instead of punishing unlawful conduct, it treats cross-border cooperation itself as suspect and worthy of penalising.
The law would expand state oversight in ways that are ripe for abuse. Public reporting indicates broad supervisory and sanctioning powers, with the possibility of effectively shutting down certain activities. That is why opponents describe the proposal as an intimidation tool.
Why the legal objections are valid
The legal objections are not political, they are valid. Similar laws have already run into major constitutional and European-law problems elsewhere.
- In Commission v Hungary (C-78/18), the Court of Justice of the EU held that Hungary’s foreign-funded NGO transparency law violated EU law. The Court found that registration, declaration and publication requirements imposed on civil society organisations receiving foreign support created discriminatory and unjustified restrictions on free movement of capital and interfered with rights including privacy, data protection and freedom of association.
- Slovakia offers another recent warning. A controversial NGO law there, widely criticised as a “foreign agents” style measure, was struck down by the Slovak Constitutional Court at the end of 2025, according to multiple reports and legal commentary. Those accounts say the court found the law incompatible with constitutional protections and human-rights standards.
Czech critics argue the current draft is likely to face the same objections: disproportionate interference with freedom of association, privacy, expression and, potentially, breaches of EU-law principles if it penalises receipt of legitimate foreign or European funding. The exact constitutional analysis will ultimately depend on the final text, but the European precedents are real and directly relevant.
Why this is NOT comparable to US FARA
Supporters of “foreign influence” legislation often invoke the US Foreign Agents Registration Act, or FARA. But this comparison is misleading.
FARA is aimed at people acting on behalf of and under the direction or control of a foreign principal, especially in lobbying or political influence operations. It does not apply to NGOs, universities, humanitarian groups, or think tanks simply because they receive foreign funding; it applies only if the target is acting on behalf of a foreign principal. The Hungarian case is a much closer European comparison because it involved a register-and-stigmatise model aimed at organisations who receive support from abroad, and the EU’s top court found that approach unlawful.
The Czech draft appears much closer to the illiberal European model than to the narrow US lobbying model.
Who could be affected
Although the politics are framed around NGOs, the apparent reach of the proposal is much broader. Depending on the final wording, it could affect:
- civil society organisations in receipt of grants from foreign foundations or international partners;
- universities and research institutes participating in international programmes;
- cultural organisations, independent media, and think tanks;
- companies or entrepreneurs with foreign investors or support structures;
- entities receiving EU-linked funding, depending on how the law defines foreign support.
This broad scope is one reason the proposal has alarmed not only rights groups but also people concerned with academia, investment, and Czech competitiveness. The draft risks turning normal international cooperation into a legal liability.
Why opposing this type of legislation matters beyond Czech domestic politics
Preventing such legislation matters because modern democracies depend on international networks: universities work with foreign partners, watchdogs receive cross-border grants, humanitarian groups operate through multinational funding, and media and think tanks collaborate internationally. A law that treats such links as inherently suspicious does not target covert hostile influence precisely; it instead risks shrinking the legitimate civic space on which democracy relies. The European Court’s ruling in the Hungary case reflects exactly that concern.
Contact for media:
Soňa Spěváková
sona.spevakova@opu.cz
+420 774 559 013