Working with local researchers safely

Much of the best research on Russia, Central Asia and the South Caucasus depends on people who live and work there. Local researchers read the press in the languages it is written in, know how records are kept and understand the context that documents leave out. They also carry risks that a client based abroad does not. Anyone who commissions their work takes on a share of responsibility for those risks, and that responsibility does not end when an invoice is paid.

Why the risk has changed

In recent years, several jurisdictions in the region have introduced or expanded laws on foreign funding, ‘foreign agents’ and ‘foreign representatives’. Their scope differs from country to country, and so does enforcement. Some are drafted broadly. Depending on the jurisdiction, receiving money from abroad, working with a foreign organisation or contributing to material published outside the country may bring a person within their reach. Consequences can include registration duties, labelling requirements, fines and, in some cases, criminal liability. Rules on state secrets, personal data and organisations designated as undesirable can add further exposure.

These laws change often, and their application can be hard to predict. A task that was routine some years ago may now carry real legal risk for the person who carries it out. Assessments therefore need to be current and specific to the country, the person and the work.

Before any task is set

The first principle is simple. We never ask anyone to break the law, and we never ask anyone to take a risk they have not understood and accepted. That rules out some lines of enquiry entirely, and it should.

Risk assessment comes before any work is commissioned. It considers the subject of the research, the sensitivity of the sector, the researcher's own profile and circumstances, and what would follow if their involvement became known. Some questions are best answered from outside the country using published sources, with no local involvement at all. Others can be handled safely by a local researcher reviewing public records. A few should not be pursued.

Consent must be informed. A researcher should know, in terms they can assess, what the work involves, who it is broadly for where that can be shared, how the material will be used and what the foreseeable risks are. They should be free to decline or withdraw at any point without penalty. The same standard applies to anyone they interview.

No piece of research is worth more than the safety of the person who carries it out.

Handling the work responsibly

Once work begins, a small number of practical commitments carry most of the weight.

• Collect only what is needed. Material that the research question does not require should not be gathered, kept or passed on.
• Protect communications and data. Tools and storage should match the level of risk, access should be limited to those who need it, retention and deletion should be agreed in advance, and data protection law in each relevant country should be respected.
• Pay fairly and lawfully. Rates should reflect skill and risk, payment should be prompt, and the method should be checked in advance, since cross-border payments can themselves create legal or banking difficulties.
• Agree attribution. Whether a researcher is credited, described in general terms or kept anonymous should be settled with them at the outset and changed only with their agreement.

After the report

Risk does not end when research is delivered. A client's report may be shared more widely than planned, cited in litigation or drawn on for publication. Each of these can bring attention to the people who helped produce it. Planning for that moment is part of the duty of care.

Suppose a newsroom commissions background research and later decides to publish. A detail that was harmless in a confidential memo, such as a description of a document that only a few people could have obtained, may point to a specific person once it appears in print. Anticipating that risk is easier before a project starts than after a story runs.

In practice this means agreeing with clients at the outset how the final product may be used and how sourcing will be described if it is published. It means removing details that could identify a researcher or interviewee, including indirect ones. It also means staying in contact with researchers after a project ends, so that any concern can be raised and addressed.

We regard all of this as ordinary professional ethics. The people who work with us in the region are colleagues, and their safety and legal position come before the convenience of any project. Organisations that commission research in the region would do well to ask the same questions of anyone who carries out work on their behalf.