Freedom House result in negative consequences, are more resilient to foreign coercion and surveillance. To supplement these informational efforts, law enforcement should provide guidance to vulnerable communities on how to document evidence of harassment, intimidation, or stalking to help mitigate obstacles to reporting and prosecution. Law enforcement should consult with stakeholders including civil society and technology companies to develop and publicize this guidance. Other agencies, especially those working with migrants and refugees, should develop similar outreach strategies. Congress should pass the bipartisan Foreign Advanced Technology Surveillance Accountability Act (H.R.2075) to better understand which governments use surveillance to target victims of transnational repression. This bill would require the Department of State to include information in its annual Human Rights Reports about the extent to which governments are using excessive surveillance or advanced technologies to violate rights. The report should also include information on which companies or countries have provided biometric or facial-recognition data to states using these technologies to violate rights. A more detailed understanding of which countries use surveillance to target critics can assist development of safeguards for potential victims of transnational repression, and of targeted sanctions for perpetrators. Work with the Department of Justice and other relevant agencies to update transparency laws regarding individuals acting on behalf of foreign governments. A critical step in curbing transnational repression is recognizing the specific actors committing transnational abuses on behalf of their home governments. In the United States, antiquated procedures for regulation of foreign agents under the Foreign Agent Registrations Act of 1938 (22 U.S.C. 611 et seq) and 18 U.S.C. Section 951 are a major obstacle to identifying those acting on behalf of repressive regimes. Although the Department of Justice has ramped up enforcement against alleged perpetrators of transnational repression, the laws remain outdated and do not address the realities of modernday foreign influence activities. The absence of effective regulation in this area makes it harder than it should be to distinguish legal activity on behalf of a foreign power or entity from illegal activity, and thus to address transnational repression threats before they escalate. Congress should closely consult civil society groups to mitigate unintended consequences in any update, such as US-based organizations being required to register as foreign agents simply because they receive portions of their funding from non-US sources. Work at international organizations and bodies with like-minded governments to highlight the threat of transnational repression and establish international norms for addressing it. The United States should work with partners and allies to call for the creation of a special rapporteur for transnational repression at the United Nations. The United States should use its voice, vote, and influence to introduce resolutions at bodies to which it belongs condemning the use of transnational repression and calling on governments to bring accountability for abuses and protection for victims. Limiting the ability of perpetrators to commit transnational repression Congress should codify a definition of transnational repression, and work with the executive branch and civil society to ensure that laws offer protection against all of its varieties. Many types of transnational repression fall outside the scope of activities covered by existing law. This can make it more difficult for law enforcement agents to assist victims and apprehend and prosecute perpetrators. Codification of a definition of transnational repression is a needed first step toward determining which new authorities may be needed. A possible definition could include the following: “The term transnational repression describes the ways a government reaches across national borders to intimidate, silence, or harm an exile, refugee, or member of diaspora who they perceive as a threat and have a political incentive to control. Methods of transnational repression include assassinations, physical assaults, detention, rendition, unlawful deportation, unexplained or enforced disappearance, physical surveillance or stalking, passport cancellation or control over other documents, Interpol abuse, digital threats, spyware, cyberattacks, social media surveillance, online harassment, and harassment of or harm to family and associates who remain in the country of origin.” Close attention should be given to the protection of civil liberties as new laws are considered. Examine the domestic utility of and international experience with laws criminalizing “individual espionage.” Spying on refugees, a common tactic of transnational repression, is not directly criminalized in the United States. In a number of Nordic and Western European countries, spying on individuals is either explicitly criminalized as “refugee espionage,” or clearly incorporated into general espionage provisions. In the United States, however, espionage is narrowly defined as the collection or distribution of sensitive defense information. A new statute addressing “individual freedomhouse.org 13