(originally published: April 24, 2025)

If someone kills another person without a justified reason, we often say that this is a murder that should be followed with legal consequences: an investigation, a case in a court, and some punishment or compensation that should be forced upon a person who committed a murder. The person who helped commit a murder would most likely be condemned as an accomplice in crime who will also have consequences for their actions.

A person or even many people can also be killed by a group of people organized in a certain way, like a social institution, a company, or even a government of a state.  For asylum seekers, such violence can be done both in the countries that they fled, and in the countries that they fled to.

One way such violence can happen in the countries that they arrived at is with the use of a state’s bureaucracy, which is called bureaucratic violence (Eldridge & Reinke, 2018).

Nadim, who fled from Afghanistan to Finland and got a negative asylum decision after the asylum practices became tightened in 2016, described the situation that he and many others faced by 2017 like this:

“In Afghanistan the Taliban kills with guns; in Finland the government kills with pens”.

He wanted to say that the way in which Finnish authorities processed his claim for asylum and his possible deportation to Afghanistan meant that he would certainly be murdered – something done both by the Taliban and Finnish authorities together. The Finnish bureaucracy would also participate in killing Nadim. It would allow Nadim’s murder by the Taliban by rejecting his claim for safety and deporting him back to Afghanistan under the Taliban (Näre, 2020).

Bureaucracy as a machine of violence

Bureaucracies can be found in the public sector (Ritzer & Stepninsky, 2018):

• They consist of offices and work in them is organized by rules
• Each office has its own function, and there are ways to compel office workers to follow the rules (for example, by removing a worker from the office if they don’t follow the rules properly)
• These offices are organized in a hierarchy with higher offices guiding the work of lower ones
• The roles that people take working in an office may require some qualifications (for example, you need to have a degree in law to work as a law expect who assesses asylum claims)
• All decisions, rules, and actions that workers do are recorded in papers or electronically

Such complicity to murder is done by many people working in many organizations in Finland.

• The Immigration Office (Migri) officers process asylum applications.
• The way Migri officers work is directed by the officials working in the Ministry of the Interior.
• The officials working in the Ministry of the Interior use the guidelines made by the officials in the Finnish government.
• The officials in the Administrative Court and the Supreme Administrative Court process the appeals of the asylum decisions made by Migri officials.
• Police officers and border guards get the decisions from Migri officials and then according to them force those asylum seekers who get a negative decision out of Finland to the countries where they can be murdered.

“A death sentence in disguise”

Borderlines interviewed 3 people who escaped from Russia to Finland, applied for asylum but received a negative decision.

Alexey Karachevsky and Andrey are a same-sex couple who lived in Russia together. They registered their marriage in 2019 in Portugal. Even though they lived in the same apartment, they didn’t live openly as a same-sex couple. Yet, in April 2022, after they expressed their disapproval of Russian invasion in Ukraine, their neighbors tried to attack them and started to threaten them with phone calls and spreading leaflets in the house referring to them as pedophiles. Because of that they had to urgently flee from Russia. On January 3 2025 they received a negative decision from Migri. They appealed it at the Administrative Court and are now waiting for its decision.

Maria Moskvina and her wife lived in Russia until their sexual orientation became known and they started to get threats. The threats also came to them because of their oppositional views regarding Putin’s regime. After they fled Russia, police officers even arrived at the place where Maria was registered to figure out her current location. In Finland they received a negative decision from Migri and then later also the Administrative Court supported Migri’s decision. They tried to appeal this in the Supreme Administrative Court, but their appeal wasn’t taken for consideration. Now Maria and her wife applied for asylum in Finland for the second – and last possible – time.

