Posts Tagged ‘foreign agent law’

« Older posts

NGOs demand to stop the Criminalization of Human Rights Defenders in El Salvador

July 22, 2025

On 3 July 2025, the undersigned 22 organizations, expressed their deep concern over the increasing use of criminal law without due process guarantees, the harassment, the stigmatization, and the persecution by Salvadoran authorities against human rights defenders, community leaders, environmental activists, university professors, lawyers, journalists, and other voices critical of the government.

Prominent journalists, activists, and lawyers, such as former prosecutor and defender Ruth López and professor and constitutional lawyer Enrique Anaya, have been arbitrarily detained in retaliation for their work documenting and denouncing corruption, human rights violations, and attacks on the rule of law in El Salvador. Both are in prolonged pretrial detention and face spurious and unfounded charges of embezzlement and money laundering, respectively. These detentions send an intimidating message to the rest of civil society and further erode public confidence in the impartiality and independence of the Salvadoran judicial system.

The Salvadoran state has intensified its attacks on civil society and the independent press through coordinated strategies in the legal, institutional, and media spheres to silence their work. It is extremely alarming that they are being persecuted under a prolonged state of exception that suspends fundamental rights and freedoms, a measure whose objective is to control organized crime gangs.

In a context of high concentration of power, the Foreign Agents Law was enacted, imposing severe restrictions on non-governmental organizations, including onerous registration requirements, a 30 percent tax on foreign funding, and broad powers to suspend their activities based on vague allegations of political activity. Together with the hostile rhetoric from senior officials led by President Bukele, these measures aim to delegitimize independent voices and restrict the legitimate activities of civil society organizations.

The persecution of defenders such as Ruth López and Enrique Anaya reflects a broader strategy to dismantle civic oversight and the rule of law, and to criminalize criticism and the defense of human rights. Other examples of criminalization include community leaders from La Floresta and the El Bosque cooperative, among them Fidel Zavala, Alejandro Henríquez, and Ángel Pérez, who have been detained during peaceful protests over land and evictions. 

It is important to note that, throughout Nayib Bukele’s administration, dozens of human rights defenders, journalists, lawyers, former public officials, members of the political opposition, and businesspeople have been forced into exile outside the country. This trend, which is worrying in itself, has significantly increased in the last month, reflecting a growing climate of repression and persecution that severely restricts civic and democratic space in El Salvador.

The repression of civic space in El Salvador is taking place within a broader context of erosion of democratic institutions and the rule of law. As a result of the state of exception, more than 85,000 people have been detained without respect for basic due process guarantees, including the presumption of innocence and access to a fair and impartial trial, and in inhumane conditions of deprivation of liberty. Local organizations have documented at least 400 deaths of people in custody since the beginning of the exception regime.

We therefore call on the Salvadoran State to:

  • ​​Immediately release lawyers Ruth López and Enrique Anaya, as well as all human rights defenders and community leaders who have been arbitrarily detained for political reasons; and respect due process guarantees, including the right to a public trial, in any proceedings against them.
  • Refrain from using pretrial detention as a form of advance punishment against human rights defenders and others detained for political reasons, in clear violation of due process guarantees and international human rights standards.
  • Protect human rights defenders from reprisals, harassment, torture, and threats, and ensure accountability for abuses committed.
  • Restore conditions that allow freedom of expression, association, and assembly, and harmonize national laws with El Salvador’s international obligations, including by repealing the Foreign Agents Law.
  • End the misuse and abuse of emergency measures and, in all cases, guarantee the right to a fair trial.

We also call on the international community, including the Organization of American States and the United Nations, to:

  • Urge the government of El Salvador to immediately cease the instrumentalization of the criminal justice system against human rights defenders or those who express criticism of the government.
  • Take urgent action, through diplomatic channels, assistance, and conditional cooperation, among other means, to protect civic space, the rule of law, democracy, and human rights in El Salvador.
  • Abogadas y Abogados para la Justicia y los Derechos Humanos (México)
  • Alianza Regional por la Libre Expresión e Información
  • Asociación Pro Derechos Humanos -APRODEH, Perú
  • Center for Gender & Refugee Studies (CGRS)
  • Centro de Documentación en Derechos Humanos “Segundo Montes Mozo SJ” (CSMM) / Ecuador
  • Centro por la Justicia y el Derecho Internacional (CEJIL)
  • Consultora Solidaria (Mexico)
  • Consultoría para los Derechos Humanos y el Desplazamiento – CODHES (Colombia).
  • Convergencia por los Derechos Humanos (CDH), Guatemala
  • Comité de Familiares de Víctimas de los Sucesos de Febrero y Marzo de 1989 (COFAVIC), Venezuela.
  • Due Process of Law Foundation (DPLF)
  • Equipo de Reflexión, Investigación y Comunicación (ERIC-SJ). Honduras
  • Global Strategic Litigation Council for Refugee Rights
  • Instituto de Defensa Legal (IDL), Peru
  • Latin America Working Group (LAWG)
  • Movimiento Autónomo de Mujeres
  • Robert F. Kennedy Human Rights 
  • Synergía, iniciativas para los derechos humanos
  • Tejiendo Redes Infancia en América Latina y el Caribe
  • The International Commission of Jurists
  • Washington Office on Latin America (WOLA)
El Salvador: Stop the Criminalization of Human Rights Defenders and the Dismantling of the Rule of Law
Bukele: Does the Strongman Show Weakness When Imprisoning Critics?

se also:

https://www.devdiscourse.com/article/law-order/3508809-el-salvadors-human-rights-defenders-forced-into-exile-amid-rising-repression

Posted in human rights, Human Rights Defenders | Leave a Comment »
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , ,

NGOs alarmed by draft law “TRANSPARENCY OF PUBLIC LIFE” in Hungary

May 27, 2025

Human Rights Watch, Civil Rights Defenders and many, many other NGOs are deeply alarmed by a new legislative proposal in Hungary that, if passed, would institutionalise sweeping, opaque, and politically motivated repression of independent civil society, the press, and private organisations that receive foreign support or have any kind of income that the Hungarian government feels would threaten the country’s sovereignty. 

