I'm glad you're here. I'm glad to follow up. Those of us who know you and have been following you, we saw our phones one morning in August, I think, and it said: Pavel Durov disappears in France, arrested. And then no one heard from you for days. It was a turning point in how I understand Europe, I speak for myself. If you don't mind, I think you haven't given interviews since then. What happened that day? The events of that day. Let's start there.
Last August, I arrived in Paris, and I was met at the airport. I was there just for tourism. My plan was to spend a couple of days in Paris and then go to Finland. I wasn't supposed to stay—there were no business meetings of any kind. And police officers approached me. They asked me questions, asked me to follow them. At first I thought it might be additional security checks for the Olympics, the Paralympics... My girlfriend Julia was worried. She asked: is everything okay? I told her: everything is fine. Nothing happens in France.
They read me a list of charges. Sixteen charges, all kinds of crimes. I was very confused because I had nothing to do with crime. I've never been found guilty. We're a company that tries to meet the highest standards. And then I realized it wasn't something I did—it was something others did using the application I created, Telegram, used by billions.
Unfortunately not. I try my best to know more, but... So yes. And then they put me in a car with a small entourage, patrol cars with sirens. Which is curious, because in the previous countries I visited, they also accompanied me with entourages because I was visiting heads of state. And here in France, there was consistency. They treated me well, equally, so to speak.
I couldn't because they took my phone and didn't allow me to.
Yes. They didn't let me contact anyone except my personal assistant, who I asked to get me some lawyers and contact certain friends I have, and try to understand what was happening. And I spent four days in police custody. In a building south of Paris that is, I think, run by the customs police.
But you spent four days without contact, without a phone? What kind of accommodation?
Yes, that's right. It was a room of seven square meters, or seventy square feet, with no windows. A concrete block. A narrow bed. Without sheets, pillow. A thin mattress—like a yoga mat? One centimeter, half an inch, and that's all. Constantly flickering light. A bit annoying.
Yes, the door was very well closed, I must say.
Yes, it was a solitary confinement cell, so to speak. There were no other people there.
Were you in total isolation?
You could say that. Well, it sounds like what it is. It wasn't prison or jail—no. If there's a closed door, without a pillow—but legally it wasn't.
So legally, why were you being held against your will by France? Did they explain that clearly to you during the first four days?
I understood they were worried about the alleged failure of Telegram to respond to judicial requests from France, which turned out to be untrue because we never received a single binding legal request from France. So I was even more confused. I asked the police: why haven't you been following European law and submitting your legal requests in the manner prescribed by this law? It's defined by the Digital Services Act. You can Google the process. You can read Telegram's privacy policy on the website. Why didn't you do it? They didn't respond. But thankfully they started doing it. They started receiving responses, helping them identify suspects—we would reveal IP and phone of suspects in criminal investigations with judicial orders signed by a judge. And this was something we had implemented a year before that. So it's not something the French forced us to do—it's something we already had. We had a company in Belgium processing these requests. Other countries had been using this process successfully, but somehow the French ignored it entirely.
For clarity, it's the standard procedure for social media. Any company, like Facebook or X, receives a court order from a country where they operate. The order says: we believe this person is a criminal. Can we have the IP address? They all comply, right? Yes. Well, it's the DSA law. If you don't comply, they can fine you, they can ban you. It's a question of whether you want to continue offering your service in the European Union or not. But the thing is, it only concerns identification data—meaning the IP address and, in some cases, the phone number of the suspect. It has nothing to do with, for example, a person's private messages, or other types of activity that are much more protected and much more private. Even if we wanted to, we couldn't reveal this information. But it's not required by the law.
But what you describe is like the current situation across Europe for all companies anyway. Ok then. But since this is something normal that already has its process that everyone recognizes, you must be very confused about why they have you in this jail that they won't call a jail.
Confused or worried? It was difficult. If I got off a plane and police appeared, took my phone, put me in a car and took me to a cell—even if they pretended it wasn't a jail, didn't let me out and closed the door for four days without letting me contact my family, I'd be worried. It was very surprising. I was in shock.
The truth is you're very diplomatic. Let me be very clear: a billion users. It's a billion-dollar company. You founded it, you own it. It's a huge company. One of the largest social networks in the world. There's an established process. If they think Telegram is doing something wrong, they can send letters to your chief legal officer, or get your phone number, which they surely can do. French intelligence has everyone's number. They just call to inform you. I've never heard of the CEO of a billion-dollar company being arrested at the airport for something like this.
