Security and respect for human rights are not a zero-sum choice - they should instead go hand in hand. This learning package will help you navigate the complex web of security-based standards, rules, and procedures that may have a restrictive impact on civil society work.
By the end of this learning package, you will:
- Understand relevant terminology, which will help you navigate this topic within your work, and when using the provided resources and other learning centre packages;
- Understand who the key stakeholders are;
- Be able to identify relevant human rights considerations and their connection to security measures;
- Have learnt from examples of poorly designed or misused restrictions and gained insight into what CSOs can, or have done, when faced with AML/CFT over-regulation.
The following module is designed to give you an overview of the key processes of countering terrorism financing, introduce the main actors involved, and illustrate the impact of these restrictions on the day-to-day activities of CSOs. Watch the video explainer and read the testimonials for real-life examples from CSOs. The following packages will then take a deep dive into specifics: why CSOs might face problems when accessing banks’ financial services; how the nonprofit sector can be part of processes that assess its risk to terrorist financing or what the most effective strategies are for CSOs to push back against undue restrictions.
There is ample evidence from many countries that security-related measures, including those aimed at countering terrorist financing and money laundering, are having an increasingly negative impact on the civil society sector, due to their poor design or intentional misuse.
What form do these restrictions come in? There is not one way a restriction for security purposes is used, in fact, there are many forms. They can be legal provisions that restrict activities or add layers of burdensome requirements. It is important to note that many of these restrictions are only applied to civil society, and often do not apply to the business sector.
Restrictions can also come in the form of repressive measures against lawful, non-violent activists or groups. For example, they can have the effect of limiting the access that CSOs have to financial resources or foreign funding. They can also be smear campaigns by governments, aimed at delegitimising groups or activists, by loosely characterising them as “terrorists” or implying that they are “threats to national security.” Additionally, definitions, such as what constitutes an act of terrorism, are often vague as there is still no globally agreed definition of the term terrorism. This can lead to inconsistencies in the implementation of standards. Another concern around vague definitions is that these terms can be manipulated or abused so that the activities of CSOs can be more easily restricted.
How and when did security regulations begin to become a real issue for CSOs?
Six weeks after the shock of 9/11, the Financial Action Task Force (FATF), introduced new rules to combat terrorist financing. During this process of creating new rules, the FATF stated that the civil society sector is particularly vulnerable to terrorist financing abuse. There were no representatives of the nonprofit sector in the room when that decision was made and it unleashed a string of restrictions on the work and existence of civil society.
What is the FATF?
The Financial Action Task Force is the global money laundering and terrorist financing watchdog. The FATF was founded in 1989 to develop policies to prevent money laundering and in 2001 its mandate was expanded to include terrorism financing. As an inter-governmental body, it sets international standards that aim to prevent these illegal activities and the harm they cause to society. Although voluntary, these standards are being rigorously implemented and evaluated. The FATF has developed the FATF Recommendations, or FATF Standards. Recommendation 8, ‘Best Practices on Combating the Abuse of Non-Profit Organisations’, directly addresses the nonprofit sector. This recommendation has received criticism from CSOs for being difficult to interpret and apply and easy to purposefully or unintentionally misuse. The FATF periodically evaluates how countries implement those standards and produces a ranking.
What are FATF Mutual Evaluations?
FATF Mutual Evaluations are peer reviews which are carried out by assessors from different countries, on a member country which is not their own. These reviews are carried out on an ongoing basis to assess levels of implementation of the FATF Recommendations and provide an in-depth description and analysis of each country’s system for preventing criminal abuse of the financial system. These reviews are the basis for FATF ranking and can have a serious impact on the state’s financial system, credit rating and ability to access financial markets.
What are regional FATF bodies?
FATF-Style Regional Bodies (FSRBs) are regional entities that cooperate with the FATF to enforce worldwide anti-money laundering (AML) and counter-terrorism financing (CFT) standards. Each body works within its designated region. Their role is to assess the AML/CFT systems of member nations, offer suggestions for improvements, and conduct research into financing terrorism, proliferation, and money laundering methods. FSRBs have a critical role in disseminating and upholding FATF's AML/CFT guidelines on a global scale. There are nine different regional bodies, for instance, the body covering Europe is MONEYVAL.
Want to learn more about the abuse of security standards and how they have been used in real life to restrict the work of CSOs? Watch the video explainer.
When watching the video, consider the following questions...
- In your context, has legislation been introduced that restricts freedom of expression, assembly and participation, under the guise of security?
- Do you feel this is proportionate or in line with human rights obligations?
- Do you see any similarities between your context and the stories from Serbian and Nigerian CSOs?
- Could the approach of these organisations be useful for you to consider?
CT /CFT /AML measures that meet human rights standards are:
- Designed to address a specific risk;
- Necessary measures needed to mitigate risk;
- Proportionate to the risk and in line with international human rights obligations;
- Time-limited;
- As unintrusive as possible;
- Targeted and focused on risk only.
CT/ CFT /AML measures inconsistent with human rights standards are:
- Measures that have a one-size-fits-all approach;
- Check box lists which do not take context into account;
- Zero tolerance standards;
- Measures that have a blanket (not targeted) approach;
- Are disproportionate to international human rights obligations and context.
Reflect on what you have learnt:
- What aspects of your work have been unduly restricted for security purposes?
- What have you or your partners done in response to such measures?
- Do you know of, or have you ever had any contact with, the FSRB covering your region?
Testimonials
After the terrorist attacks of 9/11, governments all over the world passed new counterterrorism laws and it was inevitable that civil society was going to get caught up in this. It is collateral damage as they call it.
Restrictive legislative proposals continued to be introduced despite FATF Recommendation 8's latest requirement for a risk-based approach to eliminate blanket restrictions on all CSOs.
The Serbian Government abused its investigative powers to gather private banking information from 57 CSOs. This had harmful consequences, as we were seen to be accused of money laundering.
Learn about the impacts of security and counter-terrorism measures on civil society work, and how CSOs in different countries pushed back against restrictions.
Click on the countries to read more! Come back for new stories as we expand the map!