The draft law, which is deceptively titled ‘On the Transparency of Public Life’, would give the authorities unchecked powers, allowing it to recommend the registration of organisations deemed to be ‘influencing public life’ with foreign funding in ways that ‘threaten Hungary’s sovereignty’. Because this phrasing is vague and ideologically loaded, it risks including any kind of criticism of government policy, including the promotion of human rights, press freedom, gender equality, and the rule of law. 

Potential disastrous consequences

  • No legal remedy: If the government demands an organisation register itself, the organisation in question would not be able to appeal this decision. Once listed, organisations would have no access to effective legal redress; 
  • Broad definitions: ‘Foreign support’ is defined as any financial input, no matter how small, from practically any international source (including EU institutions and dual citizens) as well as commercial revenue; 
  • Sweeping prohibitions and sanctions: Listed organisations would have to seek permission from the tax authorities to receive foreign support. Financial institutions would be required to report and block transfers, meaning NGOs would effectively be permanently monitored; 
  • Loss of domestic support: Listed organisations would lose access to Hungary’s 1% income tax donation scheme, which would prevent them from receiving support from regular Hungarian citizens; 
  • Political targeting: Leaders of registered organisations would be labelled ‘politically exposed persons’, which would expose their private financial transactions to invasive scrutiny; 
  • Severe penalties: Any violations could lead to fines of up to 25 times the amount received, suspension of the organisation’s advocacy activities, and even forced closure.

EU must speak out against proposed law

Hungary’s draft law is not about transparency: it is a calculated attempt to criminalise dissent, silence watchdogs, and entrench one-party control over the democratic public sphere and civic space. If passed, the law would violate multiple provisions of the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights and the European Convention on Human Rights, including freedom of expression and association and the right to an effective remedy. 

In an open letter to President Ursula von der Leyen and Commissioner Michael McGrath of 22 May 2025, the NGOs urge to take the following immediate steps:

  • Immediately request the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) to grant interim measures in the ongoing infringement procedure on the Law on the Defence of National Sovereignty (Case C-829/24). The Sovereignty Protection Office is crucial to the new bill and therefore this is an imminent and effective way to halt the progress and impact of the bill. Cognizant of the impending danger, the European Parliament and civil society have been calling for this step since 2024. Interim measures are designed to prevent irreparable harm — in this case, the effective paralysis of civil society organisations, independent media and dissenting voices – and with this new development comprehensive interim measures should be requested immediately.
  • At the same time, call on the Hungarian government to withdraw the bill and if unsuccessful, open a new infringement procedure on new violations that are not linked to the ongoing case on the Defence of National Sovereignty.
  • With the forthcoming Article 7 hearing on Hungary on 27 May 2025 and recognising the escalation of a systematic breakdown of the rule of law, support the Council of the EU to move to a vote on Article 7(1).

This new bill represents a severe and existential threat to democratic principles, human rights and the rule of law in Hungary and in the EU as a whole. If the existing tools are not effectively deployed, we risk an unravelling of the rules on which the EU was founded and a clear step towards authoritarian practices. We call on you to stand in solidarity with Hungarian civil society and their counterparts across the region and remain available to provide additional information and support.

https://www.hrw.org/news/2025/05/23/open-letter-hungarian-bill-entitled-transparency-public-life

Draft law in Hungary risks silencing civil society 

https://www.coe.int/nb/web/commissioner/-/commissioner-asks-hungary-s-parliament-not-to-adopt-law-that-stifles-civil-society

Posted in Civil Rights Defenders (NGO), HRW, human rights, Human Rights Defenders | Leave a Comment »
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Spread of ‘foreign agent’ laws in Eastern Europe

February 27, 2025

Natika Kantaria is a human rights advocate with nearly a decade of experience planning and implementing advocacy campaigns in human rights. She has worked with international organizations and watchdog NGOs and collaborated with the public and private sectors. For the ISHR she wrote a piece on 26 February 2025 about a worrying trend: ‘Foreign agent’ laws have been introduced in various countries, violating international human rights law and threatening to silence human rights defenders. This pattern is particularly evident in Eastern Europe, where NGOs courageously resist and need the support of the international community. See e.g. my earlier posts:

‘Foreign Agent’ Laws Spread, now also Georgia ?
Kyrgyzstan (and Slovakia) on their way to emulate Russia with draft law on ‘foreign representatives (agents)’

Societies thrive when everyone can work, speak out, and organise freely and safely to ensure justice and equality for all. Legislation requiring NGOs to register as ‘foreign agents’ is a barrier to this virtuous cycle. Despite the European Court of Human Rights’ 2022 ruling that Russia’s 2012 foreign agent law violated freedom of expression and association, the governments of Hungary, Georgia, Slovakia, Serbia, and Bosnia and Herzegovina have proceeded undeterred to introduce similar laws. 

These laws specifically target NGOs and not-for-profits that receive foreign funds and require them to register as foreign agents, organisations serving the interests of a foreign power, or agents of foreign influence. By doing so, they restrict the capacity of  human rights defenders to organise, participate and exercise their right to defend rights by:

  • imposing disproportionately high fines and heavy sanctions to NGOs refusing to comply, which may ultimately lead to the termination of their operations 
  • using vague wording, that ultimately gives too much room and power for government interpretation. For instance, the requirement for NGOs to register in official records or identify themselves as ‘agents of foreign influence’ lacks clarity and specificity.  
  • increasing the burden of NGOs by introducing heavy reporting and auditing requirements. The State’s alleged need for transparency as their primary purpose can, therefore, be effectively addressed through existing legislation regulating NGOs.
  • employing a negative narrative that stigmatises and delegitimises the work of the civil society organisations and human rights defenders. This rhetoric promotes hostility and distrust toward civil society and encourages attacks against defenders.

