Organizations are subject to heavy fines, while individuals affiliated with them can receive lengthy prison sentences if they fail to dissolve when given notice to do so.

[8][9] After the Federal Council's vote to include the MacArthur Foundation on the recommended list of "undesirable organizations", it announced the closing of its Russian division, operating since 1992.

Among NED's alleged violations were its donations to commercial and non-profit organizations that independently monitor elections, as well as for undefined "political activities" and "discrediting service in the [Russian] armed forces".

[140][141] German Chancellor Angela Merkel's spokesperson said that the law was an attempt to further isolate and discredit members of civil society who were critical of the government.

"[145] Amnesty International said the bill would "squeeze the life" from civil society, while Human Rights Watch warned it would be locals who would be worst-hit.

According to the Venice Commission conclusion, Russian undesirable organizations law consists of vague definition of certain key concepts, such as "non-governmental organisations", which determines whether the activities of a foreign or international NGO may be declared undesirable, "directing of" and "participating in" the activities of a listed NGO, coupled with the wide discretion granted to the Office of the Public Prosecutor and the lack of specific judicial guarantees in the Federal Law, contradicts the principle of legality.

The automatic legal consequences (blanket prohibitions) imposed upon NGOs whose activities are declared undesirable (prohibition to organise and conduct mass actions and public events or to distribute information materials) may only be acceptable in extreme cases of NGOs constituting serious threat to the security of the state or to fundamental democratic principles.

In other instances, the blanket application of these sanctions might contradict the requirement under the European Convention on Human Rights that the interference with the freedom of association and assembly has to respond to a pressing social need and has to be proportional to the legitimate aim pursued.