Index of Human Rights, Conflict Resolution and Nonprofit Sector Reports

Almost all of the reports featured on our website are indexed here. Many of the reports are linked to their full text, but for information on studies that are not linked, please contact us. 

 

Resources

In a Bad SPOT: Why a Military Database for NGOs Is Impractical

in
Date: 
August 3, 2010

The U.S. army’s Synchronized Pre-Deployment and Operational Tracker (SPOT) system is a military database that indefinitely stores detailed personnel data of contractors’ employees working in Iraq and Afghanistan. Recipients of federal grants, and their sub-grantees, are required to register with SPOT before beginning their projects. For Nongovernmental Organizations (NGOs) operating relief and development programs in these two countries, meeting the requirements of SPOT is impracticable, and may jeopardize their employees’ safety and the effectiveness of their programs.

Congressional Report Says Dept. of Defense Contracts Funding Afghan Insurgents

in
Date: 
July 16, 2010
Author: 
Suraj K. Sazawal

On June 21, 2010, the same day the Supreme Court upheld a federal statute that bans training in nonviolent dispute resolution as support to listed terrorists groups, a Congressional report was released saying U.S. taxpayer dollars are being funneled from the U.S. army contractors to insurgents, including the Taliban. What sense does it make to punish humanitarian groups who want to train terrorist groups to turn away from violence, but knowingly allow millions of dollars to flow uninterrupted to a designated terrorist group the U.S. military is battling everyday in Afghanistan?

Material Support and the Need for a Sensible Humanitarian Exemption

in
Date: 
July 7, 2010

Laws that prohibit "material support" to listed terrorist organizations only exempt religious materials and medicine. That means medical services or non-medicinal necessities such as clean water are prohibited, as are tents, blankets, food and more. In other words, it is legal to give someone a pill, but illegal to provide clean water for swallowing it. There is no justification for this ongoing blockade of humanitarian aid.  

Nonprofit and Legal Experts Respond to Supreme Court Ruling in Humanitarian Law Project Case

in
Date: 
June 21, 2010

On June 21, 2010, a divided U.S. Supreme Court upheld a federal statute that bans support to designated terrorist organizations, even when defined to include conflict mediation, human rights training and peace-building efforts aimed at turning terrorist groups away from violence. That same day the Charity and Security Network (CSN) and the Constitution Project (CP) held a press conference to comment on the ruling. An audio file of the entire teleconference, including reactions to the decision and a question and answer period from national media, is available here.  

CSN Comments on Treasury's FAQ for "Protecting Charitable Giving"

in
Date: 
June 16, 2010

Treasury's FAQ, titled, "Protecting Charitable Giving" fails to acknowledge the importance of protecting charitable operations and beneficiaries. The entire chain of events, from donation to delivery of services to people in need, must be protected from expropriation by terrorists and from unduly restrictive U.S. government enforcement policies. Treasury must broaden its vision.

One Year After Cairo Speech, Obama Needs to Address Charitable Problems

in
Date: 
June 16, 2010

Sahar Aziz has written a blog on the CNN.com website about the need for changing the “draconian legal regime” that restricts U.S. humanitarian aid organizations and prevents millions of privately raised dollars from being used for their charitable purposes. Aziz says reform measures should include judicial oversight of Treasury’s designation process to ensure an independent review of the process. Currently, Treasury acts as prosecutor, judge, jury and executor of any group either designated or “pending investigation.” (See KindHearts case)

Legal Roadblocks for U.S. Famine Relief to Somalia Creating Humanitarian Crisis

in
Date: 
January 27, 2010
Author: 
Suraj K. Sazawal

The unfolding crisis in Somalia illustrates a common dilemma U.S. nonprofits face when trying to conduct humanitarian operations in territory controlled by an organization listed as a Specially Designated Global Terrorist (SDGT). The humanitarian imperative to provide urgently needed food to nearly one million people in an area controlled by al-Shabab, a listed SDGT, conflicts with the “strict liability” standard against supporting terrorists that even has State Department employees fearing sanctions from Treasury. Now the United States government (USG) response to the famine in Somalia is forcing it to confront the same onerous hurdles current national security laws create for nonprofits.    

Chart: How Many Children Could be Helped if Frozen Charitable Funds Were Released?

in
Date: 
November 9, 2009

The Office of Foreign Assets Control report for 2009 indicates up to $19.8 million in assets have been frozen for individuals and entities on its watchlist. There is no public information on how much of that comes from charities, but news reports indicate at least $7 million in U.S. charitable assets are frozen.

Instead of the money remaining frozen at Treasury, the money could be used to help millions of children and families in need. As an example, we used statistics from the US Fund for UNICEF* to illustrate how frozen funds could be used for immunizing children, clean water and shelter for displaced families.

The Disconnect: U.S. Doesn't Follow the State Department's "Guiding Principles on Non-Governmental Organizations"

in
Date: 
September 22, 2009

In December 2006, the State Department launched an initiative to support the work of human rights defenders throughout the globe. Part of the initiative was the "Guiding Principles on Non-Governmental Organizations" (Principles), intended to guide the U.S. government's treatment of nonprofits and to assess the actions of other governments. However, there are glaring discrepancies between these Principles and the counterterrorism laws and policies applied to U.S. nonprofits by the federal government. 

This chart compares U.S. values against U.S. practice.

Selective Enforcement: Charities Targeted for Harsher Sanctions

in
Date: 
June 29, 2009

The U.S. Department of the Treasury's Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) has designated nine U.S. charities as supporters of terrorism, seizing all property, blocking all funds and effectively closing all programs. In contrast, the for-profit corporations Halliburton and Chiquita Brands International have only had to pay fines for very similar alleged violations, and their operations have not been interrupted or shut down. There has been no explanation from OFAC.