Furthermore, such laws contradict the commitments of these countries under international human rights law. Article 13 of the 1998 UN Declaration on human rights defenders recognises the right of defenders to solicit, receive and utilise resources.

Article 10 of the Declaration +25, a supplement to the UN Declaration put forward in 2024 by civil society, human rights defenders and legal experts, addresses States’ attempts to prohibit foreign contributions or impose unjustified national security limitations. It stipulates that States should not hinder financial resources for human rights defenders and outlines measures to prevent retaliation based on the source of their funding. These laws violate rights related to freedom of expression, association, and privacy, as outlined in the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) and International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. Foreign agent laws also run counter to commitments made by countries at the regional level as members of the Council of Europe (CoE) and the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE), including recommendation CM/Rec(2018)11, which emphasizes the protection and promotion of civil society space and OSCE guidelines for protecting human rights defenders. 

NGOs are increasingly becoming a primary target for repressive governments. According to the CIVICUS Monitor 2024 report, the countries mentioned above that have introduced ‘foreign agent’ laws have either ‘closed’ or ‘obstructed’ civil society space. In addition, the Trump administration’s rhetoric and its decision to freeze foreign aid have contributed to strengthening hostile narratives already present in ‘foreign agent laws’ in Eastern Europe and have emboldened governments in their efforts to publicly undermine these organisations.  

While the silencing of NGOs has become part of the agenda for many governments, and the rise of ‘foreign agent’ laws serves as a step towards establishing authoritarian regimes, civil society actors continue to mobilise in response. Strengthening engagement with international human rights mechanisms, fostering joint global advocacy, and providing support to targeted organisations and groups are essential steps that international NGOs and the international community should take to build resistance, reinforce coalition efforts, and protect the work of human rights defenders.

International and regional human rights mechanisms have called for governments to either repeal these laws, or not to adopt them in their current forms. On 7 February 2025, three UN independent experts issued a statement in relation to Bosnia and Herzegovina, where the government reintroduced the ‘Law on the Special Registry and Publicity of the Work of Non-Profit Organisations’ after its initial withdrawal in May 2024. The statement stressed that creating a register of non-profit organisations receiving foreign funding in one of the entities of Bosnia and Herzegovina will impose severe restrictions on NGOs and would grant government control over their operation, including the introduction of an annual inspection, with further reviews of legality of CSOs receiving foreign funding possible upon requests from citizens or relevant authorities.

In this unsupportive environment, donors have a fundamental role to play. ‘As civil society actors devise strategies to push back against these repressive tactics, private philanthropy and bilateral and multilateral donors have vital support roles to play,’ writes James Savage, who leads the Fund for Global Human Rights’ (FGHR) programme on the Enabling Environment for Human Rights Defenders. ‘They can help civil society prepare for future challenges, so that it is organised not only to respond to evolving forms of repression but also to get ahead of them by tackling their root causes,’ Savage concludes.

https://ishr.ch/latest-updates/spread-of-foreign-agent-laws-in-eastern-europe-pose-increasing-threats-to-civil-society

Posted in Human Rights Defenders, ISHR | Leave a Comment »
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

‘Foreign Agent’ Laws Spread, now also Georgia ?

April 8, 2024

Iskra Kirova, Advocacy Director, Europe and Central Asia Division of HRW, wrote on 4 April 2024: ‘Foreign Agent’ Laws Spread as EU Dithers to Support Civil Society

On the night before the infamous “foreign agents” law came into force back in 2012, unknown individuals sprayed graffiti reading, “Foreign Agent! ♥ USA” on the buildings hosting the offices of three prominent NGOs in Moscow, including Memorial. 
On the night before the infamous “foreign agents” law came into force back in 2012, unknown individuals sprayed graffiti reading, “Foreign Agent! ♥ USA” on the buildings hosting the offices of three prominent NGOs in Moscow, including Memorial.  © 2012 Yulia Klimova/Memorial

Georgia’s ruling party plans to reintroduce highly controversial Russia-style “foreign agent” legislation aimed at incapacitating civil society and independent media. If adopted, the laws, which were withdrawn last year in the face of massive protests, would require foreign-funded nongovernmental organizations and media to register as “agents of foreign influence”. That would make them subject to additional scrutiny and sanctions, including administrative penalties up to 25,000 GEL (about 8,600 Euro). Authorities claim the laws promote “transparency”, but their statements make it clear the laws will be used to stigmatize and punish critical voices.

Georgia was granted EU candidate status in December 2023 on the understanding it would improve conditions for civil society. This move risks derailing its EU integration even if the EU has until now been willing to move the country forward in the accession process despite limited progress on EU reform priorities. Georgia’s defiance of the EU on its civil society commitments isn’t so surprising when seen in the regional context. See also: https://humanrightsdefenders.blog/2024/03/24/kyrgyzstan-on-its-way-to-emulate-russia-with-a-draft-law-on-foreign-representatives-agents/

The day before Georgia’s announcement, Kyrgyzstan’s president signed an abusive “foreign representatives” law. Copied almost entirely from the Russian equivalent, the law would apply the stigmatizing designation of “foreign representative” to any nongovernmental organization that receives foreign funding and engages in vaguely defined “political activity”. The bill had been widely criticized after its initial submission in November 2022, including in a urgency resolution by the European Parliament.

The EU had ample opportunity to press the authorities to reject this bill. Kyrgyzstan benefits from privileged access to the EU internal market tied to respect for international human rights conventions: conventions this law clearly contravenes. The country is poised to sign an enhanced partnership agreement with the EU that centers democracy and fundamental rights. The EU has been silent on whether these deals would be imperiled by the bill’s adoption, despite the fact the European Commission’s own assessment highlighted Kyrgyzstan’s dire environment for civil society and the country’s breach of its obligations.