Just like Nadim, Alexey, Andrey, and Mariia also feel like bureaucracy can actually kill or harm–not only him personally but also his friends and his husband:

“To us, this [the negative decision] sounds like …. a death sentence in disguise. <…>At stake are the fates and lives of real people who are facing persecution in Russia. <…> Our lives, the lives of our friends, the asylum seekers. People whom Migri wants to send back to their home country. <…> And after the war started, I realized that gay people would be labeled as the “fifth column,” a group to be persecuted and destroyed in the name of “traditional values.” I know history well enough to recognize the parallels with Nazi Germany in the 1930s. I have no desire to end up in prison with a metaphorical pink triangle.” – Andrey

“I don’t think [coming back to Russia] is possible. Almost every LGBTQ person struggles to come to terms with their identity, no matter their age. Most of the time, you can’t turn to family or close ones for support because you either know—or fear—that they’ll judge you or even cut you off entirely. Russian society, in general, is deeply homophobic. I’m sure everyone has heard jokes or negative comments about the LGBTQ community. … And what’s worse, you know that no one will protect you—except maybe yourself or your partner.” – Maria

Migri and the whole bureaucratic system involved in asylum policies becomes complicit with violence toward LGBTQ+ people done by the Russian state and society. By failing to provide safety for Russian LGBTQ+ people, this system becomes responsible for the violence consequences following the negative asylum decisions.

The situation around LGBTQ+ people in Russia

The negative attitudes of Russian citizens toward LGBTQ+ people have been increasing during 2010-20’s.

According to the beliefs of Russian citizens, meeting LGBTQ+ people or seeing them on TV, reading about them in books is like being exposed to the blood of a person infected with a dangerous blood-transmitted disease or the cough of a COVID-positive person. Many Russians think that queer identities such as homosexuality and transsexuality belong in the same category as “pedophilia”. They believe these can “transmit” from person to person or when a person, especially a child, sees, for example, an LGBTQ+ flag or a couple of men holding hands. Such views are shaped by the Russian authorities and have roots in Europe when Peter the Great in 1716 and later Nicholas I decided to “civilize” Russian society and imported homophobia from Europe of that time (Healey, 2005; Duberman et al., 1989).

Sociologist Alexandra Novitskaya writes in her study (2023) that anti-queer laws in the post-Soviet countries appeared after the Soviet Union fell apart. The post-Soviet governments or general public were anxious of the influence from the West (for example, promoting democratic ideas) or of a transition happening in many states when less people are born and the part of society that consists of elderly people grows.

Russian authorities have tried to actively restrict and criminalize LGBTQ+ people’s presence in public already since 2013 when they introduced the new law prohibiting “LGBT propaganda” among minors, which in fact criminalized any attempts of LGBTQ+ people to publicly demand their rights.

In 2022, together with invading Ukraine, the Russian government banned mentioning LGBTQ themes in positive or neutral tone publicly, and only a negative and condemning narrative became permitted by law. In fact, this excluded LGBTQ+ people in Russia from participation in society (Human Rights Watch, 2022; Kosilkin & Kochekovsky, 2024).

In the summer 2023 Russian authorities banned transgender people from transition and thus prohibited hormonal treatment or psychological support (Amnesty International, 2023).

In fall of 2023 the Supreme Court in Russia called the “international LGBT movement” extremist. This happened because authorities saw ideals of LGBTQ+ rights as opposing “Russian traditional values”. The Supreme Court explained that the “movement” has an “inherently destructive ideological mechanism of influence” that leads to self-destruction of society, weakens family ties, harms moral health, and imposes ideas that imply the denial of human dignity and the value of human life” (OVD-Info, 2025; Kosilkin & Kochekovsky, 2024).

This change is exactly what Alexey mentioned too:

“in Russia, we’ve been equated to extremists, and for openly participating in the LGBTQ community, we will all face criminal charges.”

Human rights organizations, such as Human Rights Watch (2024) echo Alexey:

OVD-Info (2025) mentions that the decision doesn’t explain what exactly should be perceived as the “international LGBT movement”. That’s why police officers in Russia decide on their own who to arrest and what for. There is no agreement on what logic police officers in Russia use. The threat of violence is unpredictable. Moreover, police started to make informal lists of LGBTQ+ people in Russia, and a recent investigation by Meduza (2025) agency showed that keeping registers of LGBTQ+ people in Russia became a governmental guideline, the purpose of which is not yet known.

