New Ways to Address an Old Problem: Political Repression

In this chapter, Kinzelbach and Spannagel interrogate the widespread notion that human rights and civil society are facing a global, intensifying “closing space.” They argue that the prevalent narrative of an escalating crisis often conflates diverse political contexts and oversimplifies empirical realities, particularly by emphasizing severe, “hard” repression (like arrests or violence) at the expense of recognizing “softer” forms of political repression — such as legal obstacles to registering or funding NGOs, administrative harassment, and restrictions on civic engagement that populist governments increasingly employ. Their analysis suggests that while threats to civil society indeed exist and should be addressed, the current data do not definitively demonstrate a uniform, global trend of closing civic space. Consequently, they call for a recalibration of human rights advocacy: moving beyond victim-centric reporting to include more systematic documentation of perpetrators and the less visible mechanisms of repression. This shift would better illuminate how political actors deploy incremental pressures on civic life and could help human rights organizations engage state representatives in norm-based dialogues. By broadening the evidence base and refining strategic focus, they aim to strengthen civil society responses to contemporary political repression.

Book section