OUT OF SIGHT, NOT OUT OF REACH The Global Scale and Scope of Transnational Repression The project assembled a catalogue of 608 direct, physical cases of transnational repression that occurred in the period from January 2014 through November 2020. In each of these cases, the origin country’s authorities physically reached an individual living abroad, whether through detention, assault, physical intimidation, unlawful deportation, rendition, or suspected assassination.1 The list includes 31 origin states conducting physical transnational repression in 79 host countries, with 160 unique pairings between host and origin countries. The compilation is certainly only partial; hundreds of other physical cases that lacked sufficient documentation, especially detentions and unlawful deportations, are not included in Freedom House’s count.2 Nevertheless, even this conservative enumeration shows that what often appear to be isolated incidents—an assassination here, a kidnapping there— actually represent a pernicious and pervasive threat to human freedom and security. The project compiled a catalogue of 608 direct, physical cases of transnational repression. Physical transnational repression is itself only the tip of an iceberg. The consequences of each physical attack ripple out into the larger community. And beyond the physical cases compiled for this report are the much more widespread tactics of “everyday” transnational repression: digital threats, spyware, and coercion by proxy, such as the imprisonment of exiles’ families. For millions of people around the world, transnational repression has become not an exceptional tool, but a common and institutionalized practice used by dozens of governments to control people outside their borders. In essence, transnational repression is a means of injecting authoritarianism into another polity, imposing the origin country’s restrictions on individuals who live in ostensibly more free environments. Freedom House’s research shows that: • 4 Transnational repression is becoming a “normal” phenomenon. The global review identified more governments engaging in recognizable patterns of transnational repression, and far more frequently, than is typically understood. Most offending states deploy a spectrum of tactics, ranging from spyware and family @FreedomHouse intimidation to renditions or assassinations. It is no longer unusual for regimes to target “their” citizens beyond their borders—it is par for the course. This is true both of large, powerful countries like China, and of smaller and less influential countries like Burundi. Democracies must act at home and abroad to prevent the further normalization of extraterritorial persecution. • Most physical transnational repression involves co-opting host governments in order to reach exiles. The most common forms of physical transnational repression—detentions and unlawful deportations at the origin state’s request—entail exploitation of the host country’s institutions. These detentions and deportations account for roughly two-thirds of the catalogued cases.3 Most renditions also involve working closely with host country authorities to illegally transfer people to the origin country. In this way, transnational repression directly undermines the rule of law in the targeted host country. Preventing it will require building resilience through stronger relationships between host governments and exile communities, better legal protections for migrants, and greater awareness of the ways in which authoritarian regimes can manipulate host country institutions. • The consequences for transnational repression are currently insufficient to deter further abuse. Aside from damage to its image, the Saudi state has faced few concrete repercussions for the murder of Jamal Khashoggi. The international community has not sanctioned or even soundly condemned Turkey’s government for its global campaign of renditions. Multiple assassinations tied to Russian intelligence agents in Europe have not resulted in serious changes in Moscow’s international relations. Only recently have governments begun to push back against Beijing’s global campaign of intimidation against the Chinese diaspora. Stopping transnational repression will require reestablishing an international norm of universal due process and against extraterritorial violence. • The full spectrum of transnational repression tactics are significant. Online harassment, coercion by proxy, mobility controls, and use of spyware do not garner the same level of attention as assassinations, but these less visible forms of transnational repression are intimately connected to physical attacks. Of 31 states that engage in the physical methods, at least 26 also use nonphysical, “everyday” tools of transnational repression. Any effective response to the broader phenomenon must include efforts to protect people from these practices, including targeted sanctions for spyware attacks, regulation of the commercial spyware market, and support for digital security measures among at-risk groups. #TransnationalRepression