The claim of extremism was used for Andrey Kotov, a tourism agency owner, in 2023 (Human Rights Watch, 2025). Even though he wasn’t actually an LGBTQ+ activist, simply being an LGBTQ+ person became the reason to apply the law, arrest him and send to prison. Because LGBTQ+ people are perceived as morally inferior to others, the humiliating treatment of Kotov in the prison ended with his death.

Sociologist Alexandra Novitskaya in her study (2023) showed that such anti-queer laws and media make LGBTQ+ people in Russia visible for others – not like in Western democracies where LGBTQ+ people become visible as people fighting for their rights and equality, but instead as people who are dangerous and morally failed who should be always on watch. Even those who would like to be seen as usual people with a spouse or partner of the same gender or who transitioned at some point in their life – are forced into being always the center of heightened attention, suspicion, and threats from others.

This makes LGBTQ+ people be constantly exposed to the risk of violence from others. The anti-queer laws kind of tell queerphobic people that the state is on their side:

“You never know where the threat might come from—relatives who champion “traditional values,” police enforcing barbaric laws, or neighbors who have been trained by the authorities to fear and hate anything different—whether it’s someone’s thoughts, appearance, or way of life.” – Andrey

Unpredictability was an important feature of Andrey and Alexey’s story, when their neighbors heard them criticizing the Russian government for invading Ukraine and paid their attention to the fact that Andrey and Alexey were living in the same apartment. This led neighbors to threaten Andrey and Alexey and so the couple fled from the country.

Being in the focus of such public and state’s attention creates a feeling that queerphobia is everywhere and the threat “lingers over” you all the time. One of people who Alexandra Novitskatya interviewed, Anya, a lesbian woman from Russia, told that “her life before immigrating was filled entirely with “homophobia, transphobia, and all the other phobias.”” This describes well how queerphobia is everywhere and all the time around LGBTQ+ people in Russia.  Novitsakaya adds that “obviously, the “region-wide climate of hate” that befell the queer communities in the former Soviet Union in the 2010s, largely limited post-Soviet LGBTQ people’s ability to have a “livable life”. (Novitskaya, 2023).

Unsplash/ Arctic Qu

Importantly, even being in the closet doesn’t mean an LGBTQ+ person won’t face threats in the future as Alexey and Andrey’s story shows. Because such violence is unpredictable and directed against LGBTQ people as a social group, any LGBTQ+ person is at risk.

Even those who are supposed to protect from violence due to their profession – such as police officers – can do violent actions towards LGBTQ+ people in Russia.

In 2016, Alexandr Sidorov (Rossiyskaya LGBT-set’, 2017) organized a single-person demonstration with the slogan “Hating gays is an antiscientific delusion” in Makhachkala. After a while some young guys in masks approached him and started beating him. Some police officers who were passing by noticed that and approached the young guys. Instead of arresting them they just started talking to them. The activist had been taken to the police office where his police statement was rejected and police officers threatened to start a case against him. Some of them said that they would have acted just like the violence perpetrators and that such people like Alexandr should be burned.

In the same year, Misha and Oleg (Samarskoye obshchestvennoye LGBT-dvizheniye “Avers”, 2018)  in Samara were stopped by police officers for drinking alcohol on the street at night. After having taken the guys to the police office, police officers inspected their backpacks and found condoms. They demanded to unblock their phones and started inspecting the content. They noticed some sexual content showing that Misha and Oleg had a relationship. Police officers insulted the guys as “pedophiles”. The police officers started to beat the guys with a stun gun, tried to record a video where Oleg would confess that he is a “pedophile”, and threatened to publish it on the internet and disclose their identities. One of the police officers openly said that he would kill Oleg, and would pour boiling water on him from a kettle. Two sergeants were called and after they arrived, one of them started to tell how joyfully he would be beating Oleg. while another tried to imagine how it was better to break Oleg’s chest. The total time of arrest lasted for about 11 hours where no food was offered. One of the sergeants let Oleg home but said that he should expect a criminal investigation. No information about Misha is known in detail. 