You're right. It never happened. It's completely unprecedented. Indignante. Never happened. So it's something I believe was very unnecessary. Because besides what you just described, I'm also a French citizen.
How did you end up living here? Because you're not originally from France.
Yes, I'm not originally from France, but I have certain ties to France and was granted citizenship through a specific process that took several years. I didn't take any shortcut. I had to pass the French exam. I wanted to—I love the country. It's a great country, a great culture. Of course, these events are alarming, and that's why it makes sense to talk about them.
The most interesting part is that every French citizen has their personal address in their passport. So French authorities know very well how to contact that person. And on top of that, the French consulate is located in the same building as Telegram's office in Dubai.
The same building. Just two floors down.
So two floors from the French consulate?
We're two floors from the French consulate. And I was a frequent visitor to the consulate. Whenever any agency, authority, or representative of France wanted to see me, they had no trouble at all arranging meetings. These meetings took place—I was happy to go down two floors from my office and talk, or invite them to our office. So it's very strange what happened because it could have been resolved through other means.
Obviously they made a huge effort to humiliate you. They announced your arrest. I mean, you weren't googling news about yourself because you couldn't. But the rest of us were. And they announced: we've arrested Pavel Durov and arms trafficking or drug trafficking or child pornography or who knows, horrible things. It was like, what? So they were trying to intimidate you and humiliate you.
Obviously, yes. This was very unusual. My lawyers here in France told me that normally the prosecution isn't that public. They don't issue daily press releases or comment on their investigations, which wasn't the case with me—they were very active.
Have you revisited this? You were locked up and couldn't read the coverage, but have you gone back to read those four days when you were detained?
Well, when I was in police custody, I learned from one of the police officers. He told me: all the newspapers in the world are covering this and they're mentioning you. And I said: what's going on? He said: well, a lot of people are supporting you. But I asked, what are the newspapers writing about this case? And he told me... everything but the truth. And I got scared at that moment—everything but the truth, really? And when I left, when those four days ended...
Can I ask what your family was doing? You have children and parents and, you know, what were they...
To be honest, that's the hardest part because I'm quite resilient to stress, I can take care of myself. But being there, locked up, thinking about what's happening with my mom—you know, she's very sick, she's older. I was very worried. As I found out later, what was happening with my children, with their well-being. And that's something that really affects you.
And you couldn't contact them?
You don't have access to any device or can't even read anything. What did they think was happening?
They were surprised, confused, and worried.
Everyone wants to feel safe at home. It's your castle. There's nothing like going to bed with a total sense of security. That's why you sleep deeply. That's why we can't recommend SimpliSafe enough... Most security systems only act after someone enters your home. That's a bit late. The new exterior protection Active Guard from SimpliSafe stops thefts before they happen. It gives you peace of mind... You won't have to sleep with a baseball bat or loaded pistol on your nightstand. Here's how it works: if something suspicious happens outside, cameras and live monitoring agents detect it. They'll talk to the intruder, turn on spotlights, and can call the police if necessary. No wonder CNET named SimpliSafe the best home security system for 2025. More than four million Americans trust it because it's preventive. Monitoring plans from one dollar per day. No hidden charges. Sixty-day money-back guarantee. Visit simplisafe.com/tucker for fifty percent off a new system with professional monitoring plan and your first month free. That's SimpliSafe.com. Tucker, nothing as safe as SimpliSafe.
The people trying to destroy our civilization want you to be passive. They want you weak to control you. Weakness is their goal. No thanks. Our friends at Beam, a proud American company, understand our country is only great if its people are strong. That's why they created creatine to help listeners like you stay mentally sharp and physically fit. People like to mock creatine. CNN doesn't like it. But people buy it because it works. Beam's creatine helps improve your strength, brain health, longevity. It's free of sugar and synthetic junk. Sure, it's not talked about much because, again, a strong, clear, capable population is a threat to tyrants. That's why they want you playing video games. To celebrate true American strength, Beam is offering up to thirty percent off their best-selling creatine for the next forty-eight hours. Go to shopbeam.com/tucker, use code TUCKER at checkout. That's shopbeam.com/tucker, use TUCKER for up to thirty percent off. Based on values, integrity, results. No shortcuts. Beam. We recommend it.
