The End of an Era for Foreign Lobbying? The Emergence of Foreign Transparency Laws in Washington, Canberra and Brussels

Abstract

The lobbying of other countries' political and legal elites has emerged as a security risk globally. The securitization of foreign lobbying has prompted the adoption of specialized legal regimes, that is, foreign transparency laws, to enable the scrutiny of how foreign actors lobby. This article analyzes and compares such laws in the United States, Australia and the European Union (EU) with respect to three issues: (1) the definition of a foreign actor, (2) the definition of a type of foreign lobbying and (3) the definition of a protected normative good. While the impetus to legislative reform has often rested on a concern with authoritarian governments, the foreign transparency laws capture diverse kinds of foreign influence activities and actors. They may thus catch in their nets actors or types of influence never intended to be caught in the first place. This has particularly significant implications for the EU as a polity and foreign policy actor.

The European Economic Area: Decision‐Shaping during the COVID‐19 Pandemic

“…The EU's regulatory framework threatens to downsize the space where third countries and entities and people from third countries can legitimately interact with the EU (Korkea‐Aho, this issue). It follows that in order to retain their decision‐shaping capabilities, the EEA EFTA States will in all probability increasingly have to work to distinguish themselves from other non‐member states and avoid falling into the general classification of third countries.…”

“…There is no specific definition of third countries in the EU treaties and there are vast differences in the types of relationships various non‐member states have with the EU (Korkea‐Aho, this issue). In EU discourse, the term third country is used in a variety of contexts and generally refers to countries that fall outside the scope of the EU legislation in question.…”

“…Evidence suggests that the EU is closing in on external influence and putting in place frameworks to counter foreign impact on both the internal market and policy process more broadly (Korkea‐Aho, this issue). Therefore, it will most likely become more important for the EEA EFTA States to emphasize their special status vis‐à‐vis the EU in coming years to legitimise their role in decision‐shaping.…”

“…Once legislation has been incorporated, any references to the rights or obligations of EU Member States also refer to the EEA EFTA States. Therefore, in many policy areas, particularly those falling under the internal market, the EEA EFTA States are not in fact considered third countries (Korkea‐Aho, this issue). This arguably boosts their claim to play an active role in decision‐shaping – which is important, as trends can be observed whereby third‐country influence over EU decision‐making is increasingly seen as suspicious or a security threat and the space in which third countries can legitimately interact with the EU is decreasing (Korkea‐Aho, this issue).…”