To flee from violence or the threat of it, LGBTQ+ people apply for asylum abroad. However, in Finland, the threat of violence from the state doesn’t disappear.

Why is Finnish bureaucracy violent?

One reason why bureaucratic violence happens is because Finland’s bureaucracies such as Migri simplify the situation around LGBTQ+ people in Russia. Instead of considering the situation around LGBTQ people in Russia as changing, Migri decision makers see it as something static.

During the last 3 years, several laws involving LGBTQ people in Russia have changed, but Migri doesn’t consider such laws in their decisions and assess safety for LGBTQ people as if the new laws don’t exist and as if LGBTQ people in Russia aren’t considered extremists.

“As LGBT+ activists, we can be imprisoned for up to 12 years in Russia. The Finnish Migration Service decides on asylum requests based on their data about the applicants’ countries of origin. However, their information about Russia is outdated and inadequate. They do not consider the anti-LGBT laws, human rights violations, and the high level of violence against LGBT+ individuals in Russia as serious risks.” – Petition by Anna Iliukovich-Strakovskaia and Victoria Tsvetkova

The [extremism] law wasn’t in Migri’s decision because it was passed later. The court mentioned it, but it was more like “Yes, there’s such a law,” and that was it.” – Mariia

Both before accepting LGBTQ+ movement as extremism and after this, as we showed here, there was evidence that even police officers didn’t really protect LGBTQ+ people from violence and sometimes even committed violent actions themselves. This created a lot of fear and distrust in Russian LGBTQ+ people. In 2023, it was the state authorities that criminalized LGBTQ+ people. Yet, Migri ignores this too, providing advices and explanations that Mariia, who got a negative decision from Migri, called “absurd”:

“Migri has no real understanding of the situation for LGBTQ people in Russia and relies on outdated information. Almost every argument they used was absurd!”

“Based on the information about your home country, the status of being LGBTQ+ may complicate receiving official assistance, but belonging to a sexual minority in itself does not mean that a person cannot receive official protection. The migration service believes that you will still be able to expect assistance from the authorities of your country.” – Alexey

The second reason comes from anthropologist Mariam Ticktin’s work. In her book Casualties of Care (2011), Ticktin described how in welfare states the idea to help those in need becomes “chauvinist”. Instead of assessing the circumstances where people need help and helping them based on that, bureaucracies make up ever stricter criteria about if one’s experiences “fit” the label and separate those who “deserve” help from those who “doesn’t”.

Bureaucracy officials use some “ideal” pictures of what it means to be an asylum seeker when they create criteria for asylum. Often, such an ideal picture contains “signs” of extreme suffering. Such a picture also misses out the contexts and situations from which people try to escape (for example, laws due to which one can be arrested and thrown into a prison, public attitudes that encourage violence against some particular group of people), because this is not what a bureaucracy would evaluate in the first place. According to such an ideal picture of an asylum seeker, a person fleeing from danger should have physical or mental traumas, be raped, be sold, some of their relatives should be murdered – in this case such agencies as Migri decide that such a person “deserves” security.

If an asylum seeker’s life experiences don’t really fit in such an ideal image, then Migri will most likely decide that such an asylum seeker doesn’t “deserve” asylum – even if that would mean a deportation to the country where such a person can be later murdered or injured.

If someone doesn’t meet the criteria, Migri simply sends people seeking for safety back to the dangerous places. This is how Migri and other bureaucratic structures become assistants in violence done by other states to those who flee from danger.