To put it in perspective, for those who don't know your story—I won't tell the whole story, it's incredible. We interviewed you a year and a half ago where you told your story. You're Russian, as people can probably hear in your voice. And you seemed happy and successful in Russia, but you had to leave for political reasons. The government was trying to use your company for their own purposes. You didn't want to be used. You left your own country and moved around several places, but ended up in Dubai and France. Did Putin ever arrest you in Russia?
No. Ok, just to be more precise in this—I'm not defending Putin—but you were arrested by the French government in the free West. That happened. Did you ever see the irony in that?
That was the most unexpected place to be arrested, because before this trip I visited several countries. Some are considered in the West as autocratic or authoritarian. But Telegram is very, very popular in these countries. In fact, I visited some before coming to Paris. And I had no trouble at all, despite the fact that Telegram has zero censorship in terms of political speech. And Telegram offers one hundred percent privacy and confidentiality to its users in all these places.
So you don't extract personal data from your users, unlike our companies.
Ok. But other companies, I mean, Facebook—Meta is rich because they extract personal data. Right? That's their model. And you don't do that.
Yes, we don't have to do that. We found ways to monetize Telegram without having to abuse people's personal data. Telegram became profitable last year, and very profitable. Over five hundred million dollars in profit without having to rely on methods where you extract personal data and then use it to serve ads, for example. We have a very successful paid subscription service in the Telegram app. We monetize in ways consistent with our values, which are voluntary—users sign up for things that make you money, not that you steal their data.
Correct. We just surpassed the one billion user milestone. Congratulations. Thank you... It's growing very fast. And we're happy with what we do. We're proud of what we do.
If you look at any mobile messaging app now, we're number two after—well, you can imagine which one. We're the second most popular in the world. But most of the features you use in a modern messaging app were created first by Telegram and then borrowed. We made a list of a hundred of these features. And they're not small things. They're basic things you know in any modern messaging app—like the way you reply to messages, share links, share documents, the text format. Many, many things. Dozens of them appeared first in Telegram, and then three to eight years later were copied by our rivals—one bigger than Telegram and others smaller. But we're proud. We're proud that we've been able to shape what the industry is today and define how billions of people communicate.
But you know? I just go back to this story. By the way, I love your stoic Slavic approach to this. It's crazy. If they grabbed Mark Zuckerberg or Elon at the private part of Charles de Gaulle airport, it would be like, everything stops. What? The world is ending? But they grabbed you and people: Russian surname, must be for a reason.
Well, I hope it had nothing to do with my ethnicity, because that would be very alarming.
Of course. Are you kidding? Because they kicked you out of Russia, by the way. Let me say that again, they kicked you out. You'd probably still be living there if you hadn't had to leave. So it's clear you didn't do whatever bothers them in Russia. You're no longer there.
But that can still make you an easier target.
I'm aware. Because people don't know my story. Right? Not everyone saw our last interview.
Well, I know you and obviously I like you. And I like what you're doing. I like your commitment to privacy and to the user. And I think user privacy should play a role in how you think about a business. That's my opinion. And you agree. Most don't, so I'm on your side. But where were the civil liberties defenders jumping to your defense? How can they grab someone at the airport because—who knows why?—put them in jail for four days, take their phone. Where were your defenders?
Well, to be fair, some people did speak up and defend me. And in fact there were over ten million or more, I believe a very large number of people who signed a petition to release me. So it was a movement that was really very, very big.
I'm thinking more of UN human rights monitors. Where are they? If this had happened in North Korea—which hasn't happened—we'd say, heavens, it's Stalinism. But it happens in France. And you say, sure there must be a good reason.
That's what makes this situation so complicated. Because we need to see cases like this—regardless of what jurisdiction you were born in, what jurisdiction is conducting this investigation—it should be completely impartial. Right? It's very worrying.
Were you asked about Russia during your four days of entertainment?
Yes, I think so. But it wasn't the main topic of the questions. Most questions were about how Telegram operates, as if it were a mystery. We're a large company. Audited by one of the Big Four auditing firms. We work with the largest financial institutions. So we're a large company, and we spend millions of dollars every quarter on legal compliance. We pay law firms for the best advice to make sure we don't violate laws anywhere. And we operate in almost two hundred countries. So it was very, very surprising for me to be detained in Paris and learn that Telegram did something wrong or didn't process requests.
