A Region Under Pressure: The Erosion of Civic Space

Between 2024 and 2025, a concerning trend emerged as Ecuador, El Salvador, Nicaragua, Paraguay, Peru, and Venezuela enacted or revised legal frameworks that impose disproportionate controls on CSOs. These measures directly impede their capacity to support communities, defend human rights, and access vital resources. The situation represents a significant setback for democratic governance and the protection of fundamental freedoms.

“We are witnessing a deeply troubling regional pattern,” stated Ana Piquer, Americas Director at Amnesty International. “So-called ‘anti-NGO laws’ are a clear reflection of rising authoritarian practices aimed at silencing dissent and consolidating power at any cost.” This crackdown isn’t isolated; it’s a deliberate strategy to stifle independent voices and limit accountability.

Amnesty International’s comprehensive analysis identified common threads running through these legislative changes. Prior to the passage of these laws, governments consistently engaged in campaigns to discredit CSOs and human rights defenders, labeling them as “internal enemies,” “foreign agents,” or “anti-patriotic.” This rhetoric fuels public distrust and creates a climate of intimidation, as seen particularly in Paraguay where racist and misogynistic language exacerbated the hostile environment.

Crucially, these laws were often rushed through without meaningful public consultation or dialogue. While proponents justified them under the guise of transparency or combating financial crimes, existing regulatory mechanisms were often sufficient. The speed of approval, lack of supporting evidence, and absence of impact assessments underscore the true intent: expanding state control over civil society. Amnesty International’s full report details these findings.

Vague Laws, Arbitrary Control, and Disproportionate Penalties

The new legislation relies on broad and ambiguous definitions – such as “public order,” “political activity,” and “social interest” – allowing for discretionary interpretation and selective enforcement. This creates a system ripe for abuse, targeting organizations and individuals critical of the government. Administrative registration systems now condition operation on state approval, lacking clear deadlines and transparent criteria, effectively amounting to prohibited prior authorization.

Organizations face a deluge of repetitive and excessive reporting requirements, diverting crucial resources from their core missions. In Venezuela, opaque registration processes, demands for sensitive information, and the threat of sanctions have severely hampered the work of human rights organizations. Control over funding is another key tactic, with restrictions on international cooperation and abusive taxation – as observed in El Salvador – undermining the sustainability of vital projects supporting human rights, gender equality, environmental protection, and Indigenous communities.

Banks and donors, fearing repercussions, are increasingly conditioning their relationships on compliance with these restrictive laws, leading to program cuts and reduced support for vulnerable populations. This creates a chilling effect, further limiting the ability of CSOs to operate effectively.

Escalating Risks: Safety and Criminalization of Defenders

These laws mandate the disclosure of detailed information about donors, beneficiaries, and staff, without adequate data protection safeguards. This exposes human rights defenders, LGBTQ+ individuals, survivors of violence, and Indigenous communities to increased surveillance and persecution, particularly in hostile environments. Moreover, the legal frameworks establish disproportionate sanctions, including excessive fines, asset freezes, suspension of legal status, and even criminal penalties.

In Peru, a civil society organization could be dissolved simply for legally representing victims of human rights violations in litigation against the state. Nicaragua has witnessed the mass closure of thousands of organizations, while Ecuador has documented cases of suspension, intervention, and bank account blockages as forms of pressure. These actions demonstrate a clear intent to silence and dismantle independent civil society.

What responsibility do international organizations have to protect these vulnerable groups when national governments actively work against them? And how can we ensure that legitimate advocacy work isn’t conflated with criminal activity?

Beyond Organizations: The Impact on Communities

Civil society organizations are integral to the social fabric, documenting state abuses, providing legal support, defending Indigenous territories, supporting survivors of gender-based violence, promoting transparency, and monitoring electoral processes. When these organizations are silenced, communities lose essential allies in their pursuit of justice and the defense of their rights.

Human rights defenders interviewed by Amnesty International reported a significant deterioration in their ability to act, influence policy, and support communities, leading to emotional exhaustion, reduced activities, forced migration, and self-censorship. In some cases, prolonged harassment has forced individuals into exile. “Freedom of association is a gateway to the exercise of other rights,” emphasized Rosalía Vega, Director of Amnesty International Paraguay. “When civil society organizations are dismantled, entire communities lose support, representation, and avenues to seek justice. Without a strong and independent civil society, people cannot enjoy or defend their human rights.”

Frequently Asked Questions About the Crackdown on Civil Society

• What are “anti-NGO laws” and why are they concerning?
  “Anti-NGO laws” are restrictive legal frameworks designed to control and weaken civil society organizations, often through excessive reporting requirements, limitations on funding, and vague definitions that allow for arbitrary enforcement. They are concerning because they stifle dissent and undermine democratic principles.
• Which countries in the Americas are most affected by these new laws?
  Ecuador, El Salvador, Nicaragua, Paraguay, Peru, and Venezuela have all recently adopted or reformed laws that restrict the operations of civil society organizations.
• How do these laws impact human rights defenders?
  These laws increase the risks faced by human rights defenders by exposing them to surveillance, persecution, and criminalization. They also limit their ability to access funding and operate effectively.
• What is the role of international funding in this situation?
  Restrictions on international funding are a key component of these laws, undermining the sustainability of essential projects and limiting the ability of CSOs to operate independently.
• What can be done to reverse this trend?
  Governments must repeal or amend laws that violate freedom of association, end stigmatizing rhetoric against CSOs, and ensure that any regulation complies with international human rights standards.