Andrey, who together with his husband Alexey received a negative decision from Migri, wrote that “Queerness—whether bisexuality or homosexuality—is as fundamental to a person as heterosexuality. Not being yourself, not being gay, is like ceasing to be human. That’s not life; it’s mere existence. And trying to hide it means living under constant fear of being exposed.” Andrey meant that when a state imposes criminalizing and oppressing laws on LGBTQ+ people, it’s impossible to live with dignity and safety.

Yet, Migri doesn’t recognize people who are forced to hide themselves and living in fear as someone “deserving” security from Finland:

Having lived in such conditions for many years is another thing that doesn’t fit the ideal picture of an asylum seeker. In Migri’s view, a person who faced some danger and escaped from the country quickly “deserves” asylum, while those who have been living in conditions not letting them be fully human for years do not:

“The authorities acknowledged the facts of persecution and threats but deemed them insufficiently systematic to grant asylum. We had hoped that the current situation in Russia—with the complete lack of rights for LGBTQIA+ people and the threat of criminal prosecution—would be taken into account, but that didn’t happen. … the Finnish authorities deemed the threats insufficiently serious, essentially saying, “You’ve survived in these conditions for so many years—you’ll manage a little longer.” Moreover, the Finnish Immigration Service claims that we could seek protection from Russian authorities in the future.” – Alexey

“For example: “Yes, we acknowledge that you have suffered, but it was not enough or not systematic.” And that raises the question—what is enough? Are we supposed to constantly put ourselves and our partner in danger just to prove it?Or another one: “You have demonstrated your ability to live and be in a relationship in Russia.” And that was it—no explanation, just a statement. We kept asking ourselves: What does that even mean? What are they trying to say? Yes, we lived there. Yes, it was hard. We coped however we could, sometimes we broke down. Of course, all of it affected our quality of life, our relationships, and left lasting damage on our mental health.” – Mariia

Researchers Jaana Palander and Saara Pellander in their study (2021) pointed at yet another reason why bureaucratic violence happens.

In 2000’s and especially after the 7/2011 incident in the US, the governments of many countries, including Finland, started to gradually perceive migrants as a threat to national security. The ideas that migrants can make society less safe pushed authorities to make immigration laws strict and moving to a country difficult. In Finland, this meant that the government became more interested in protecting the society from imagined danger and less interested in human rights of those who come to Finland. Neither Finland, nor many other states in 2000-10’s really explained how strict immigration rules would decrease risks of danger or what kind of exact threat they are afraid of.

The government officials started to change the Finnish Aliens Act (containing immigration laws) and the way bureaucracy works assessing asylum claims and deporting. The officials kept explaining these measures as something necessary due to “national security”. This way, Migri and other immigration agencies in many other countries started to work not to protect people fleeing from danger but instead to let only some people in and exclude many others who are all labeled “potentially dangerous”.

Bureaucracies in Finland involved in immigration are neither neutral nor objective. They create bureaucratic violence because of ideas of national security and deservingness that shape the way they work. These ideas make Migri and other bureaucracies complicit in violence done to LGBTQ+ asylum seekers by the Russian state.

Migri’s psychological harms

Asylum decisions and the ways bureaucracies make them are harmful not only because of what may result from them in the future, but also because they influence how LGBTQ+ asylum seekers from Russia feel and live in Finland.

“We were upset by the rejection, but once we fully translated the decision and read Migri’s reasoning, we were devastated. <…> After Migri’s rejection, we held ourselves together as best we could. Of course, we were anxious about the future—what if the court rejected our appeal as well? What would we do then? <…> When we first arrived, I had constant nightmares about ending up back in my home country. A year later, I developed insomnia, though it went away after three to four months. <…> But things got much worse when the court of first instance rejected our appeal. We were horrified—why had we been denied again? Why were we seeing the same arguments as in Migri’s decision? Some parts of the court’s response didn’t make sense at all. <…> For about a month, we managed to stay relatively okay, but by September, our condition started deteriorating significantly. <…> Right now, my wife is struggling with severe anxiety, which also manifests physically. She has started experiencing suicidal thoughts and spends most of her time reading books. As she put it, “I’m trying to escape reality—otherwise, it becomes unbearable.” – Mariia

From justice to ignorance and back?

