When thousands of Georgians took to the streets of Tbilisi in 2023 to protest against a government-backed ‘foreign agents’ law, they were not just contesting a piece of legislation; they were standing up against a systematic attempt to silence dissent. Despite the initial withdrawal of the law due to public outcry, the government returned stronger in 2024, reintroducing a renamed version that further entrenched their authoritarian grip. This legislative assault is not an isolated incident but part of a broader, alarming global trend that threatens the very fabric of civil society.
CIVICUS’s recent report, “Cutting Civil Society’s Lifeline,” highlights the prevalence of foreign agents laws across the globe, from Central America to Central Asia, and Africa to the Balkans. These laws falsely frame civil society organizations and independent media as mere agents of foreign powers, a tactic aimed at delegitimizing their essential roles in democracy and accountability. Since 2020, countries like El Salvador, Georgia, Kyrgyzstan, Nicaragua, and Zimbabwe have enacted these repressive measures, demonstrating a growing threat to civic freedoms worldwide.
The precedent for this repressive architecture was set by Russia in 2012. Under Vladimir Putin, the government mandated that any civil society organization receiving foreign funding and engaging in loosely defined ‘political activity’ register as a foreign agent. This designation not only stigmatizes organizations but effectively forces many to cease operations altogether. By 2016, over 30 groups had shut down rather than accept this damaging label. The European Court of Human Rights has rightfully condemned Russia’s legislation for violating fundamental civic freedoms, yet this has not deterred other authoritarian regimes from adopting similar laws.
The argument that these laws promote transparency is utterly disingenuous. Civil society organizations that receive international support are already held to rigorous accountability standards imposed by their donors. Conversely, governments often receive substantial foreign funding without any corresponding disclosure obligations. This stark double standard reveals the true intent behind foreign agents laws: control rather than transparency. These laws are designed to stifle any public interest activity that could be construed as political, including human rights advocacy and democratic engagement, leaving definitions purposely vague to allow for discretionary enforcement against disliked organizations.
The implications of these laws can be catastrophic. Nicaragua serves as a chilling case study where President Daniel Ortega’s administration has used foreign agents legislation as part of a broader strategy to dismantle civil society. Over 5,600 organizations have been shuttered, representing a staggering 80% of the country’s active groups. State security forces have raided these organizations, confiscated their assets, and driven thousands of activists, academics, and journalists into exile. With only state-sanctioned entities allowed to operate, Nicaragua has devolved into a full-blown authoritarian regime, where independent voices have been systematically eradicated.
In Kyrgyzstan, a foreign agents law enacted in March 2024 has already had a chilling effect on civil society. Organizations are curtailing their activities, re-registering as commercial entities, or shutting down altogether to avoid harsh penalties for non-compliance. El Salvador’s government, led by President Nayib Bukele, has imposed a punitive 30% tax on all foreign grants, further straining civil society organizations and forcing many to close their doors.
These foreign agents laws create insurmountable barriers through convoluted registration processes and stringent reporting requirements, effectively suffocating smaller organizations. The threat of severe penalties—including heavy fines, license revocations, and imprisonment for non-compliance—fosters a climate of fear that often leads to self-censorship and the dissolution of organizations. By restricting foreign funding without offering alternative domestic funding sources, governments make civil society dependent on state approval, undermining their independence. The stigmatising label of ‘foreign agent’ not only damages public trust but also hinders the ability to organize and resist further crackdowns.
However, amid this bleak landscape, there are glimmers of hope. Civil society has demonstrated remarkable resilience in the face of these oppressive laws, with street mobilizations and legal challenges sometimes reversing or stalling such measures. Ukraine’s swift repeal of its foreign agents law following mass protests in 2014 exemplifies the power of collective action. Similarly, Ethiopia amended its restrictive 2009 law in 2019, and Hungary was compelled to abandon its anti-NGO legislation due to a ruling from the European Court of Justice.
International legal pressure is crucial in this struggle. The European Court of Human Rights’ clear condemnation of Russia’s legislation has established vital precedents for challenging similar laws elsewhere. Yet, we see authoritarian governments continuously adapting their tactics, as evidenced by Hungary’s recent introduction of a ‘sovereignty protection’ law.
The alarming acceleration of foreign agents laws since 2020 reflects a disturbing trend of democratic regression worldwide. Authoritarian leaders are exploiting legitimate concerns about foreign interference to craft legal instruments that serve their repressive agendas. This is not merely a problem for those countries directly enacting such legislation; it poses a threat to democratic principles globally. Bulgaria’s parliament has repeatedly rejected foreign agents bills, yet a far-right party persistently reintroduces them, mirroring the tactics of other nations.
Coordinated resistance is imperative before these draconian laws become normalized. There is an urgent need for international courts to expedite cases involving immediate threats to civil society, for democratic governments to refrain from adopting similar stigmatising laws, and for targeted sanctions to be imposed on foreign officials who enact such oppressive measures. Funders must create emergency mechanisms for rapid-disbursement grants, while civil society must strengthen international solidarity networks to share strategies and expose the malicious intent behind these laws.
The alternative to this coordinated action is passive complicity as independent voices are systematically silenced. The right to exist and function freely must be staunchly defended, for civil society is the backbone of democracy, accountability, and human rights. The battle against foreign agents laws is not just about protecting organizations; it is about safeguarding our fundamental freedoms and the future of democratic society itself.
