Across the Americas, a troubling trend is taking hold: governments are increasingly enacting laws designed to stifle the work of civil society organizations (CSOs). These measures, often framed as efforts to increase transparency or combat financial crimes, are in reality creating a climate of fear and severely restricting the ability of groups to advocate for human rights, support vulnerable communities, and hold power accountable. A new report from Amnesty International details how Ecuador, El Salvador, Nicaragua, Paraguay, Peru, and Venezuela have adopted or reformed legal frameworks between 2024 and 2025 that impose disproportionate controls on these vital organizations.
The erosion of civic space isn’t happening in isolation. It’s part of a broader regional pattern, characterized by the stigmatization of human rights defenders and a deliberate attempt to silence critical voices. As Ana Piquer, Americas Director at Amnesty International, explained, these so-called “anti-NGO laws” reflect “the rise of authoritarian practices aimed at silencing critical voices and consolidating power at any cost.” This crackdown on civil society has far-reaching implications, threatening the foundations of democratic governance and the protection of fundamental freedoms throughout the region.
The Amnesty International report, titled Tearing Up the Social Fabric: Impact of restrictive laws on civil society organizations in the Americas, identifies several common threads running through these new laws. The full report provides a detailed comparative analysis of the legislation and its impact.
A Pattern of Stigmatization and Control
Before the passage of these restrictive laws, Amnesty International found that governments consistently engaged in campaigns to discredit civil society organizations. These groups were routinely labeled as “internal enemies,” “foreign agents,” or “anti-patriotic” by authorities and their allies, fueling public distrust and creating a hostile environment. In Paraguay, this rhetoric reportedly included racist and misogynistic attacks, exacerbating the risks faced by human rights defenders and further chilling free expression. This deliberate attempt to delegitimize CSOs paved the way for the legal restrictions that followed.
Crucially, the adoption of these laws often lacked meaningful public consultation or dialogue. While proponents justified them in the name of transparency or preventing financial crimes, Amnesty International found that existing regulatory mechanisms were often sufficient to address these concerns. The speed with which these laws were approved, the absence of evidence supporting the alleged risks, and the lack of impact assessments suggest that their primary purpose is to expand state control over civil society, rather than to genuinely address legitimate concerns.
Vague Laws, Arbitrary Enforcement, and Disproportionate Sanctions
The laws themselves are characterized by vague and ambiguous definitions – such as “public order,” “political activity,” and “social interest” – that allow for broad interpretation and selective enforcement. This lack of clarity gives authorities significant discretion to target organizations based on their perceived criticism of the government. The laws establish administrative registration systems that condition an organization’s ability to operate on state approval, often without clear deadlines or transparent criteria. These systems effectively amount to prior authorization, a practice prohibited under international human rights standards.
The burden placed on CSOs is also excessive. Organizations are required to comply with repetitive and detailed reporting requirements, including financial and operational reports, inventories, and prior notifications for the use of funds. These obligations not only duplicate existing regulations but also divert valuable resources away from their core work. In Venezuela, administrative discretion and overly complex requirements have already hindered the work of human rights organizations, creating significant obstacles to registration and threatening sanctions for non-compliance. Restrictions on funding, including abusive taxation in El Salvador and prior authorization requirements, further undermine the sustainability of essential projects focused on human rights, gender equality, environmental protection, and the rights of Indigenous peoples.
Increased Risks to Safety and Criminalization
The new laws also pose significant risks to the safety of human rights defenders and the communities they serve. Requirements to disclose detailed information about donors, beneficiaries, and staff, without adequate data protection safeguards, expose vulnerable individuals to surveillance, and persecution. What we have is particularly concerning in hostile environments where human rights defenders already face threats and intimidation. The legal frameworks establish disproportionate sanctions, including excessive fines, asset freezes, suspension or cancellation of legal status, and even criminal penalties. In Peru, a civil society organization could potentially be dissolved simply for legally representing victims of human rights violations in litigation against the state.
The situation in Nicaragua is particularly dire, with these measures leading to the closure of thousands of organizations. In Ecuador, organizations have reported facing suspension, intervention, and bank account blockages as forms of pressure. These actions not only silence critical voices but also dismantle essential support networks for communities in need.
The Broader Impact on Human Rights
Civil society organizations play a crucial role in protecting human rights and promoting democratic governance. They document state abuses, provide legal support to victims, defend Indigenous territories, support survivors of gender-based violence, promote transparency, and monitor electoral processes. When these organizations are silenced or dismantled, communities lose essential allies in their fight for justice and accountability. Human rights defenders interviewed by Amnesty International reported a significant deterioration in their ability to act, influence public policies, and support communities, with many experiencing emotional exhaustion, reduced activities, forced migration, or self-censorship.
As Rosalía Vega, Director of Amnesty International Paraguay, powerfully stated, “Freedom of association is a gateway to the exercise of other rights. 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.”
A Call for Action
Amnesty International concludes that these laws violate international obligations related to freedom of association, freedom of expression, privacy, and the right to defend human rights. The organization is calling on governments in the region to repeal or amend laws that restrict these freedoms, end stigmatizing rhetoric against civil society, ensure that any regulation of CSOs complies with international standards, facilitate access to funding, and refrain from criminalizing the legitimate work of human rights defenders. They also urge the Financial Action Task Force (FATF) and the donor community to reject the misuse of financial standards as a pretext for restricting civil society.
The coming months will be critical. Several countries are expected to continue debating and implementing these restrictive laws. The international community must remain vigilant and continue to advocate for the protection of civil society space in the Americas. Protecting the right to organize truly is protecting the very heart of human rights.
What are your thoughts on the increasing restrictions on civil society organizations? Share your comments below and assist spread awareness about this important issue.