Alexey, Andrey, Mariia, and her wife all trusted Migri’s bureaucracy in the hope that it would let them live safely. Moreover, officials told them that they should trust them. In the beginning they believed them.

“In our reception center, we were denied a lawyer, with the reasoning that we should trust the bureaucracy. ” – Alexey

But this changed as Alexey, Andrey, Mariia and her wife started to face the ways asylum-related bureaucracy really works.

“The negative decision undoubtedly shook our faith in justice” – Alexey

At Borderlines we talked to Alexey, Andrey, and Mariia and they expressed their wish to keep their real names in our publication. We then consulted an asylum law specialist about possible negative influence on their Migri decisions as their court applications were in the middle of processing. We also warned them that publishing their stories and experiences with their real names can actually increase the risk of Russian authorities starting a case against some of them (Passoja, 2025) or Migri considering their activism as a way to “earn” asylum after they arrived in Finland and received their application rejected. Both of the changes in Finland and Russia are new.

Yet, knowing all the risks and experiencing injustice, Alexey, Andrey, and Mariia repeatedly told us that they want to be heard because they want to fight injustice – even at the risk of their own safety.

Since it was what they wanted to do, Borderlines decided to share their stories publicly – also amazed at their enormous bravery and the deep demand for justice.

United by the unbearableness of the situation, Alexey, Andrey, Mariia, and other LGBTQ+ asylum seekers from Russia find each other, offer support, and speak out to demand change.

“[W]e’re trying to fight for every one of us. <…> [W]e also support each other, which is very important because it’s impossible to cope with this situation alone. [W]e <…> continue to fight for our rights, including the right to be heard. <…> [D]on’t blindly trust the bureaucracy, demand a lawyer before the interview, don’t remain silent, and don’t accept injustice. Be mentally prepared for a long struggle for your right to life and safety”– Alexey

People who are threatened by their countries of citizenship are often forced to move to other countries, which contrary to the hopes, don’t always give them safety. In this situation, asylum seekers make demands that safety is something that should be given to you regardless of what state you are in – which is itself a cosmopolitan idea. In other words, it is an idea that safety should be given to you by the world simply because you are a human being. Such cosmopolitan ideas aren’t some abstract thoughts but something states decided to accept when they ratified the Refugee Convention (the 1951 Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees) (Näre, 2020).

“According to UNHCR, the core principle of the 1951 Geneva Convention is non-refoulement, which asserts that a refugee should not be returned to a country where they face serious threats to their life or freedom. <…> We demand that the Finnish Migration Service update their information about Russia and recognize it as a dangerous country for LGBT+ individuals….

Petition: We respectfully urge you to update and maintain current data on the plight of LGBT+ individuals in Russia to ensure informed decisions.” – Petition by Anna Iliukovich-Strakovskaia and Victoria Tsvetkova

Alexey also demands that Migri must reconsider the situation in Russia:

“Authorities should update information about the country of origin and make decisions based on actual circumstances and legal practices.”

Just because asylum seekers – regardless of a positive or negative decision – are not citizens of Finland, that doesn’t mean they cannot demand changes from the Finnish state, and the cosmopolitanism of human rights also opposes this – as if saying to Finnish authorities“you have to give me safety and let me into Finnish society because I am human”.

Lena Näre in her research (2020) writes that asylum seekers demand safety provided by the European Convention of Human Rights by making their struggles and suffering visible for others. This is why Alexey, Andrey, and Mariia want to be heard – even though that may mean that they would be less safe after doing this.

Citation from a decision sent from Migri: “Immigration office did not consider that you would be at risk in Russia.”