The latest spate of curbs on civil society comes in the wake of the European Commission’s December 2023 legislative proposal for an EU Directive on “transparency of interest representation” that would create a register of organizations which receive foreign funding. European civil society vehemently opposes the proposal because it risks shrinking space for independent organizations at home and diminishing the EU’s credibility in opposing such laws abroad. Yet the Commission forged ahead. On the same day the proposal was adopted, Hungary’s parliament approved a law that gives a government-controlled body broad powers to target civil society and independent media.

With civil society organizations under threat throughout Europe and Central Asia, we need an EU that in words and actions protects civic space and sets the right standards.

https://www.hrw.org/news/2024/04/04/foreign-agent-laws-spread-eu-dithers-support-civil-society

Georgian government wants to bring back criticised law 

https://www.ohchr.org/en/press-briefing-notes/2024/04/kyrgyzstan-new-law-risks-undermining-work-ngos

https://news.un.org/en/story/2024/05/1149776

https://www.ohchr.org/en/press-releases/2024/05/georgia-un-experts-condemn-adoption-law-transparency-foreign-influence

and see this! https://oc-media.org/georgian-foreign-agent-law-protester-lazare-grigoriadis-found-guilty/

Posted in EU, HRW, Human Rights Defenders | 1 Comment »
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Kyrgyzstan (and Slovakia) on their way to emulate Russia with draft law on ‘foreign representatives (agents)’

March 24, 2024

On 21 March 2024, Nikkei Asia carried the story on Kyrgyzstan taking a page from Russia in pushing for a ‘foreign agents’ law

Kyrgyzstan: Veto the draft law on ‘foreign representatives’ - Civic Space

Kyrgyz President Sadyr Japarov faces a high-stakes decision on whether to sign new legislation that critics warn will significantly impair how human rights defenders and independent media, among others, can work in his mountainous Central Asian state. On March 14, Kyrgyzstan’s parliament voted overwhelmingly in favor of a “foreign agents” bill that mirrors legislation adopted in Russia over a decade ago. The law is designed to control the activities of nonprofit and nongovernmental organizations that receive funding from abroad by compelling them to register as “foreign representatives,” leading to closer scrutiny of their activities by the authorities.

Japarov has a month from that date to sign it into law. Many observers have been vocal in their opposition and are urging the president to veto the bill. Syinat Sultanalieva, Central Asia researcher at Human Rights Watch, told Nikkei Asia that this law “would see the further and sharper shrinking of civil society,” a sector that has been under attack in Kyrgyzstan for more than a decade. BUT see: https://www.aol.com/kyrgyzstan-adopts-law-targeting-foreign-100124498.html

In the meantime the Prague based NGO, People in Need, speaks out against the Slovakian government’s proposed measures to curb critical media and NGOs, which would mirror tactics employed by autocrats and dictators in places ranging from Russia to Latin America, It has raised concerns about the erosion of civil liberties and the stifling of dissent. In a move reminiscent of authoritarian regimes, officials seek to designate these entities as “foreign agents,” a term often utilised to suppress opposition voices. The Fico government has already taken steps to cut NGO funding, raising further alarms about the independence of civil society activities. Additionally, Culture Minister Martina Šimkovičová and Justice Minister Boris Susko have initiated cuts to subsidy programmes, redirecting funds away from NGOs to other areas, citing concerns about transparency and favouritism in grant allocation. The government’s actions have prompted backlash from NGOs, with 90 organisations signing a petition against the minister’s decisions. 

As an organisation with roots steeped in the freedom and civic movements of post-Cold-War Czechoslovakia, we are appalled to see the illiberal turn taken by the Slovak government. The Fico government’s proposal to impose a Russian-style foreign agents’ law is anathema to the shared goals of the Czech and Slovak people who fought to end the Russian subjugation of our homelands. This is of great concern and sadness to us at People in Need.  

https://www.peopleinneed.net/slovak-government-targets-ngos-with-proposed-foreign-agents-act-11299gp

On 21 March 2024, a large group of civil society organisations jointly called on the president of Kyrgyzstan, Sadyr Japarov, to veto the amendments to the Law on Non-commercial Organisations, known as the law on ‘foreign representatives’ which clearly violates the country’s international human rights obligations and would be a devastating blow the civil society. [see also: https://humanrightsdefenders.blog/tag/foreign-agent-law/]

…We are writing to you on behalf of the undersigned civil society organisations from different countries to express support for Kyrgyzstan’s civil society and urge you to veto the amendments to the Law on Non-commercial Organisations, known as the law on ‘foreign representatives’, which parliament adopted on third reading on 14 March 2024. The proposed amendments fall seriously short of Kyrgyzstan’s international human rights obligations and risk delivering a devastating blow to its vibrant civil society. The amendments will impair civil society’s ability to carry out its important and legitimate work to the benefit of the people of Kyrgyzstan, and to promote public participation, transparency, accountability and good governance, thereby eroding democratic and human rights progress made by Kyrgyzstan with negative implications for its international reputation. Further, the proposed amendments will endanger international development and economic assistance programmes in the country, which will also undermine prospects for the achievement of sustainable development goals contrary to your government’s ambitious agenda in this area. Thus, we urge you to veto the amendments for the benefit of Kyrgyzstan and its people.

Both national and international human rights experts have concluded that the draft law on ‘foreign representatives’ clearly violates Kyrgyzstan’s international human rights obligations. For example, such conclusions were presented in a joint communication addressed to your government by three UN Special Rapporteurs, appointed by the UN Human Rights Council, of which Kyrgyzstan currently is a member. The three rapporteurs stated: ‘many provisions in the proposed law would be contrary to the international human rights obligations of the Kyrgyz Republic, including the right to the freedom of association, the right to freedom of opinion and expression, the right to non-discrimination and the right to privacy. If passed, this draft law could have a chilling effect on the operation of all associations in the Kyrgyz Republic, limiting their ability to advocate for human rights, provide social services, and contribute to the development of a robust and inclusive society.’

