Accessibility Settings

color options

monochrome muted color dark

reading tools

isolation ruler



The Global Backlash Against NGOs (and How To Fight Back)

Authoritarian governments have cleverly used the liberal norm of transparency in order to shut down liberal groups in their countries, a new report has detailed.

The report, “Distract, Divide, Detach: Using Transparency and Accountability to Justify Regulation of Civil Society Organizations,” is aimed at helping civil society organizations (CSOs) against a growing backlash against them. The report describes how a focus on transparency, in particular requirements to disclose sources of funding, has allowed authoritarian states to paint liberal CSOs (also known as NGOs, non-governmental organizations) as puppets of the West with little local constituency, and to justify crackdowns against them.

The most notorious example is Russia’s so-called “Foreign Agents Law,” which requires groups getting funding from abroad to register and tar themselves with that unattractive label. But that is just one example of many similar cases around the world, and especially in the post-Soviet space.

The report also cites Azerbaijan as an exemplar of the trend.

[T]he government of Ilham Aliyev invoked transparency when legislation to regulate CSOs was introduced. In 2013, the government stated at a UN forum that its NGO legislation “should only disturb the associations operating in our country on a non-transparent basis.” The actual legislation reached far beyond transparency, as the bank accounts of most CSOs were frozen. Many CSOs closed, and others could restart operations only after demonstrating loyalty to the government. Several human rights defenders were arrested and held in prison for months, some of them under charges of tax evasion and fraud related to their CSOs. Most independent observers viewed the charges as fabricated.

The governments use the transparency argument in bad faith, argues the report’s author, Tbilisi-based Hans Gutbrod.

“Many of the arguments on transparency and accountability appear reasonable at face value: Governments appear to ask of CSOs, in many cases, what CSOs ask of governments,” Gutbrod writes. “[A] degree of regulation to ensure that these are organizations working for broader charitable purposes is sensible and even necessary. However, proposed measures often come with intrusive requirements and enforcement mechanisms.”

Yet the report is unsparing about the systemic weaknesses that plague donor-funded NGOs and open them to attack.

One is that the NGOs often don’t have a strong local constituency, which allows them, with some justification, to be responsive not to the country’s citizens but to foreigners.

“Demands for accountability also play on the fact that in many contexts, CSOs do not draw on a large membership base. While many Western CSOs have developed extensive member networks over many decades, for issues ranging from civil rights to bird-watching, membership numbers in other countries remain comparatively low,” the report says. In cases where foreign donors back an organization, “the direction of the funding stream reverses accountability of the CSO and its leadership toward donors and away from the membership base.”

Another is that local NGO officials often get generous salaries, which is necessary to compete for highly qualified staff but opens the groups to criticism that they represent only a privileged elite.

Combating those perceptions “requires sophisticated counter-messaging,” Gutbrod writes.

But in many cases civil society groups are unaware of their lack of public support. The report cites research in Armenia, which showed that “CSOs greatly overestimate the trust that they enjoy.” According to the 2013 study, NGO leaders believed that 48 percent of the population “fully or somewhat trusts” NGOs. But the real number was 18 percent. “It is at least possible that this pattern holds in other countries as well,” the report argues.

And a lack of transparency does in fact plague many organizations — even those that advocate for transparency from governments. At the 2015 International Open Data Conference in Ottawa, “only 12 out of 34 organizations provided comprehensive information on their funding. Many open-data advocates were opaque.”

So what to do? The report advocates a variety of PR and legal measures that groups could take to prepare for attacks from authoritarian governments. But they should not give up pushing for transparency, even as the same argument can be used against them: “the overall pro-transparency strategy remains sound, though continuously adapting the tactics to context will help achieve greater impact,” the report concludes. “The language that grantees use with donors likely is not the language that always appeals to local constituencies.”

This post first appeared on and is cross-posted with permission.

Joshua Kucera is a freelance journalist based in Istanbul. He is Turkey/Caucasus editor at EurasiaNet and his articles also have appeared in Slate, The New York Times, The Wilson Quarterly, The Atlantic, Al Jazeera America, Roads & Kingdoms, and Jane’s Defence Weekly.

Republish our articles for free, online or in print, under a Creative Commons license.

Republish this article

Material from GIJN’s website is generally available for republication under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International license. Images usually are published under a different license, so we advise you to use alternatives or contact us regarding permission. Here are our full terms for republication. You must credit the author, link to the original story, and name GIJN as the first publisher. For any queries or to send us a courtesy republication note, write to

Read Next

News & Analysis

Tips from the Pros: Investigating Raw Materials Traders in Switzerland

A haven of banking secrecy for decades, Switzerland has now become a land of raw materials trading. Most of the private hydrocarbon trading giants have set up their headquarters in Geneva. But unlike banks, which have to comply with international standards on money laundering and tax fraud these trading companies are accountable to virtually no one.

News & Analysis

Document of the Day: UK Cities Refuse Public Scrutiny of Accounts

When the Bureau of Investigative Journalism asked to see a contract between property developers and the North London borough of Haringey, its reporters were disappointed to receive a heavily-redacted document. This was part of a drive by the UK nonprofit to test the Local Audit and Accountability Act 2014, which gives citizens and journalists the right to access the accounts and related documents of city councils and other local authorities.

News & Analysis

Document of the Day: Freedom In The World 2019

Freedom House’s 2018 Freedom in the World report, which was just released this week, signals an alarming trend: Democracy is in retreat. There were media freedom reversals in many countries spanning across regions, including long-standing democracies such as the United States and consolidated authoritarian regimes such as China and Russia.