Use When
Authorities demand bulk data sharing, deploy public‑space facial recognition, or buy data to bypass warrants.
Grants and procurements are weaponized—blacklisting critical voices and routing funds to insiders.
“Foreign agent/extremist” labels and SLAPPs (Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation) are used to coerce collaboration.
Instructions
- 1
Formulate the core argument and define measurable, nonviolent objectives based on a meticulous mapping of the target agency's data-sharing pathways.
- 2
Sharpen a unified public message that frames the boycott around fundamental human rights, constitutional safeguards, and democratic integrity.
- 3
Assemble a cross-sector steering team, assigning dedicated roles for legal counsel, procurement analysts, secure communications, and sector liaisons.
- 4
Secure binding coalitions with partner organizations, human rights monitors, and legal allies to establish mutual defense and reporting networks.
- 5
Build advance public visibility by circulating collective pledges, model refusal clauses, and transparent vendor red lines across the industry.
- 6
Engage independent media outlets with curated press kits to strategically amplify the campaign's launch and preemptively counter state disinformation.
- 7
Execute the noncooperation action with strict operational discipline, deploying pre-arranged alternative service pathways to shield the public from essential utility disruptions.
- 8
Document all compliance pressure safely using encrypted channels, secure whistleblower drops, and standardized legal incident logs.
- 9
Gather post-action testimonies, publish a verified public registry of declined contracts, and anchor the narrative around explicit, reform-oriented off-ramp conditions.
Historic Parallels
- United Kingdom, 2018, medical and civil‑society boycott of NHS‑Home Office immigration data‑sharing, MoU scrapped and patient confidentiality strengthened.
- United States, 2020, tech‑sector refusals on police facial recognition sales, moratoria and local restrictions slowed deployment and enabled oversight.
- South Africa, 1980s, civic and business noncooperation with apartheid agencies and parastatals, legitimacy and financing eroded and negotiations accelerated.
Modern Examples
- Technology & Telecom firms reject "smart city" integrations and data-fusion projects without strict human-rights safeguards.
- Academic & Healthcare institutions freeze security ministry data-sharing, creating independent, safe pathways for patient and student care.
- Organizations refuse propaganda-linked grants, redirecting those funds to independent, transparent civil-society pools.
Participants
Individual
Yes
10–25 core coordinators (legal, procurement, privacy, comms, sector liaisons, digital security) plus organization captains to manage templates, incident logging, and outreach.
Helpful Materials
- Refuser-letter templates
- Legal memos on data-sharing
- Encrypted-messaging
- Open‑contracting/FOI (Freedom of Information) request kits
- High-contrast window placards
References
- Open Contracting Partnership, Open Contracting Guide, 2023
- Transparency International, Curbing Corruption in Public Procurement, 2019
- Access Now, Data Sharing for Public–Private Partnerships: Human Rights Safeguards, 2022
- Electronic Frontier Foundation, Face Recognition: A Guide for Policymakers & Vendors, 2020
- ECNL, Foreign Agent Laws: Impact and Responses, 2021
- UN OHCHR, UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights, 2011
- OECD, Preventing Corruption in Public Procurement, 2016
- U.S. Supreme Court, NAACP v. Claiborne Hardware Co., 1982
Use of Action Playbook educational materials must adhere with Unruled Masses’ Terms of Service.
Stay Nonviolent. Coordinate Strategically. Take Back Your Power.