In an earlier legal assessment prepared at the request of Kyrgyzstan’s Ombudsperson, the OSCE Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights (ODIHR) found that the proposed provisions lack legitimate justification and do not meet the requirements of international human rights law for acceptable restrictions on the right to freedom of association. ODIHR also stressed that the key concepts of ‘foreign representatives’ and ‘political activities’ used in the draft law are inconsistent with the principle of legal certainty and predictability and ‘would allow unfettered discretion on the part of the implementing authorities’. ODIHR further found that the proposed provisions are contrary to the principle of non-discrimination and risk stigmatising organisations carrying out legitimate work and triggering mistrust, fear and hostility against them.

The draft law on ‘foreign representatives’ does not only violate your country’s international obligations but also contradicts provisions of the Constitution of the Kyrgyz Republic (including articles 36, 32, 24 and 29), which protect the right to freedom of association and other fundamental rights. In this way, the draft law challenges the legitimacy of the current Constitution, which was initiated by you and endorsed by citizens in a national referendum in 2021.

The proponents of the draft law on ‘foreign representatives’ have argued that it is aimed at ensuring the transparency of civil society organisations (CSOs). However, while transparency is an important issue, it is not a legitimate reason under international human rights law for imposing invasive, discriminatory, and stigmatising restrictions on CSOs. On the contrary, transparency can be ensured in ways that do not contradict international law nor hamper the work of CSOs. Moreover, all non-commercial organisations in Kyrgyzstan, including those that receive foreign funding, are already subjected to extensive state control and regularly report about their activities and finances to various state bodies, which ensures transparency of their work. In particular, amendments to the Law on Non-commercial Organisations, adopted in 2021, oblige non-commercial organisations to annually provide detailed information on their sources of funding, use of funds and assets for publication on the Tax Service’s website. This information is thus already publicly accessible.

Rather than increasing the transparency of non-commercial organisations, the draft law risks undermining civil society’s crucial role in assisting public bodies with the provision of support to vulnerable groups of the population, and also in promoting public sector transparency and accountability. Watchdog organisations have already warned of a significant decline in government transparency in Kyrgyzstan, preventing the exposure of wrongdoing and increasing the risk of corruption. This impairs foreign investments as well as economic growth and well-being in the country.

Kyrgyzstan’s international partners have warned that the adoption of the law on ‘foreign representatives’ would negatively affect development assistance programmes in the country. For example, in a joint statement issued on 14 March 2024, the Delegation of the EU to the Kyrgyz Republic and the Embassies of Canada, France, Germany, the United Kingdom, and the United States stated that the proposed provisions would ‘jeopardise our ability to provide assistance that improves the lives of the citizens and residents of the Kyrgyz Republic’. They stated that, if signed in its current form, the law ‘has the potential to hurt the most vulnerable who rely on the essential services – such as food, healthcare, and education – that non-profits and NGOs [non-governmental organisations] provide’. The UN Resident Coordinator in the Kyrgyz Republic pointed out that enacting the law would threaten civil society engagement in development initiatives and the achievement of UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). Thus, the law contradicts the government’s aim of being among the top 30 countries in the realisation of SDGs by 2030.

The World Bank and the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development have also stressed the importance that they attach to CSO engagement for the success of their in-country operations, when commenting on NGO concerns about the draft law’s potential impact on the activities of international financial institutions in Kyrgyzstan.

As you know, as a beneficiary of the General Scheme of Preferences Plus (GSP+), the Kyrgyz Republic is required to effectively implement international human rights conventions, including the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) in return for trade benefits afforded by the EU. Thus, the adoption and enforcement of the law on ‘foreign representatives’ is likely to negatively affect these benefits. The European Commission’s recent GSP+ monitoring report on the Kyrgyz Republic highlighted shrinking space for civil society as a key area of concern and called for swift measures to reverse this negative trend in the light of the country’s ICCPR obligations. Moreover, in its resolution adopted in July 2023, the European Parliament called for a reassessment of Kyrgyzstan’s GSP+ benefits in view of recent developments, in particular draft legislation that runs counter to the country’s international human rights obligations.

We are aware that proponents of the draft law on ‘foreign representatives’ have argued that it is similar to the US Foreign Agent Registration Act (FARA). However, FARA differs from the proposed legislation in Kyrgyzstan in crucial respects. In particular, FARA is not targeted at non-commercial organisations that receive foreign funding. Instead, FARA requires persons who conduct certain activities ‘at the order’ or ‘under the direction or control’ of a foreign government or other foreign entity to register as an ‘agent of a foreign principal’ and periodically file supplementary information about their activities in this capacity. The purpose of FARA is to ensure the public disclosure of such information rather than to subject those registered under it to ongoing, invasive state control.

President Japarov, when you consider whether or not to sign the draft law on ‘foreign representatives’, you are deciding the fate of civil society in Kyrgyzstan. Will you opt for the path taken by authoritarian countries, where similar legislation has been used in campaigns to systematically dismantle independent civil society, with negative implications for the reputation, prosperity and well-being of these countries? Or for a more forward-looking, inclusive, and democratically-oriented approach under which CSOs are treated as important, respected partners who can work together with state bodies in addressing societal problems, and international partners retain their confidence in Kyrgyzstan’s commitment to sustainable development?

For the reasons outlined above, we urge you to refrain from signing the draft law on ‘foreign representatives’ and ensure that any new legislation impacting non-commercial organisations reflects Kyrgyzstan’s international human rights obligations and undergoes thorough and inclusive consultations with civil society, as well as national and international experts. When elaborating this type of legislation, it is crucial to take the opinions of CSOs directly affected by it into account.