“Our friends helped us connect with local LGBTQIA+ organizations SETA and TEMA. Currently, these organizations are preparing a joint letter of support for us and are actively raising awareness about the situation of Russian LGBTQIA+ asylum seekers with Finnish authorities and the media. … Along with other dedicated activists, we founded the project Queer Asylum: Fi, aimed at supporting LGBTQIA+ asylum seekers in Finland.  We organize protest rallies, send letters to parliamentarians and ministers. Last summer, we participated in Helsinki Pride, where through our vibrant performance, we tried to highlight the issues and threats that LGBTQIA+ people face daily in Russia to the residents of Finland and the country’s authorities.” – Alexey

Based on our analysis, Borderlines demands that:

1. Migri has to update its “geographical information” about insecurity of LGBTQ+ people in the Russian state and accept that this state is dangerous for them.
2. Migri has to provide safety for all LGBTQ+ asylum seekers from Russia regardless of whether they faced violence in Russia or not before coming to Finland.
3. The criteria for assessing asylum have to be based on the assessment of the need for safety and not on the evaluation of “deservingness” of asylum in Finland.

In addition, Borderlines supports the demands made in the petition by Anna Iliukovich-Strakovskaia and Victoria Tsvetkova, with the small correction that in our opinion asylum should be given to any LGBTQ+ individuals from Russia, and not only open LGBTQ people or activists.

You can help LGBTQ+ asylum seekers from Russia to fight for their humanity

Alexey:

“…by spreading information about our problems, supporting LGBTQIA+ organizations, and advocating for the reform of migration laws.”

Maria:

“Another way is to raise awareness ….—whether individually or in small groups—by getting media attention on the struggles of LGBTQ asylum seekers from Russia.”

Author’s addition:

By 2026, Mariia and her wife as well as Alexey and Andrey have finally received asylum in Finland. Migri published their own guideline regarding the “country information” about LGBTQ+ people in Russia. Still, asylum policies in Finland remain harmful toward LGBTQ+ migrants from Russia and other countries and Queer Asylum: Fi continues demanding changes.

How to cite this article (APA style):

Borderlines. (2026, May 27). LGBTQ+ asylum seekrs from Russia and Migri: facing a death sentence in disguise. Available at: https://borderlinesfi.blog/en/2026/05/27/lgbtq-asylum-seekers-from-russia-and-migri-facing-a-death-sentence-in-disguise/ (Accessed: your date)

