Russia’s courts have given the state a clear green light to keep throttling or blocking voice calls on popular messaging apps – and for ordinary users that means fewer reliable options for calling, while for companies it means an awkward choice between compliance and retreat.
Court refuses to reopen challenge to Roskomnadzor limits
On 19 February 2026 the Moscow City Court reviewed appeals and left unchanged a Tagansky district court decision from 29 December 2025 that stopped proceedings in an administrative lawsuit brought by Konstantin Larionov on behalf of 105 plaintiffs against the Federal Service for Supervision of Communications, Information Technology and Mass Media (Roskomnadzor) and the Ministry of Digital Development of the Russian Federation.
The plaintiffs had asked the court to declare Roskomnadzor’s actions – the partial restriction of voice calls in Telegram and WhatsApp introduced in August last year – unlawful. The appellate panel rejected that challenge.
What changed and why it matters
Roskomnadzor says the measures are intended to fight fraud, but earlier this month it stepped up pressure on Telegram, warning the restrictions would remain until the platform placed servers in Russia and complied with domestic law. At the same time, the agency intensified limits on WhatsApp.
That demand – put servers on Russian soil or suffer degraded service – is a familiar lever. Requiring local data handling makes it legally easier for authorities to compel access, to enforce content and metadata rules, and to throttle services without lengthy court fights. For encrypted apps, hosting servers locally doesn’t magically break end-to-end encryption, but it does shift the balance of jurisdiction and control in ways that matter for surveillance, law enforcement access, and service reliability.
A pattern, not an isolated push
This episode fits into a longer string of regulatory pressure. Russian laws and enforcement practices over the past decade have repeatedly pressured global platforms to localize data and cooperate with surveillance and takedown orders. Platforms that resist risk partial or full blocking; those that comply face reputational and technical trade-offs.
For users the blunt reality is simple: when regulatory friction escalates, calls drop in quality or disappear, businesses that relied on app-based calling lose a low-cost channel, and privacy-conscious people must choose between degraded service, migration to smaller apps, or tools that can bypass national controls.
Who wins, who loses
Winners: Roskomnadzor and the state. Keeping the courts aligned with enforcement gives regulators leverage over international platforms and signals to other companies that noncompliance has consequences.
Losers: ordinary users, privacy advocates and international messaging platforms. Businesses and NGOs that counted on free, reliable app calling now face operational headaches. The official fraud-prevention rationale is plausible, but blunt network restrictions are a heavy-handed tool – they punish victims as much as they disrupt perpetrators.
What companies will do next
Platforms have three basic responses: place infrastructure inside Russia and accept the legal trade-offs; try to negotiate narrow exemptions or technical workarounds; or reduce service functionality in the market. Each path has costs. Localizing servers hands more control to the state; negotiating can be slow and uncertain; retreat risks cutting off millions of users and handing advantage to domestic alternatives.
Expect incremental escalation: enforcement notices, selective throttling, and a steady drumbeat of legal pressure aimed at getting platforms to blink. Legal challenges like the one by Larionov are unlikely to change that dynamic unless a higher court or a new legal text creates a check on regulator power.
Verdict
The Moscow City Court’s decision is less about the fine print of administrative law and more a sign that Russian regulators will keep using infrastructure demands as leverage. The fraud argument will be the public face. The practical effect is stronger state control, weaker guarantees for private communications, and a harder operating environment for global messaging services that want to serve Russian users without becoming arms of the state.
For users, the takeaway is blunt: assume voice calling on popular global apps in Russia will be intermittently unreliable until firms, courts or new laws shift the balance – and that privacy promises are softer in practice when jurisdictional pressure is high.