Signed by the following organisations (listed in the order of signature):

International Partnership for Human Rights (IPHR), Belgium

IDP Women Association Consent, Georgia

Norwegian Helsinki Committee

Hungarian Helsinki Committee, Hungary

Legal Policy Research Centre, Kazakhstan

Public Association “Dignity”, Kazakhstan

Netherlands Helsinki Committee

Civil Rights Defenders, Sweden

Protection of Rights without Borders NGO, Armenia

Swedish OSCE-network

Helsinki Citizens’ Assembly – Vanadzor, Armenia

Center for Civil Liberties, Ukraine

Public Verdict, Russia

Turkmen Helsinki Foundation, Bulgaria

Crude Accountability, USA

Freedom Files, Poland

Human Rights Center “Viasna”, Belarus

Center for Participation and Development, Georgia

Human Rights Defence Center Memorial, Russia

Civic Assistance Committee, Russia

Austrian Helsinki Association

Bulgarian Helsinki Committee

Human Rights Center (HRC), Georgia

Macedonian Helsinki Committee

Sova Research Center, Russia

Promo LEX Association, Moldova

Helsinki Foundation for Human Rights, Poland

ARTICLE 19 Europe

FIDH (International Federation for Human Rights), within the framework of the Observatory for the Protection of Human Rights Defenders

World Organisation Against Torture (OMCT), within the framework of the Observatory for the Protection of Human Rights Defenders

Amnesty International

https://asia.nikkei.com/Politics/Kyrgyzstan-takes-page-from-Russia-in-pushing-foreign-agents-law

Posted in Amnesty international, HRW, Human Rights Defenders, ISHR | 2 Comments »
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Environmental defender Alexander Nikitin awarded compensation by European Court

November 13, 2023

On 10 November 2023 the Caucasian Knot reported that the ECtHR had found a violation of the rights of Krasnodar activist Nikitin. Alexander Konstantinovich Nikitin is a Russian former submarine officer and nuclear safety inspector turned environmentalist. In 1996 he was accused of espionage for revealing the perils of decaying nuclear submarines, and in 2000 he became the first Russian to be completely acquitted of a charge of treason in the Soviet or post-Soviet era. Nikitin is still engaged in environmental and human rights issues in Russia. He is the head of Bellona Foundation’s Saint Petersburg branch, and is engaged in environmental and nuclear safety projects, as well as in human rights cases. He is a widely recognised HRD, see: https://www.trueheroesfilms.org/thedigest/laureates/D519B52C-D0C3-4B3B-B8F6-798A34B1BF04

The European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) has awarded compensation of EUR 5000 to Alexei Nikitin, a Krasnodar activist. Nikitin was detained at an action against increasing prices for public transport in 2018 and at a rally in support of Alexei Navalny* in 2021.

Navalny’s offices are recognized as extremist organizations and banned in Russia. Alexei Navalny is a founder of the Anti-Corruption Foundation (known as FBK), an NCO that is included by the Russian Ministry of Justice (MoJ) into the register of NCOs performing functions of a foreign agent. The NCO is also recognized by a court as extremist and banned in the territory of Russia.

https://eng.kavkaz-uzel.eu/articles/63451

Posted in Human Rights Defenders | Leave a Comment »
Tags: , , , , , , , , ,

Foreign Agent law in Russia from bad to worse

December 12, 2022

A new law entered into force in Russia that drastically expands the country’s oppressive and vast “foreign agents” legislation, Human Rights Watch said on 1 December 2022. The law is yet another attack on free expression and legitimate civic activism in Russia, and should be repealed:

Adopted in July 2022, the law’s entry into force was delayed until December 1. The law expands the definition of foreign agent to a point at which almost any person or entity, regardless of nationality or location, who engages in civic activism or even expresses opinions about Russian policies or officials’ conduct could be designated a foreign agent, so long as the authorities claim they are under “foreign influence.” It also excludes “foreign agents” from key aspects of civic life. 

“For more than a decade, Russian authorities have used ‘foreign agents’ laws to smear and punish independent voices,” said Rachel Denber, deputy Europe and Central Asia director at Human Rights Watch. “This new tool in the government’s already crowded toolbox makes it even easier to threaten critics, impose harsh restrictions on their legitimate activities and even ban them. It makes thoughtful public discussion about Russia’s past, present, and future simply impossible.” See also: https://humanrightsdefenders.blog/2022/05/21/kasparov-and-khodorkovsky-are-now-also-foreign-agents/

In Russia, the term “foreign agent” is tantamount “spy” or “traitor.” The foreign agent designation remains extra-judicial, with no possibility to contest it in court before the designation is made. Those designated must comply with all requirements the day after the authorities add them to the registry, even if they challenge the designation in court.

When the first foreign agent law was adopted in 2012, only registered organizations could be designated “foreign agents.” Successive amendments gradually expanded the application from registered organizations, to media, to other categories of individuals, and to associations without legal entities.

The July law, On Control Over Activities of Entities/Persons Under Foreign Influence, replaces these with a consolidated, simplified, but endlessly broad definition to cover any person – Russian, foreign or stateless; any legal entity, domestic or international; or any group without official registration, if they are considered to have received foreign support and/or are considered to be “under foreign influence” and engaged in activities that Russian authorities would deem to be “political.” It also covers anyone who gathers information about Russia’s military activities or military capabilities, or creates or publicly disseminates information or funds such activities.

The law defines “foreign influence” as “support” from foreign sources that includes funding, technical assistance, or other undefined kinds of assistance and/or open-ended “impact” that constitutes coercion, persuasion, and/or “other means.”

Under this definition, any interaction with a foreign element can potentially be construed as “foreign influence,” Human Rights Watch said. There is also no requirement for any causal link between “foreign influence” and the “political” or other activities for the designation to be applicable.

Foreign sources include not only foreign states or foreign entities, but also international organizations, presumably including such multilateral organizations as the United Nations. The law considers Russian nationals or organizations “foreign sources” if they are respectively considered by the Russian authorities to be under “foreign influence” or to be beneficiaries of “foreign funding.”

