WRITTEN EVIDENCE SUBMITTED BY ANONYMOUS
(TRUK0054)
A. Definition and understanding
Yes, the UK Government should adopt a formal definition of transnational repression because it is a targeted and systematic strategy used by the Eritrean regime states to silence those against them beyond their borders. A definition should include of how these individuals are experiencing harassment, intimidation, and threats. As well as that, the government should also include how these individuals are experiencing restriction of basic rights through diplomatic and legal means, such as passport revocations or visa denials.
For those targeted, transnational repression creates a life of fear and insecurity. Even after fleeing persecution in Eritrea, we are not safe. The Eritrean government continues to monitor, threaten, and silence us through its network of spies and supporters in the UK. We are afraid to speak openly, to engage in activism, or to criticise the regime, knowing that our families back home may suffer consequences. Some of us receive direct threats, are harassed at community events, or are falsely accused of crimes to discredit us. As well as that, the Eritrean embassy restricts access to passports, denies services, and compels Eritreans to pay the unlawful 2% diaspora tax, which directly finances the regime. Those who refuse to comply face repercussions, including the inability to renew official documents or travel. Additionally, pro-regime supporters have engaged in acts of physical aggression and intimidation against anti-government activists in the UK. Eritrean government-sponsored events are also utilised as platforms to spread propaganda and suppress anti-government individuals.
I would say that, cities such as XXXXXX are considered key locations for transnational repression in the UK, as pro-government individuals actively gather information on critics and report back to the Eritrean government. As a result, those who oppose the regime receive warnings that their families in Eritrea will face repercussions should they continue speaking out. Some individuals are directly threatened at community events or through online platforms.
B. Government response
So far, the UK has not done enough to recognise and combat Eritrean transnational repression. Some government departments, like the Home Office, have acknowledged threats against diaspora communities, but responses remain weak. Coordination between law enforcement and intelligence agencies must improve to protect victims and hold perpetrators accountable.
The UK can learn from countries like Canada., which has introduced stronger policies against foreign interference, including sanctions against individuals involved in transnational repression. Germany has also taken steps to investigate and restrict pro-regime activities within Eritrean communities. The UK should consider similar measures, including stricter regulations on foreign embassy activities and targeted sanctions against Eritrean officials responsible for repression.
While the National Security Act 2023 introduces new tools, it is unclear how it is being applied to Eritrean transnational repression. The Foreign Influence Registration Scheme could help expose how the Eritrean government works within the UK, but enforcement will be key. The UK must ensure Eritrean embassy activities, including coercion and financial exploitation of the diaspora, are closely monitored.
The UK domestic legislation is not effective in preventing instances of transnational repression due to the lack of protection for victims. Anti-government activists and refugees rarely receive security assistance when facing threats. To enhance the effectiveness of domestic legislation, the UK must take action, including enforcing a crackdown on the unlawful 2% diaspora tax, which is frequently collected through intimidation. Additionally, stricter oversight and potential closure of the Eritrean embassy should be considered, as it operates with minimal scrutiny, enabling the facilitation of repression.
The UK has obligations under the human rights law to protect refugees from threats and transnational repression. It should take further steps, such as working with the United Nations to document Eritrean repression and supporting efforts to hold the regime accountable at the international level.
C. Law enforcement and support for victims
Many Eritrean refugees who report threats to the police feel ignored. Law enforcement does not always understand transnational repression or recognise the signs of Eritrean government interference. The intelligence community needs better engagement with targeted communities to detect repression tactics.
The police are not effective at recognising and dealing with instances of transnational repression. While some officers appear supportive and make efforts to escalate concerns to higher authorities, others dismiss victims' reports and, in some cases, resort to force to remove them from festivals organised by supporters of the Eritrean government. A more standardised and structured approach is necessary, including comprehensive training on transnational repression, to ensure that all victims receive appropriate protection and support.
The support and security assistance offered is not effective because Individuals often feel unsupported. They rarely receive protection from threats, and reporting intimidation does not always lead to action. Communities lack safe spaces to discuss repression openly. The UK should provide funding for community-led initiatives that support Eritrean refugees facing intimidation.
D. International cooperation
Yes, Eritrean regime misuses international mechanisms to target anti-government. There have been cases where these individuals are falsely accused of crimes to punish them or pressure them to stop activism. The UK should ensure that politically motivated cases are thoroughly examined before cooperation.
I am unsure whether the UK actively collaborates with its allies on broader security threats. Even if such cooperation exists, it does not appear to prioritise the protection of justice-seeking communities. The UK should strengthen its partnerships with other democracies to expose and counter Eritrean government repression, including through intelligence-sharing and the implementation of targeted sanctions.
The UK’s diplomatic stance towards Eritrea has been and is still weak, allowing the regime to continue transnational repression even outside of Eritrea. The UK must prioritise human rights over diplomatic convenience and hold the Eritrean government accountable for its actions.
(Feb 2025)