Case T-459/25: Action brought on 10 July 2025 – Röper v Council
Date: 2025-07-10
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU restrictive measure, Russia, disinformation, economic sanctions, freedom of expression, freedom of the press, hybrid warfare, international sanctions, natural person, principle of proportionality








C_202504890EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
C series













C/2025/4890


15.9.2025






Action brought on 10 July 2025 – Röper v Council


(Case T-459/25)

(C/2025/4890)
Language of the case: German

Parties


Applicant: Thomas Röper (St. Petersburg, Russia) (represented by: V. Wester, lawyer)

Defendant: Council of the European Union

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


firstly, annul Council Implementing Regulation (EU) 2025/965 of 20 May 2025 implementing Regulation (EU) 2024/2642 concerning restrictive measures in view of Russia’s destabilising activities, (1) in so far as the name of Mr Thomas Röper has been included in the list of natural persons in Annex I to Regulation (EU) 2024/2642 under section ‘A. Natural persons’, serial number 37;










—


secondly, order the Council of the European Union to pay its own costs and those incurred by Mr Thomas Röper.





Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of the action, the applicant relies on four pleas in law.






1.


First plea in law, alleging that the applicant is wrongly accused of undermining the security or fundamental values of the EU through hybrid activities or targeted disinformation, especially since his journalistic work on the ‘Anti-Spiegel’ portal shows no evidence of targeted manipulation or support for Russian propaganda. His activities are covered by the comprehensive protection of freedom of the press and freedom of expression under the German Basic Law, the European Charter of Fundamental Rights and the European Convention on Human Rights, which also expressly permit cross-border reporting and the use of foreign sources.










2.


Second plea in law, alleging that there are no concrete indications that the applicant, through his work as an international expert or election observer, supported or legitimised Russia’s actions contrary to international law. Rather, his commitment demonstrates a democratic attitude, and his neutral election reporting does not constitute conduct worthy of sanctions.










3.


Third plea in law, alleging that the applicant’s participation in a meeting based on the United Nations’ ‘Arria formula’ was legitimate under international law and served to promote peace and international security. Such formats enable early analysis of conflicts and strengthen peaceful dispute resolution in accordance with the UN Charter. Through his participation, the applicant made a constructive contribution to the security policy dialogue within the framework of the international order.










4.


Fourth plea in law, alleging that the sanctions imposed on the applicant are disproportionate, as they significantly restrict both his return to Germany and his professional activities. He suffers massive financial losses due to blocked payment channels, terminated partner programmes and a lack of income from book sales and donations.






(1)  OJ L 2025/965.


ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2025/4890/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)