To avoid the “foreign agent” label, an organization needs to ensure that no source of any donation was at any stage “tainted” by “foreign influence,” including indirectly.

In defining what constitutes “political” activities of a foreign agent, the law consolidates provisions of earlier iterations of “foreign agent” amendments to include “opinions about public authorities’ decisions or policies.” For example, a journalist who publishes a commentary about urban development plans could fall under the definition of foreign agent activity.

The new law also excludes “foreign agents” from key aspects of public life. These include bans on joining the civil service, participating in electoral commissions, acting in an advisory or expert capacity in official or public environmental impact assessments, in independent anti-corruption expertise of draft laws and by-laws, or electoral campaigns or even donating to such campaigns or to political parties.

Foreign agents are also banned from teaching or engaging in other education activities for minors or producing informational materials for them. They cannot participate in organizing public assemblies or support them through donations and are barred from a number of other activities.

The law expands the notion of a person or entity affiliated with a “foreign agent,” which was first introduced in 2021 in relation to electoral candidates. A person remains “affiliated” up to two years after they sever ties with the foreign agent, even if the “affiliation” started before the law entered into force, and even if the “affiliation” started before the entity was designated a foreign agent.

Since the adoption of the first “foreign agents” law, hundreds of civic groups and activists, including those that work on human rights, the environment, election monitoring, and anti-corruption, have been designated “foreign agents.” A large number of organizations had to close down because they either sought to avoid the toxic label or were unable to bear the hefty fines imposed for not complying with the law’s burdensome, arbitrary labelling and reporting requirements. The authorities used the “foreign agents” law as a legal pretext to close down other groups, such as the human rights group Memorial, one of the 2022 Nobel Peace Prize laureates. See also: https://humanrightsdefenders.blog/2021/12/29/russias-supreme-court-orders-closure-emblematic-memorial/

“This new ‘foreign agents’ law is an unrestrained attack on Russian civil society aimed at gagging any public criticism of state policies,” Denber said. “It should be scrapped.”

https://www.hrw.org/news/2022/12/01/russia-new-restrictions-foreign-agents

Posted in HRW, human rights, Human Rights Defenders | 1 Comment »
Tags: , , , , , ,

Kasparov and Khodorkovsky are now also foreign agents

May 21, 2022
Agence France-Presse

On 21 May 2022 Agence France-Presse reported that Russia on Friday added two high-profile Kremlin critics to its list of “foreign agents“: former chess champion Garry Kasparov and ex-tycoon Mikhail Khodorkovsky.

The infamous label, reminiscent of the “enemies of the people” of the Soviet period, is used extensively against opponents, journalists and human rights activists accused of conducting foreign-funded political activities. Such “foreign agents” are subject to numerous constraints and laborious procedures, under pain of severe sanctions. In particular, they must indicate this status in all their publications. See also: https://humanrightsdefenders.blog/2016/02/09/foreign-agent-law-in-russia-keeps-widening-its-net/ and https://humanrightsdefenders.blog/2021/12/29/russias-supreme-court-orders-closure-emblematic-memorial/

In its updated website list, the Russian justice ministry said that Khodorkovsky, 58, and Kasparov, 59, have “sources” in Ukraine to finance their activities.

Soviet-born former world chess champion Kasparov is a long-time opponent of President Vladimir Putin and has lived in the United States for almost a decade.

Khodorkovsky was one of Russia’s most powerful businessmen in the 1990s, before coming into conflict with the Kremlin when Putin came to power in 2000. He spent ten years, from 2003 to 2013, in prison and then went into exile. For years, he helped to finance the Russian opposition organisation Open Russia, which dissolved itself in May last year in the face of growing repression.

Since the start of Moscow’s military operation in Ukraine on 24 February, dozens of members of the Russian intellectual elite and journalists have left the country, as the authorities step up pressure against the last critical voices and media. See also: https://humanrightsdefenders.blog/2022/04/26/lev-ponomarev-human-rights-defender-leaves-russia/

https://www.thesouthafrican.com/news/world-news/kasparov-and-khodorkovsky-added-to-foreign-agents-list-russia/

Posted in Human Rights Defenders | 1 Comment »
Tags: , , , ,

Lev Ponomarev, human rights defender, leaves Russia

April 26, 2022
Lev Ponomarev. Alexander Zemlianichenko / AP Photo / TASS

On 22 April, 2022 AFP reported that Lev Ponomarev, a veteran Russian rights defender who was earlier detained for protesting the Kremlin’s military operation in Ukraine, has “temporarily” left the country. See also: https://humanrightsdefenders.blog/2022/02/27/anti-war-human-rights-defenders-in-russia/

The 80-year-old former parliament member has been engaged in activism since the last years of the Soviet Union, helping create the now-dissolved Memorial organization in 1988. He said in a statement on Friday that worries about his personal safety, including “shadowy information about what they intended to do to me,” have forced him to take a break abroad.

“I doubt that my leave of absence will last long,” said Ponomarev, whose name has been added to Moscow’s list of “foreign agents” in Russia.

Ponomarev did not disclose his new location, saying only that he continued to closely follow the “worrying” news in Russia.

Ponomarev confirmed his departure on the same day fellow Kremlin critic Vladimir Kara-Murza appeared before investigators on charges of spreading false information about Russia’s military campaign in Ukraine, according to his lawyer. [see: https://humanrightsdefenders.blog/2022/04/14/human-rights-defender-vladimir-kara-murza-arrested-in-russia/]

The charge, which falls under a new law introduced after Russia’s Feb. 24 launch of the campaign, could see Kara-Murza, 40, jailed for up to 15 years. Kara-Murza was due to appear in a Moscow court later Friday, Interfax said.

