Export Control

Discussion Prompt: To what extent can and should surveillance technology be subject to export control? 

For tyrants, and those who would like to be one, digital technology has ushered in a new era of social and political control. Around the world, authoritarian regimes persecute journalists and dissidents and violate the rights of minorities with sophisticated surveillance tools, from government malware to facial recognition and from Stingrays to IMSI catchers. European countries, particularly the UK, Germany, and France, are among the key suppliers of these technologies. Despite the implementation of stricter export controls for European companies since 2011 — after the Arab Spring exposed the degree to which European technology aided the crackdown of protests — much government oppression continues to be “Made in the EU”. With global trade in AI-enabled surveillance flourishing, what are the regulatory options for ensuring that surveillance technology produced in Europe will not be used to assail fundamental human rights elsewhere? And what are the practical obstacles to their effective implementation and enforcement? 

Dual-use surveillance tech: How trade agreements can incentivise good behaviour

The carrot is mightier than the stick.

by Katrina Lampert(former) Editor, about:intel

Katrina Lampert is former Editor of about:intel. Previously, Katrina worked as a Programme Officer at the NGO Democracy Reporting International on a range of Good Governance topics, as well as for the GIZ’s Decentralisation programme in Rwanda. Katrina holds an M.A. of Public Policy from the Hertie School of Governance and a B.A. in Political Science, German, and International Relations from Ursinus College. She is currently completing a PhD-preparatory master’s in research training at Humboldt University.

A recipe for hypocrisy: democracies export surveillance tech without human rights

Controlling the spread of surveillance technology is a moral, legal, and strategic imperative.

by Edin OmanovicAdvocacy Director, Privacy International

Edin is Advocacy Director at Privacy International, a London-based NGO which exposes and challenges abuses of power by governments and corporations. His research and advocacy focuses on the security industry, surveillance technology, migration, biometrics, state hacking, border controls, sanctions and export controls, intelligence agencies, the telecommunications industry, and security aid. He was previously a researcher at the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute where he focused on preventing illicit trafficking.

A search for common ground: export controls on surveillance technology and the role of the EU

On the recent past & possible future of regulatory efforts aimed at preventing autocratic repression “Made in the EU”.

by Mark BromleyDirector, Dual-Use & Arms Trade Control Programme, SIPRI

Mark Bromley (United Kingdom) is the Director of SIPRI’s Dual-use and Arms Trade Control Programme, where his work focuses on national, regional and international efforts to regulate the international trade in conventional arms and dual-use items. Previously, he was a Policy Analyst for the British American Security Information Council (BASIC). His recent publications include 'Detecting, investigating and prosecuting export control violations: European perspectives on key challenges and good practices’, SIPRI Report, (Dec. 2019, co-author), 'Revising the EU Dual-use Regulation: Challenges and opportunities for the trilogue process’, SIPRI Topical Backgrounder, (Oct. 2019), and 'Measuring illicit arms and financial flows: Improving the assessment of Sustainable Development Goal 16’, SIPRI Background Paper, (July 2019, co-author).