sorce: WOLA
Political imprisonment in Latin America remains one of the gravest consequences of the ongoing democratic deterioration in several countries. Cuba, Nicaragua, and Venezuela top the list with the highest number of documented political prisoners. Nicaragua currently has at least 73 political prisoners, Venezuela has 1,074 documented cases, and Cuba has 543 people deprived of their liberty in connection with protests that have taken place since July 11, 2021. Other countries, such as Guatemala, have also recorded cases of arbitrary detention, including those of indigenous rights defenders Luis Pacheco and Héctor Chaclán, and prisoner of conscience and journalist José Rubén Zamora.
Since the implementation of the state of exception in El Salvador in March 2022, thousands of arbitrary detentions have occurred. Among those detained, various reports have identified individuals arrested for exercising their freedom of expression, participating in demonstrations, or openly criticizing the government. These actions have been widely recognized as signs of political persecution and the criminalization of dissent.
What distinguishes today’s political prisoners from those of El Salvador’s past? And what does this reveal about the state of democracy under President Nayibe Bukele? To answer these questions, we must examine how Bukele has transformed the political imprisonment of El Salvador’s authoritarian past into a modern tool of control, and what this means for the country’s democratic future.
The following sections outline the current situation of political imprisonment in El Salvador and present a series of recommendations for the international community and human rights organizations.
The Case of Ruth Lopez, Anti-Corruption Lawyer
They took Ruth López on a Sunday night.
After months of smear campaigns and threats, on May 18, 2025, members of the National Police detained prominent human rights lawyer Ruth López in San Salvador. For 36 hours, neither her family nor her legal team knew where she was, which various international bodies denounced as a forced disappearance while in state custody.
López directed the Anti-Corruption Unit of Cristosal, a human rights organization that has consistently denounced corruption, lack of transparency in the use of public funds, electoral manipulation, and the abuse of power by the Bukele administration. As a result of her invaluable work, she was included on the BBC’s list of the 100 most influential women in the world in 2024.
Amnesty International declared her a prisoner of conscience, and she is one of at least 35 other Salvadorans currently detained for political motives. These journalists, lawyers, former officials, community leaders, and human rights defenders have been imprisoned not for any crimes that they committed, but for challenging President Bukele’s consolidation of power.
Although the use of political imprisonment is not new in El Salvador, a country marked by a civil war and several authoritarian regimes, the current wave represents another dangerous development: the systematic dismantling of the last pillars that sustain Salvadoran democracy.
Political Imprisonment in El Salvador
The history of Latin America has been marked by the use of political imprisonment as a mechanism of control, concentration of power, and consolidation of authoritarian regimes. The history of El Salvador is particularly marked by this practice. During the brutal civil war that the country experienced between 1980 and 1992, the political repression was systematic. Thousands of people were imprisoned for their beliefs or political affiliations, and thousands more were disappeared or murdered by death squads and national security forces.
The 1992 peace accords should have marked the end of this era. For decades, despite deep inequalities, persistent corruption, and ongoing gang violence, El Salvador maintained the basic architecture of democracy: competitive elections, an independent judiciary, a free press, and space for civil society to operate and express dissent.
Since Nayib Bukele’s arrival to the presidency in 2019, El Salvador once again faces a dark chapter in its history. Although there are no longer death squads, massacres, or bodies abandoned on the roads by national forces, democracy is facing a crossroads and deterioration, from the lack of independent branches of government to a civic space constantly under attack.
And political imprisonment has returned, not as a relic of the past, but as a refined tool of modern authoritarian control.
First Term: Disband the Political Opposition for “Corruption”
During his first term, President Bukele was clear that, to advance his political agenda of absolute control over institutions, he needed to dismantle the political opposition, silence any dissident voice exposing his abuse of power, and eliminate those who threatened his image and popularity. In his first term (2019-2024), he began with a sophisticated narrative against the country’s two main historical political parties, FMLN and ARENA. During this period, the main targets of persecution were former officials from previous governments. In these cases, the majority of the crimes charged were exclusively related to corruption, such as embezzlement, bribery, and material falsification. At no point were organized crime or illicit associations included.
Furthermore, since 2021, Bukele has created the necessary infrastructure to ensure that the judicial system lacks independence and is unable to guarantee impartiality when investigating and punishing criminality. This is evident, for example, in the fact that most of the corruption cases investigated have been against his political opponents, yet not one has been from his own party, New Ideas, despite numerous citizen and journalistic reports of large-scale corruption within his own government.
