The Politics of Opacity and Transparency in Non-European Contexts

This chapter explores the controversial role transparency (around screening) plays in authoritarian contexts. Transparency demands are weapons that can be used and abused by those in power vis-à-vis their subjects. States and financial institutions expect transparency from aid organizations in terms of their employment affairs and financial transactions to counterterrorism or prevent money laundering. Aid organizations, however, are not only legally obliged to ‘distrust’ employees, partners, volunteers by means of using reasonable efforts to prevent adverse outcomes, but are also self-regulated to some extent. By screening people against various watchlists, aid organizations produce ‘transparent subjects’, but opacity around screening cannot but reinforce the power imbalances embedded in historical, political and legal structures. By considering the diverse power relations embedded in aid relations and the broader context of the operations of aid organizations, this chapter demonstrates that basic data protection principles—such as transparency—may simultaneously fulfil the rights of data subjects, local individuals included and endanger the security of NGO operations in conflict and authoritarian settings. However, if aid organizations cannot deliver services or function as employers because they are considered foreign agents in aid recipient countries, other human rights of local individuals may also be violated.