International nonprofits and other non-government organizations (NGOs) need American support to function, or even exist, a trio of witnesses told U.S. senators during a hearing. Repressive regimes around the world have realized they can use legislation to give oppressing nonprofits and other NGOs the veneer of legality, the witnesses attested.

Without protections, which can include sanctions, adjustments to vias policies and increasing personnel in key government agencies that support NGOs, nonprofits across the globe are increasingly being compromised or even eliminated, according to testimony presented during Anti-NGO Laws And Other Tools Of Democratic Repression, a hearing held by the Senate Committee On Foreign Relations.

Repression of these organizations is becoming increasingly common. “In the past five years, 72 countries have introduced 270 measures restricting civil society,” Douglas Rutzen, president and CEO of the International Center for Nonprofit Law testified. “Disaggregating the data, 33% of the measures restrict the ability to form or operate a nonprofit.” The Nicaraguan government has closed down 1,500 nonprofits, including religious organizations, human rights groups and even the American Chamber of Commerce, Rutzen added.

The issues are far from isolated. Venezuela recently enacted legislation that gives the government unlimited discretion in determining which nonprofits are allowed to exist, the government in Afghanistan issued an order banning women from working in nonprofits, and several countries have created structures that allow governments to regulate how or even whether nonprofits can receive donations, whether international or domestic.

Rutzen proposed a series of initiatives, including calling for the U.S. government to:

• Establish a standalone global program that proactively and preemptively addresses anti-NGO laws and legal threats to civil society;
• Increase support of programs such as the Surge and Sustain Fund, which covers user costs for open-source virtual private networks and other means that enable users in restrictive censorship environments to circumvent monitoring; and,
• Review the efficacy and scope of existing programs to make sure they meet the needs of current targets of repression.

Additionally, Rutzen asked that staffing levels of those addressing treats, including within the U.S Department of State and USAID’s Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Governance be reviewed to determine if they cover current needs. Additionally, he suggested that regional bureaus and embassies have specific plans regarding protection of those requiring support, and that those plans be reviewed regularly.

Rutzen also requested that the Global Magnitsky Act of 2016, which authorizes the U.S. government to freeze the assets of foreign government officials who are human rights offenders and bars the offenders from visiting the United States, be used more frequently. Rutzen highlighted what he said was a slowdown in the use of sanctions, to the detriment of those seeking to thwart repressive activities. “Finally, as bills advance through the Senate, please help ensure they safeguard civil society, not only internationally but also here at home,” Rutzen asked.

Rutzen was joined in the hearing by witnesses Eka Gigauri, executive director of the Tbilisi, Georgia Transparency International Georgia, the Georgian arm of a global anti-corruption nonprofit, and Yaqiu Wang, Research Director for China, Hong Kong, and Taiwan at Freedom House, a Washington, D.C.-based anti-authoritarianism nonprofit. Gigauri testified that Georgian citizens had been struggling against the anti-NGO laws influenced by Russia which “… amplify Russian anti-Western disinformation, cultivate social division and undermine partnership with the U.S. and the EU all against the will of the majority of citizens.”

Gigauri made it clear she was not asking for U.S. institutions to take the lead in promoting NGO freedoms within Georgia. “A free country is never granted even by the greatest allies,” she said. “It is earned by its citizens for whom America has always been an inspiration. The key point is that in places where the pro-democracy movements are strong and America’s well-established partnerships are challenged by actors like Russia, as in Georgia, maintaining a high level of support in backing democratic aspirations of nations can tip the balance in Georgia.”

Gigauri noted that leaders in Georgia were proceeding apace along a three-phase legislative attack on NGOs. “Autocratic objectives are simple: silencing critical voices; closing civic space; and neutralizing free media,” she said. “Anti-NGO legislation is a convenient tool for these goals, providing a facet of legality in Georgia.”

Phase one, per Gigauri, included the use of propaganda to discredit against civil society, USAID and other U.S.-based democracy-promoting organizations, including personal-level intimidation. Phase two involved passing anti-NGO laws despite public opposition. And phase three consists of enforcing the laws, which label NGO members and activists as foreign agents — a term that carries heavy weight in Georgia due to the Soviet-era connotations, according to Gigauri – along with levying substantial fines and seizing the assets of NGOs that refuse to register with the government and requiring NGOs to disclose sensitive personal data.

Yaqui Wang spoke to the need to support individuals working on behalf of human rights in Hong Kong and mainland China, increasing numbers of whom have faced jail or other oppression since Xi Jinping assumed power in 2012. Wang asked members of Congress pass legislation that liberalizes visa issuances for at-risk human rights defenders. She also called for the U.S. government to impose sanctions on Chinese companies that sell technologies which aid in human rights abuses, such as surveillance equipment.

By and large, senators in the hearing were sympathetic, with several touting their own international human rights activities. Sen. Jeanne Shaheen (D-New Hampshire) sympathized with Gigauri regarding Georgia’s passage of the “foreign agents” law and reported that when she met with the country’s Prime Minister, Irakli Kobakhidze, his sole request of the United States was that the country stop funding NGOs critical of his government.

Sen. Tim Kaine (D-Virginia) noted that even U.S. allies had passed or amended laws such as India’s Foreign Contribution Regulation Act, which constricts the ability of NGOs operating in India to collect donations from around the world. “Organizations like Amnesty International and others have had to dramatically limit or shutter operations in India, because they do rely on fundraising,” Kaine said.

Committee Chairman Sen. Ben Cardin (D-Maryland) gave some indication regarding Congress’s potential next steps in his remarks when he noted he had introduced The Human Rights Defenders Protection Act (S.3705), which if passed would bolster the U.S. Government’s capacity to support human rights defenders in their efforts in a number of ways. That includes establishing an interagency framework for doing so that will live beyond any one administration, as well as moving the International Freedom Protection Act (S.3854), which would define the term transnational repression, require a U.S. strategy on the matter and require the consideration of transnational repression in human rights-related sanctions.

The post Senators Urged To Protect NGOs Via Systems, Staffing, Sanctions appeared first on The NonProfit Times.

Source From Non Profit Times