Then, when I learned more, I realized we didn't do anything wrong because the law is very clear in describing the process that must be followed for this request to be legally processed. And it wasn't followed. This is something French prosecutors could have discovered in six minutes. Obviously. The irony is that Telegram, police contact, EU cooperation was on Google, it was public. For some reason, it wasn't used the way French authorities would be expected to use it. One must think before asking. By the way, how was the prison food during those days?
I think they made an exception with me. It was fine. It was quite good. You know, I don't eat meat, I don't eat fast food. So regarding food, I must say I was quite fine. I did two hundred push-ups and squats. I kept my routine.
During the time you were confined there, did you have the opportunity or need to join any gang for protection or companionship?
Incredible. How's everything going now? You know, right now we're here in Paris, specifically... We're in France. Are you still in France?
Yes, indeed, I'm still in France.
It's been almost eight months.
Eight months, and you're still there?
Well, due to the legal situation, there's this restriction on my travel under judicial control. Still, I was allowed to travel to Dubai, and in fact I returned last week from Dubai, and I'll go to Dubai again later this week. But it's a process that's still very restricted and controlled, maintained under extremely strict control and constant surveillance, especially by French authorities who are in charge of this delicate case.
What's the idea? You own a billion-dollar company with a billion users—where would you flee to?
Well, what you just mentioned is, without a doubt, absolutely a fundamental part of this entire affair. It's the source of my misunderstanding and confusion here. I mean, where to? I'm not fleeing anywhere and I've been in Dubai, I returned. So it's very difficult for me to understand my role being here because I'm required to answer some questions about Telegram every four or five months. So the other three or four months, I just... I'm here. I have to be here for reasons that are very difficult for me to understand.
What's their argument? I'm confused. Nobody, despite the headlines in August when you were detained—no one is claiming you were directly involved in child pornography, drug trafficking, organized crime, weapons—I don't remember. But like the worst crimes in the world. Nobody, as far as we know, is claiming you were directly involved in the commission of those crimes. Is that right?
Correct. Absolutely nobody claims that in that way.
Ok. They're saying that out of your billion users, some might have been doing bad things. And you say, I tried, but it's not my fault, right?
Yes, what you just expressed and described is completely correct and precise.
It would be like telling Donald Trump there are 350 million people in the United States—a third of your user base—and some of them are in organized crime, some are using child pornography or selling drugs. So why are you still here? Could you kindly explain a bit more clearly what the formal accusation is against you in this case, and why they're pursuing you?
I'm still trying to figure that out. I'm still confused. We were accused of complicity for not responding. But we did respond. From our perspective and according to the legal analysis we've conducted, we consider that this accusation, as presented, represents an extremely broad interpretation of complicity that is currently applied in similar cases here in France. What my lawyers tell me is that it's unprecedented. They had a couple of very small niche apps that are like ten thousand times smaller than Telegram—and they were specifically targeted at criminals. Nothing like Telegram. Those companies didn't even have bank accounts. Different profile. Not audited by Big Four organizations. But these companies were prosecuted in France before, and their founders were accused of running a platform created specifically to facilitate crime. It's obvious that Telegram isn't that kind of company. It has a billion users. One in eight people on the planet uses Telegram regularly. And it's incomprehensible to assume that all these people are criminals. Everyone knows the Telegram story well. It wasn't created for criminals. However, this reasoning, as far as I understand, is being used in our case too. They say, well, you created this app and this app was used by other people who were criminals, and you didn't do enough to prevent them from doing what they were doing. Which, again, contradicts what we see on other platforms. For example, there are cases where problematic content exists despite the efforts of social media platforms, moderation teams, etc. It's almost impossible to prevent. But the accusation itself, conceptually, doesn't make sense. If someone commits an armed robbery in Burgundy or Toulouse or Nice, can they arrest President Macron for that? Because it's his country, he runs the country, and he didn't do enough to stop the armed robbery in Toulouse. How does that hold up? Why isn't he in jail? It's madness.