In 2021, the Committee of Relatives of Political Prisoners of El Salvador (COFAPPES) was also created, documenting how political imprisonment has been a key tool for President Bukele and his power circles. In this context, it is important to highlight that during his first term, the state of exception, which came into effect in March 2022, was not as well established, and the patterns of threat, intimidation, and criminal prosecution were different from those today.
Second Term: Use of the State of Exception for Political Purposes and Persecution of Critical Voices as “Organized Crime”
With the consolidation of the state of exception as a legal and political tool, the justice system and security forces under President Bukele’s command are adapting a strategy to persecute critical voices. With electoral reforms imposed and the political opposition completely excluded from the electoral process, Bukele was reelected in February 2024 and launched a wave of attacks and harassment against key players in the civic space: human rights defenders, independent journalists, and social leaders. The strategy during this period focuses on accusing these individuals of illicit association, a crime specific to organized crime and groups such as maras or gangs. This is because it is the only way to use the state of exception in their cases and therefore, limit due process guarantees
These patterns of harassment and persecution manifest themselves in various ways: disinformation campaigns and coordinated attacks on social media to discredit those who criticize the government; surveillance and intimidation by the National Police; legal harassment through the discretionary application of the Foreign Agents Law; criminal prosecution based on unfounded accusations; and, in many cases, the exile or forced displacement of human rights defenders, journalists, and social leaders who are forced to leave the country for their safety.
According to recent data from COFAPPES, as of September 2025, there are 35 people imprisoned for political reasons. This includes prisoners of conscience, such as Ruth López, lawyer and human rights defender; Alejandro Henríquez, lawyer and environmental defender; and José Ángel Pérez, evangelical pastor and community leader, who were detained for their participation in a peaceful protest against the forced eviction of the El Bosque community.
Another political prisoner is defender Fidel Zavala, spokesperson for the Union for the Defense of Human and Community Rights (UNIDEHC), who was arrested on February 25, 2025, during an operation in which Salvadoran authorities raided the organization’s headquarters. His case has generated profound concerns, given that Zavala witnessed and reported acts of torture and ill-treatment in prisons under the state of exception
In addition to those detained, COFAPPES identified 35 other politically persecuted individuals who have already been sentenced or acquitted and are currently free, among them the five community leaders and environmental defenders in the Santa Marta-ADES case. They were initially detained in January 2023 and subsequently subjected to a judicial process plagued by irregularities, based on unsubstantiated accusations for an alleged homicide that occurred in 1989. Although the Sensuntepeque Sentencing Court unanimously acquitted them in October 2024, that decision was overturned weeks later by the Second Criminal Chamber of Cojutepeque. In April 2025, the San Vicente Court issued new arrest warrants against them, following their refusal to appear before a trial without due process guarantees. On September 24, 2025, the court again found them innocent of the charges.
There are 25 prisons in El Salvador. According to interviews conducted by WOLA, unlike the people detained en masse in centers for gangs or the Terrorist Confinement Center (CECOT), political prisoners are mostly held in the Santa Ana Detention Center, a location where foreigners, including U.S. citizens, are also reported to be detained
Deaths in Prison
In its latest report on El Salvador, from June 2024, the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (IACHR) highlighted the dire conditions of prisoners. The report emphasized the “inhuman conditions of detention; restrictions on medical care and access to medication; lack of access to data on the whereabouts and situation of detainees; and the use of isolation and solitary confinement measures.” This applies to the majority of the prison population and also to political prisoners. Due to the lack of medical care, several prisoners have died. In total, human rights organizations have documented the deaths from various causes of at least 430 people imprisoned under the state of exception.
Among those who have died in state custody is José Leonidas Bonilla Torres, a union leader arrested on April 26, 2022, who died on September 5 of the same year due to lack of medical care; his family received his release letter at the time of his burial.
Mario Alberto Mijango Menjívar—who had been arrested before the Bukele administration for his role in negotiating a truce between the FMLN government and El Salvador’s gangs during the Funes administration—died in prison in July 2022 from cancer after being denied humanitarian release.
Franklin Gabriel Izaguirre, a union leader detained under the state of exception since June 2022, suffered from diabetes and hypertension and died in September 2023.
Alejandro Muyshondt, a former member of the state intelligence agency during Bukele’s 2019–2023 administration, was tortured and died in a public hospital. His case is emblematic because forensic experts hired by Human Rights Watch gained access to the autopsy, which clearly indicated acts of physical torture. He was arrested on August 9, 2023, and held incommunicado for nearly six months, during which his family received no information about his whereabouts.
