In a move that has sparked concern among international human rights organizations, civil society groups, and governments around the world, Paraguay has passed a controversial law that grants the government sweeping powers to crack down on non-governmental organizations (NGOs) operating within its borders. Critics warn that this law could stifle civil society, restrict freedom of speech, and limit the ability of organizations to address critical social issues in Paraguay.
The law, formally known as the “Law on the Protection of National Interests,” was approved by the Paraguayan Congress in late 2024 and signed into law by President Mario Abdo Benítez. While the government argues that the legislation is necessary to protect national security, reduce foreign influence, and prevent money laundering, the law has been met with alarm from both domestic and international observers who fear it could severely restrict the work of NGOs and hinder efforts to promote human rights, environmental protection, and social justice.
This article explores the background of the new law, the concerns raised by critics, and the broader implications it may have on Paraguay’s civil society and its international relations.
The Controversial Law: A New Era of Government Control
The “Law on the Protection of National Interests” was introduced with the stated goal of curbing foreign interference in Paraguay’s internal affairs and preventing illegal activities, such as money laundering and financing of terrorism. The law gives the Paraguayan government the authority to monitor, audit, and even shut down NGOs that are deemed to be acting against the country’s national interests or engaging in activities that violate national security laws.
Under the new law, NGOs will be required to undergo stringent financial audits, and those found to be receiving foreign funding from organizations or governments with interests in Paraguay could be subject to investigation. The law also establishes a special government body tasked with overseeing NGO activities and ensuring that they align with national priorities.
While the law’s proponents argue that it will safeguard the country’s sovereignty and strengthen security measures, many see it as an attempt by the government to increase its control over civil society organizations that have been critical of the government or its policies. Critics believe that the law could be used as a tool of repression, effectively silencing dissent and limiting the work of organizations advocating for human rights, environmental protection, and anti-corruption efforts.
Key Provisions of the Law
Some of the most alarming provisions of the law include:
- Government Control of NGO Funding: The law mandates that NGOs disclose all sources of foreign funding. This includes any donations or grants from international organizations, foreign governments, or foreign nationals. Failure to comply could result in fines or even the revocation of an organization’s operating license.
- Monitoring and Auditing: NGOs will be subject to increased scrutiny, with government officials authorized to conduct audits of their financial records, activities, and partnerships. This provision raises concerns about the potential for politically motivated investigations and the abuse of power.
- Shutting Down NGOs: The government has the power to suspend or shut down NGOs if they are found to be in violation of the law, particularly if they are deemed to be acting against national interests or involved in activities that threaten the country’s security.
- Restriction of International Partnerships: The law places restrictions on how NGOs can collaborate with international organizations or foreign governments. This could limit the ability of NGOs to access international resources, partnerships, and expertise, ultimately hindering their ability to address pressing issues in Paraguay.
- Vague Definitions and Ambiguities: Critics of the law have pointed out that many of the provisions are overly vague and open to interpretation. For example, the term “national interests” is not clearly defined, giving the government broad discretion in deciding which organizations to target. This lack of clarity raises concerns about arbitrary enforcement and the potential for abuse.
The International Response: Widespread Concern
The passing of this law has been met with widespread condemnation from international human rights groups, foreign governments, and UN agencies. Human Rights Watch (HRW), Amnesty International, and Transparency International have all issued statements expressing their concerns about the law’s potential to suppress dissent and undermine the work of civil society organizations in Paraguay.
Human Rights Watch has warned that the law could effectively silence critics of the government by giving authorities the power to shut down organizations that challenge official policies or advocate for human rights. HRW’s Latin America Director, Jose Miguel Vivanco, called the law “a direct assault on the independence of civil society” and urged the Paraguayan government to reconsider its provisions.
Amnesty International has also raised alarms about the potential for the law to curtail freedom of expression and association. The organization’s regional director for the Americas, Erika Guevara-Rosas, stated that the law could create a “chilling effect” on NGOs, particularly those working on issues related to democracy, governance, and human rights.
In addition to human rights organizations, several foreign governments, including the United States and members of the European Union, have expressed concerns about the law. The U.S. State Department issued a statement emphasizing the importance of maintaining an open and transparent civil society, while the European Parliament called for a review of the law’s impact on human rights and democratic freedoms.
Domestic Reactions: Fear of Repression and Control
Within Paraguay, reactions to the law have been mixed, but many domestic organizations are voicing their alarm. Local NGOs, particularly those working in the fields of environmental protection, indigenous rights, and anti-corruption, have expressed fears that the law will severely limit their ability to operate freely. These organizations often rely on foreign funding and international collaborations to support their projects, and they fear that the new law could make it more difficult to sustain their work.
Marta González, the director of a prominent environmental NGO in Paraguay, shared her concerns with the press: “We are already seeing the government crack down on organizations that speak out against deforestation and land grabs. This law will make it even harder for us to continue our work, and we fear it will be used to target anyone who stands in opposition to the government.”
Similarly, advocates for indigenous rights have warned that the law could be used to silence groups that challenge the government’s policies regarding land and resource extraction on indigenous territories.
Political opposition parties have also criticized the law, arguing that it represents an erosion of democratic freedoms and a dangerous consolidation of power by the government. Some members of the opposition have vowed to challenge the law in court, though the legal battle is likely to be long and contentious.
Broader Implications: A Step Backward for Democracy?
The passing of the law in Paraguay raises significant questions about the state of democracy and civil society in the country. Paraguay has long been seen as a relatively stable democracy in South America, but the introduction of such a draconian law signals a troubling trend toward authoritarianism. The law’s vague provisions and broad scope could allow the government to crack down on any organization it deems a threat, creating an atmosphere of fear and uncertainty.
The law could also have negative implications for Paraguay’s international relations. As one of the few countries in South America to pass such restrictive legislation, Paraguay risks isolating itself from the international community. The country may face increased scrutiny from international human rights bodies, donor countries, and foreign investors, all of whom could view the law as a sign of growing repression.
Conclusion: A Dangerous Precedent
The passing of the “Law on the Protection of National Interests” in Paraguay marks a significant moment in the country’s political landscape. While the government frames the law as a necessary measure to protect national security and sovereignty, the sweeping powers it grants could have a devastating impact on the freedom of civil society organizations and the ability to advocate for human rights and democracy.
With widespread concerns over its potential to suppress dissent, limit free speech, and stifle the work of NGOs, this law represents a dangerous precedent that could undermine Paraguay’s democratic institutions and isolate the country from the international community. As the law is implemented, it will be crucial for both domestic and international actors to monitor its effects and continue to push for reforms that protect the rights of citizens and civil society.