Colleague activist Ronald Airapetyan: //www.rferl.org/a/russia-activist-asylum-netherlands/31823471.html

See also re Mikhail Nesvat: https://www.rferl.org/a/russia-activist-asylum-united-states-crackdown/31833981.html

https://www.themoscowtimes.com/2022/04/22/veteran-rights-defender-ponomarev-leaves-russia-a77467

Posted in human rights, Human Rights Defenders | 2 Comments »
Tags: , , , , , , , ,

Foreign Agents Law now also threatens to come to El Salvador

February 9, 2022

Devon Kearney in NPQ of 8 February 2022, reports on a worrying legislative development in El Salvador….

It has been nearly a decade since the Russian government passed its “foreign agent law,” a measure that requires nonprofit groups that engage in political activity to register with the government if they receive money from overseas. Russia justified the bill by saying it was based on a U.S. law—a statute from the lead-up to World War II that many of us came to know only after Donald Trump’s campaign manager, Paul Manafort, was accused of being an unregistered foreign agent. Putin’s message was that this was just an ordinary, even boring regulatory measure.

But it is more than that. Initial concerns focused on the stigma of being branded a foreign agent, but the law has sharper teeth, allowing the government to fine or even ban organizations that do not accept being branded as foreign agents. For example, on December 28, 2021, the government presented its case for disbanding the storied human rights organization Memorial for failing to include the disclaimer “produced by a foreign agent” on a few of its web pages. At the end of the hearing, the court ordered the Memorial to shut down. See: https://humanrightsdefenders.blog/2021/12/29/russias-supreme-court-orders-closure-emblematic-memorial/

The sinister brilliance of the foreign agent law is twofold. First, it targets human rights NGOs’ supply lines, as it were, making it difficult to accept the funds they need to survive. In much of the world, human rights defenders rely on support from global philanthropies like the Open Society Foundations for the funding they need to operate. By the standards of Russia’s law, most would be required to register as foreign agents. Groups that take foreign money would be subject to government meddling and harassment; those that opted to do without would struggle to keep their doors open.

Second, the law accomplishes this by co-opting legitimate regulatory functions of the state to crush dissent. Setting the rules for nonprofits—along with corporations, lobbyists, and a wide range of activities that impact the public good—is something governments are supposed to do. The great innovation of Putin and the autocrats that followed him was to turn regulatory schemes into instruments of their own political dominance. By obviating the need for violence against opponents, these methods may avoid the consequences of harsher exercises of state power. They are key to creating, in the words of Hungarian semi-dictator Viktor Orbán, an “illiberal democracy,” a state where elections continue but the rights and liberties of the people are curtailed.

The world took notice when the Russian foreign agent law passed and, today, more than fifty countries have adopted laws based on the Russian example. One of the latest, introduced in November 2021 and still under debate, has an ominous twist. See also: https://humanrightsdefenders.blog/2020/10/17/nicaragua-things-getting-worse-and-worse-for-human-rights-defenders-covid-19-and-foreign-agents/ as well as https://humanrightsdefenders.blog/2016/06/17/un-rapporteurs-urge-india-to-repeal-law-restricting-human-rights-defenders-access-to-foreign-funding/

Under 38-year-old President Nayib Bukele, a charismatic young politician, El Salvador has taken a sharp turn toward authoritarianism. Bukele made headlines in February 2020 when he brought armed soldiers into Congress to stand behind him as he demanded funding for the military. He has since fired prosecutors and judges in order to pack the legal system with loyalists. Bukele is the latest in a growing number of modernized dictators who adopt the tactics but not the swagger of their forebears. But his style is distinctive. In the Journal of Democracy, Salvadoran political scholar Manuel Meléndez-Sánchez writes: “Bukele relies on millennial authoritarianism, a distinctive political strategy that combines traditional populist appeals, classic authoritarian behavior, and a youthful and modern personal brand built primarily via social media.”

Bukele’s authoritarian moves have raised alarms among Salvadoran civil society and around the world. The US has expressed its concern by hitting the government in the pocketbook: in May 2021, the United States Agency for International Development announced that it would pull funding from the Salvadoran police and other national agencies, instead directing the funds to civil society groups carrying out local development projects. More recently, USAID Administrator Samantha Power said the agency would commit $300 million for direct civil society funding in Central America, and promised to increase the amount of funding bypassing national governments to 50 percent within 10 years.

All of this is in keeping with Power’s stated intention to provide aid to developing nations with a local, “bottom up” approach that prioritizes small businesses over big international contractors, and local civil society groups over national governments—“[t]o engage authentically with local partners and to move toward a more locally led development approach,” as she told the Senate Foreign Relations Committee in July 2021.

But in a region where US interference has long rankled rulers and their people, the move may be seen as ham-fisted—taking aid money to support opponents of a duly-elected government brings to mind the ways in which our country funded proxy wars that killed hundreds of thousands of Salvadorans and left a bloody trail in Nicaragua and Guatemala, as well. More recently, in 2019 the Trump Administration slashed hundreds of millions of dollars in aid to the region in the hopes that by increasing financial pain it could pressure countries to take harsher measures to prevent their people from fleeing to the U.S.

With this history as a pretext, and perhaps stinging at this new reduction in aid funding, Bukele’s government struck back. On November 9, 2021, the government introduced a bill to require domestic nonprofits or social enterprises (solely commercial enterprises are exempted) to register as foreign agents if they “respond to the interests of, or are directly or indirectly funded by, a foreigner.”

“That the Legislative Assembly is even considering such a restrictive bill sends a chilling message to human rights groups and organizations fighting against impunity and corruption,” says Ricardo González Bernal, the Fund for Global Human Rights’ Program Director for Latin America. The Fund supports grassroots human rights defenders and independent journalism in El Salvador, across Central America, and throughout the world.

https://nonprofitquarterly.org/salvadoran-foreign-agent-law-threatens-human-rights-movements/

Posted in Human Rights Defenders | Leave a Comment »
Tags: , , , , , , ,

« Older posts