The premise of Russia's 2012 “Foreign Agents” Law, one of the first such laws restricting foreign funding for non-governmental organizations (NGOs), is that foreign monies equal foreign agendas. Since then, over 50 countries have adopted similar laws using a similar justification. This paper interrogates this claim of foreign donor influence through examining legal mobilization by human rights NGOs at the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR). We track donor support for litigation by providing an overview of all foundation grant flows relating to strategic litigation for 2013–2014, and then matching the granting activities of two major U.S. foundations over 14 years to human rights NGO participation in cases before the ECtHR. Further, through case studies of Russian NGOs, we assess the causal role that donor support has played in facilitating their increased involvement in ECtHR litigation. The combined analysis indicates broad patterns of private foundation support to litigating NGOs, but uncovers no evidence that foreign donors were “pushing” NGOs toward litigation as a strategy, but instead more evidence suggesting that NGOs convinced donors to support human rights litigation. Despite the inaccuracy of the justification underpinning Russia's foreign agent law, the law threatens the survival of human rights organizations.

中文翻译：

---

外国代理人还是司法代理人？私人基金会、对非政府组织的抵制和国际人权诉讼

俄罗斯 2012 年“外国代理人”法是首批限制向非政府组织 (NGO) 提供外国资金的此类法律之一，其前提是外国资金等同于外国议程。从那时起，50 多个国家/地区以类似的理由通过了类似的法律。本文通过审查人权非政府组织在欧洲人权法院 (ECtHR) 的法律动员来质疑这种外国捐助者影响的说法。我们通过提供 2013-2014 年与战略诉讼相关的所有基金会赠款流的概览，然后将美国两个主要基金会 14 年来的赠款活动与人权非政府组织参与 ECtHR 案件进行匹配，来追踪捐助者对诉讼的支持。此外，通过对俄罗斯非政府组织的案例研究，我们评估了捐助者的支持在促进他们更多地参与 ECtHR 诉讼方面所发挥的因果作用。综合分析表明，私人基金会支持诉讼非政府组织的广泛模式，但没有发现外国捐助者将“推动”非政府组织作为一种战略“推动”非政府组织诉讼的证据，而是更多证据表明非政府组织说服捐助者支持人权诉讼。尽管支持俄罗斯外国代理人法的理由不准确，但该法威胁到人权组织的生存。但更多的证据表明，非政府组织说服捐助者支持人权诉讼。尽管支持俄罗斯外国代理人法的理由不准确，但该法威胁到人权组织的生存。但更多的证据表明，非政府组织说服捐助者支持人权诉讼。尽管支持俄罗斯外国代理人法的理由不准确，但该法威胁到人权组织的生存。