Introduction

We urge the legislature to enact comprehensive laws requiring online payment processors and crowdfunding platforms (hereinafter “Service Providers”) to implement transparent, fair, and standardized procedures regarding the acceptance, rejection, and de-platforming of users. In addition, we demand Service Providers who enact discriminatory policies face suspension or revocation of all regulatory or legislative approvals until they rectify the situation(s), including financially compensating the affected individual(s). In particular, we emphasize the critical need to protect humanitarian organizations, civil society groups, registered non-profits, informal community groups, individuals, and families seeking life-saving funds from discriminatory practices that impede their vital work, and their ability to survive.

Background

The digitization of financial services has transformed payment processors and crowdfunding platforms into essential public utilities. However, their opaque decision-making processes have led to arbitrary denials of service and de-platforming. These actions often occur without adequate justification or recourse, threatening the work, livelihood, and ability to survive of individuals and organizations.

Issues and Proposed Legislative Actions

1. Mandatory Transparency in Service Denial and Deplatforming

Current Issue: Service Providers frequently issue vague explanations citing "terms of service violations" without providing specific details — which impacts civil rights groups, and more importantly, individuals and families seeking living-saving funding.

Proposed Actions:

Service Providers must provide detailed written explanations, including:

• Specific terms or policies violated
• Concrete evidence supporting the violation claim
• Chronological documentation of the alleged violations
• Complete disclosure of complaints against the user
• Geographic or political factors considered in the decision
• Documentation of any external pressure or requests that influenced the decision

Service Providers must also provide an option for an appeals process, allowing users to challenge the decision to deny service.

2. Standardized Risk Assessment Protocols

Current Issue: Inconsistent risk assessment procedures enable discriminatory practices, particularly affecting organizations and civil rights formations working in specific geographic regions or with certain populations, as well as individuals and families seeking life-saving funding.

Proposed Actions:

Service Providers must:

• Develop and publicly disclose standardized risk assessment criteria
• Implement objective, quantifiable evaluation factors
• Submit risk assessment protocols for regular regulatory review
• Provide detailed risk assessments to users upon account creation
• Consider compliance with international humanitarian law in risk evaluations
• Demonstrate that decisions are not based on political pressure
• Document consideration of humanitarian impact in risk calculations
• Provide a transparent and evidence-based appeals process for decisions of service denial.

3. Enhanced Due Process and Appeal Procedures

Current Issue: Limited appeal options and protracted, non-transparent processes particularly burden humanitarian organizations, as well as at risk individuals and communities requiring immediate access to funds.

Proposed Actions:

Service Providers must:

• Establish clear, accessible appeal procedures
• Allow 45 days minimum for appeal filing
• Provide decisions within 30 days
• Create an expedited review process for individuals and communities fundraising for life-saving resources
• Enable third-party advocacy group assistance in appeals
• Establish an independent oversight board including civil rights experts
• Provide interim service access during appeals when possible

4. Enforcement and Oversight Mechanisms

Current Issue: Lack of meaningful enforcement allows discriminatory practices to continue without consequence.

Proposed Actions:

• Establish substantial penalties for discriminatory practices.
• Create private right of action for affected organizations
• Require quarterly transparency reports detailing:
  • Service denial rates by organization type
  • Geographic distribution of affected users
  • Resolution rates for appeals
  • Timeline statistics for decision-making
• Mandate regular third-party audits
• Create oversight committees, including civil society representatives

5. Non-Discrimination Safeguards

Current Issue: Organizations, civic formations, at risk individuals, and communities face service denial based on geographic focus or constituent populations.

Proposed Actions:

• Prohibit blanket bans based on geographic regions
• Prevent discrimination based on ethnic, religious, or political affiliation
• Require documentation justifying any regional restrictions
• Mandate alternative service options when traditional channels are restricted
• Protect organizations' right to serve marginalized populations
• Establish special protocols for individuals and communities seeking life-saving funding

Legal and Regulatory Justification

• Consumer Protection: Users deserve fair treatment and transparency under consumer protection laws
• Due Process Rights: Service denial without proper explanation violates basic due process principles
• Non-Discrimination: Financial services constitute a public accommodation requiring equal access
• International Humanitarian Law: Platforms must respect humanitarian principles and access
• Civil Rights: Protected classes require specific safeguards against discrimination

Conclusion

The proposed legislative measures will ensure Service Providers operate with accountability and fairness while protecting the crucial work of humanitarian and civil society organizations. These protections are essential for maintaining a robust and equitable digital financial infrastructure that serves all legitimate users without discrimination.

Action Requested

We respectfully request that the legislature:

1. Immediately suspend Service Providers where there is substantial evidence of discrimination.
2. Draft and pass comprehensive legislation incorporating these proposals
3. Engage diverse stakeholders, including humanitarian organizations, civil rights groups, and legal experts
4. Establish robust oversight mechanisms with meaningful enforcement powers
5. Create specific protections for humanitarian and civil society organizations
6. Mandate regular review and updates of platform policies and procedures