Well, the logic escapes me too, so to speak. The inevitable conclusion, I think, from a viewer's perspective, is that they do this publicly instead of just calling you. Like we have a problem, let's resolve it, or call your lawyers. They arrest you publicly, publicly defame you, try to link you to the worst crimes mankind commits. And straight to jail. And then they're trying to pressure you, intimidate you, wear you down to get a backdoor to Telegram. To be able to spy on people. Probably for political reasons. What really concerns them is an uprising in their own country. Every government is most concerned that its own population rebels against their bad governance. That's their fear. And they hate Telegram because it offers privacy and that's a threat to them. And that's why they hate, force you as the owner to give them the keys.
That seems to be the case. To be clear, nobody has approached me demanding what you call the keys. Those keys don't exist. But if someone approaches me and says we need the keys, you'll be among the first to know, I assure you. But that hasn't happened.
But the US government did pressure you. I remember the FBI was trying.
Yes, yes. Because this is something governments want, not just from you, but from all social media.
You know what's interesting? In the United States, you have a process that allows the government to actually force any engineer at any tech company to implement a backdoor and not tell anyone, using this process called a gag order. And there are certain legal procedures. Not telling even their own employer. Yes, exactly. If you tell your own boss, you can end up in jail. A gag order. This exists?
Yes. This is something... It's on Wikipedia. In the United States.
In the Soviet Union or the United States?
Then your employees have a legal obligation to act as spies, saboteurs against you. Your employees. That's one of the reasons we didn't discuss last time why I didn't move to the United States with my team.
And they raided you in San Francisco on the one trip you made.
Exactly. I'll never forget that moment. But I did this exhaustive legal analysis. I asked my lawyers, the US lawyers—what's this called? The gag order? And they explained to me what it is, how it works, and how it could be applied. So we decided it might not be the best place for a privacy-oriented platform.
But here in France, we don't know, because there are many conspiracy theories. And at first I thought—I also started to worry, what is this about? But then, when French police and judges started sending their requests according to European law to Telegram, and receiving identification data—meaning IP addresses of suspects—they seemed very happy. They expressed their joy in the press. They said, oh, Telegram is cooperating now, suddenly, as if it were something new.
Can I ask you to pause when they said that? I remember it well. To me it sounded like they were trying to discredit you and send the message because they weren't specific. They just said it's cooperating. And that made it sound to the rest of the world like, oh, they broke Pavel. They hung him by the ankles and burned him with Gauloises until he finally gave in and handed them the backend. And now they're spying on all Telegram users. You're cooperating like in East Germany in 1975. That's how it sounded.
Yes. That's why it's so important to clarify this. Because this perception is not only bad for Telegram. It's even worse for France's image, because if you think about it... France is still a place where laws and legal procedures must be respected... And even in this case, if you want additional access to certain...
Personal data must be handled in accordance with the laws. And so every company, for example, we have never revealed private message data to any third party, including governments. And if in any country they told us we had to do it, we would stop providing services in that country before doing so.
Wasn't that why you left Russia in the first place?
You already went through this. You left your country by refusing to give up user privacy.
Yes, but here it's catching up with me because last month the Senate here in France passed a law that basically bans encryption. This law forced all messaging app providers to implement a backdoor so French law enforcement could fight crime.
The problem was... fighting crime.
Exactly. The problem is that there is no exclusive backdoor. If you implement a backdoor, technically other actors can exploit it. And they could be foreign agents, they could be hackers, it could be anyone. So that law would have put millions of people, or tens of millions of French citizens, in danger. Their private messages would have been exposed. Criminals, however, would have moved to niche apps, smaller apps, not the popular ones. And if the government tried to ban these apps, they would switch to VPNs. They would even become more efficient at hiding their tracks. Criminals would have no problem if that law passed. It's the law-abiding citizens who would be affected. And that's why it's so problematic. And nobody was talking about it. I asked my French friends, have you heard about this law? And no, they had no idea. And fortunately, the National Assembly here in France rejected that bill, so it wasn't approved this time.
But if you look at the new EU project from the European Commission, published in early April, they want to do exactly that again, put a backdoor on encryption. But now at the EU level. And that raises serious questions, because no country in the world has banned encryption so far, not even the places you would consider authoritarian, for the reasons I just described. It's simply an enormous threat to the entire population to legally force companies to implement backdoors. So I think it's very important that people talk about these things.