On December 4, 2023, a judge denied his mother access to his medical records, citing “national security.” An independent analysis of more than 2,000 pages of medical documents revealed serious irregularities, including the lack of radiological and laboratory evidence, the absence of tests confirming cerebral hemorrhage or multiorgan failure, and a high level of disorganization that prevented transparency in the process. Moreover, the investigation failed to comply with the UN Minnesota Protocol, and the family never received the official autopsy report.
These deaths occur within a system marked by extreme secrecy and the systematic denial of family contact. Relatives are routinely prevented from visiting their detained loved ones or obtaining information about their conditions while imprisoned. When deaths occur, families face additional barriers to accessing even basic information about the circumstances surrounding these deaths, leaving them without answers and unable to demand accountability from the authorities. This veil of secrecy not only deepens the families’ grief but also effectively shields detention conditions and potentially unlawful treatment from public scrutiny.
The human and societal cost
As in any case, behind every political arrest, there is a family plunged into uncertainty. Spouses who do not know where their husbands are. Mothers and fathers who are denied information about their children’s health. Children who grow up without their parents, marked by the stigma of having a “criminal” in the family.
During the first days after Ruth López’s disappearance, her family had no answers: Where was she? Was she alive? Was she being tortured? This anguish is not unique to her case. It is the daily reality of thousands of Salvadoran families whose loved ones have been absorbed by a prison system characterized by extreme secrecy and systematic denial of information.
Furthermore, the persecution of human rights defenders, journalists, and community leaders sends a clear message to all of Salvadoran society: dissent comes at a very high price. When internationally recognized figures such as Ruth López can be detained and temporarily disappeared, the message to ordinary citizens is even more forceful.
This climate of fear has caused dozens of defenders, journalists, and activists to flee into exile. For every political prisoner, there are four people who have had to leave the country, according to COFAPPES records accessed by WOLA. Silencing these voices not only weakens the Salvadoran social fabric but also erodes the last remaining spaces for ensuring accountability and democratic transparency.
At times like these, the response of the international community is crucial, even though it navigates increasingly uncertain terrain. Traditional mechanisms—diplomatic pressure, resolutions by international organizations, selective sanctions—remain necessary, but they operate in a world where authoritarianism is more widely accepted and democratic alliances have weakened. The challenge is not only to denounce human rights violations in El Salvador, but to do so in a context where multiple democracies are simultaneously regressing and the international human rights architecture is facing systematic attacks.
However, surrendering to this complexity is not an option: every documented case, every pressure exerted, every gesture of solidarity contributes to keeping alive a standard of human dignity that otherwise risks disappearing completely.
Recommendations
Organization of American States
- Within the framework of the Inter-American Charter, the Permanent Council of the Organization of American States should evaluate and discuss actions to prevent the deterioration of democracy in El Salvador and condemn the use of political imprisonment as a tool for consolidating power.
- The human rights protection bodies of the Inter-American System should redouble their efforts to call for respect for the guarantees of due process enshrined in the American Convention on Human Rights and grant precautionary measures to persons whose lives and physical integrity are in danger, as they have recently done in the cases of Ruth López and Enrique Anaya.
United Nations
- The various bodies of the United Nations should use all the tools at their disposal to ensure that no one is deprived of their liberty for peacefully exercising their rights. Specifically, the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) should periodically assess respect for due process and the situation of political prisoners. Likewise, the United Nations should urge El Salvador to accept visits from the Special Rapporteur on Torture, the Special Rapporteur on the Independence of Judges and Lawyers, and the Working Group on Arbitrary Detention.
International Red Cross
- The Red Cross should strengthen its presence and monitoring in El Salvador’s detention centers to verify conditions and respect for the fundamental rights of detainees, including political prisoners. It can also document and alert to possible patterns of abuse of authority and corruption in detention centers.
Foreign governments
- Countries within and outside the region can exert visibility and diplomatic pressure, urging dialogue and offering channels of negotiation for the release of political prisoners, as has occurred in countries such as Nicaragua.
- These nations can also make international cooperation with El Salvador conditional by incorporating and enforcing human rights clauses.
United States
- The U.S. Congress should pass recently introduced legislation that seeks to sanction authorities responsible for human rights violations in El Salvador. It can also promote greater oversight of the Trump administration to report on its cooperation with El Salvador.
- Congress should evaluate the security assistance and cooperation it provides to El Salvador. In addition to conditioning part of the support on improving due process and combating impunity, it should include conditions related to the immediate release of persons detained for political reasons or without substantiated charges.
- The Trump administration should consider imposing individual sanctions on officials responsible for serious human rights violations.
- Diplomatic tools could be used to encourage dialogue, transparency, and promote respect for due process and international human rights law for all persons deprived of liberty, especially those imprisoned for political reasons.
