Use When
When vendors engage in procurement bid‑rigging and kickback schemes, a government blacklist cuts off public money and deters future collusion.
Where firms supply intrusion spyware, facial recognition, or other surveillance tech used to repress dissent, exclusion rules prevent enabling surveillance harms.
Under authoritarian contexts, blacklist traders tied to sanctions‑evasion supply chains or financing of security forces implicated in abuses to choke the regime’s commercial lifelines.
Instructions
- 1
Confirm legal authority — charter, statute, or procurement code — and document the specific abuses (corruption, surveillance tech, sanctions evasion) that will define the exclusion grounds.
- 2
Build the public argument: name the complicit vendors, document the harm, and state the accountability demand. This requires a clear, verifiable claim.
- 3
Assemble a 6–10-person core team with defined roles — procurement lead, legal counsel, ethics officer, IT analyst, finance, and communications — before drafting any policy.
- 4
Recruit technical and legal support from partners for templates, screening tools, and beneficial-ownership data standards.
- 5
Draft and adopt the exclusion ordinance with embedded due process: written adverse findings, appeal rights, time-bound debarment, and a cross-department review committee.
- 6
Launch a public vendor registry simultaneously publish compliant-alternative supplier catalogs to ensure agencies have workable substitutes.
- 7
Release a pre-launch communications package — criteria explainer, case summaries, FAQ — and brief journalists and human rights monitors with documented evidence.
- 8
Execute the registry launch with disciplined documentation: log all screening decisions, secure adverse-finding records, and open a whistleblower channel for ongoing reporting.
- 9
Publish periodic outcome reports — contracts redirected, appeals resolved, savings achieved — and collect community testimony to sustain the narrative and deter rollback.
Historic Parallels
- U.S. federal debarment rules (FAR Subpart 9.4, codified 1984) blocked fraud-convicted and sanctioned vendors from federal contracts, establishing the global template for exclusion registries.
- During the 1980s, over 90 American cities passed anti-apartheid procurement ordinances, severing commercial ties with South Africa and amplifying divestment pressure that contributed materially to apartheid's end.
- San Francisco's 2019 Surveillance Technology Ordinance became the first U.S. citywide ban on government facial recognition procurement, inspiring similar legislation nationwide.
U.S. federal debarment rules (FAR Subpart 9.4, codified 1984) blocked fraud-convicted and sanctioned vendors from federal contracts, establishing the global template for exclusion registries.Modern Examples
- A city ordinance bars procurement of facial recognition, geofence data, or data‑broker services; vendors must attest to rights‑respecting use.
- A state embargo pauses purchase and in‑state shipment of tear gas and kinetic rounds to agencies lacking crowd‑management policies aligned with international human rights standards.
- A county “no‑buy list” against firms with documented pay‑to‑play, bid‑rigging, or sanctions‑evasion histories; agencies shift spend to vetted co‑ops and local providers.
Participants
Individual
No
5–7 policy drafters and analysts, 2–3 counsel for legal review, 4–6 procurement/compliance officers, plus a governing majority (council/board) and a civil‑society advisory group of 8–12.
Helpful Materials
- Exclusion ordinance and policy templates
- Automated sanctions and adverse-media screening software
- Beneficial-ownership lookup and due-diligence tools
- Vendor risk dashboards and audit trails
- Compliant-alternative supplier catalogs
References
Use of Action Playbook educational materials must adhere with Unruled Masses’ Terms of Service.
Stay Nonviolent. Coordinate Strategically. Take Back Your Power.