References

• All Out (2024). Finland: stop ignoring the Geneva Convention. Available at: https://action.allout.org/en/m/e15a7534/?fbclid=PAZXh0bgNhZW0CMTEAAaYpb8zDQ_VUvkbKW9vnUdNcIUUpx6MsGcssOfq6z5ImGlEr1nhSPjWp3Ak_aem_JPYSrTCPw99ZGoUzNdK83A (Accessed: 17 March 2024)
• Amnesty International (2023). Russia: adoption of transphobic legislation – a horrendous blow to human rights. Available at: https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2023/07/russia-adoption-of-transphobic-legislation-a-horrendous-blow-to-human-rights/ (Accessed: 26 March 2024)
• Duberman, M. B., Vicinus, M., Chauncey, G. (1989). Hidden from History. New York: Dutton Books.
• Eldridge, E. R., & Reinke, A. J. (2018). Introduction: Ethnographic engagement with bureaucratic violence. Conflict and Society, 4(1), 1–5. https://doi.org/10.3167/arcs.2018.040108
• Healey, D. (2004). «Russia». An Encyclopedia of Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual, Transgender, and Queer Culture.
• Human Rights Watch (2022). Russia: Extended Gay Propaganda Progresses Toward Law. Available at: https://www.hrw.org/news/2022/11/25/russia-expanded-gay-propaganda-ban-progresses-toward-law (Accessed: 26 March 2024)
• Human Rights Watch (2024). Russia: First Convictions Under LGBT ‘Extremist’ Ruling. Available at: https://www.hrw.org/news/2024/02/15/russia-first-convictions-under-lgbt-extremist-ruling (Accessed: 17 March 2024)
• Human Rights Watch. (2025, June 30). Russia: Rising toll of LGBT ‘extremism’ designation. https://www.hrw.org/news/2025/06/30/russia-rising-toll-of-lgbt-extremism-designation (Accessed: 17 March 2024)
• Kosilkin, S. & Kochekovskiy (2024) The rights of LGBT-people in war-time Russia. (Russian: Косилкин, С., Кочековский, А. (2024). Права ЛГБТ-людей в России военного времени. Берлин. Quarteera e. V. стр. 21)
• Levada center (2021). Russian citizens’ opinions on LGBTQ+ people (Russian: Левада-центр (2021). Отношение россиян к ЛГБТ-людям. https://www.levada.ru/2021/10/15/otnoshenie-rossiyan-k-lgbt-lyudyam/)
• Levada center (2024). Opinions on homosexuality, LGBTQ+ rights and “homosexualism propaganda” (Russian: Левада-центр (2024). Отношение к гомосексуальности, правам ЛГБТ-людей и “пропаганде гомосексуализма”: октябрь 2024. https://www.levada.ru/2024/11/18/otnoshenie-rossiyan-k-gomoseksualnosti-oktyabr-2024/)
• Meduza (2025). We know you all now. (Russian: Медуза (2025). Мы теперь всех вас знаем. Available at:  https://meduza.io/feature/2025/01/27/my-teper-vseh-vas-znaem (Accessed: 29 March 2025)
• Näre, L. (2020). ‘Finland kills with a pen’ – asylum seekers’ protest against bureaucratic violence as politics of human rights. Citizenship Studies, 24(8), 979–993. https://doi.org/10.1080/13621025.2020.1769559
• OVD-Info (2025) “Distilled lawlessness: what we have understood during a year under the law about “LGBTQ extremism” (Russian: ОВД-Инфо (2025). «Дистиллированный произвол»: Что мы поняли за год существования нормы об «ЛГБТ-экстремизме». Available at: https://ovd.info/2025/01/16/lgbt-extremism-god (Accessed: 17 March 2024)
• Palander, Jaana; Pallander, Saara: Securitizing asylum seeking in speech and practice in Finland, VerfBlog, 2021/11/26, https://verfassungsblog.de/os2-finland/, DOI: 10.17176/20211126-220143-0.
• Passoja, A. (1.2.2025) “The Putin regime has increased the persecution of Russians living abroad, a reality also experienced by Maksim Aliev from Kemi.” (Finnish: Putinin hallinto on lisännyt ulkomailla asuvien venäläisten vainoa, ja sen joutui kokemaan myös kemiläinen Maksim Aliev. Yle.) https://yle.fi/a/74-20140491 (Accessed: 2 March 2026)
• Rossiyskaya LGBT-set’. Monitoring of discrimination and violence on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity in Russia during 2016-2017 (Russian: Российская ЛГБТ-сеть. Мониторинг дискриминации и насилия на основании сексуальной ориентации и гендерной идентичности в России в 2016-2017 гг. стр. 13)
• Samarskoye obshchestvennoye dvizheniye Avers (2018). The report on monitoring of human rights abuses and discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity in the Samara region during 2017 (Russian: Самарское общественное ЛГБТ-движение “Аверс” (2018). Отчёт о мониторинге нарушений прав человека и дискриминации по признакам сексуальной ориентации и гендерной идентичности за 2017 год в Самарской области. Самара. стр. 10-12)
• Ticktin, M. (2011). Casualties of Care: Immigration and the Politics of Humanitarianism in France (1st ed.). University of California Press. http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.1525/j.ctt1ppmv8
• Vyhod (2024). The situation around LGBTQ+ persons in Saint Petersburg and its surroundings (Russian: Выход (2024). Положение ЛГБТ*-подростков в Санкт-Петербурге и Ленобласти. СПб.: Выход. стр. 29-30)