Introduction
In May 2024, the UN Human Rights Council reviewed Uruguay during the fourth cycle of the Universal Periodic Review (UPR). The UPR is a UN process that reviews the human rights records of all member states. Notably, the country received some recommendations on civic space freedoms, emphasising the importance of protecting and promoting freedom of expression and safeguarding journalists.
Various states called for urgent and sustained efforts to prevent threats and restrictions on media freedom to ensure the safety of journalists, and to conduct independent and impartial investigations into any acts of intimidation or violence against them. In addition to the focus on freedom of expression, one recommendation drew particular attention to environmental concerns, emphasising the need to prioritise environmental protection through the effective implementation of the Escazú Agreement.
Expression
New media bill faces scrutiny for potential impact on freedom of expression
On 14th May 2024, the Senate passed a new media bill (1194/2023) that could significantly change the media regulatory framework in the country. The bill, approved under the classification of a “serious and urgent” bill, bypassed standard legislative procedures, such as review by the committee and public debate before its approval.
According to the Centre for Archive and Access to Public Information (Cainfo), one of the most concerning aspects is the concentration of media ownership, as it proposes a maximum of eight licences per group. If approved, it would also strengthen the position of four local groups already holding more than the current legal limit.
Additionally, it would allow a greater foreign influence in Uruguay’s media landscape. Current Law No. 19.307 limits foreign ownership in audiovisual media to 49 per cent, but the bill would remove this restriction, paving the way for increased foreign content and ownership. It also seeks to eliminate fees for frequency licences, favouring media conglomerates. The bill's alignment with the interests of large national and foreign media groups raises concerns about the further erosion of media plurality and independence.
On 22nd May, the National Human Rights Institution and Ombudsman’s Office (INDDHH) expressed concerns over a proposed article within the bill that requires all media outlets to “deliver information, analysis, opinions, comments and assessments to the public in a comprehensive, impartial, serious, rigorous, plural and balanced manner among political actors.” The INDDHH emphasised that this provision threatens freedom of expression by introducing undue media content restrictions.
The legislation has also been criticised strongly by several international organisations, signaling a potential impact on freedom of expression, including the Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ), Federation of Journalists of Latin America and the Caribbean (FEPALC), Inter-American Press Association (IAPA), and Reporters Without Borders (RSF).
#Uruguay 🇺🇾 | La @RELE_CIDH externa su preocupación por la aprobación del proyecto de Ley de Medios de Comunicación por parte del Senado de la República el pasado 14 de mayo.
— Relatoría Especial p/la Libertad Expresión (CIDH) (@RELE_CIDH) May 29, 2024
Cainfo’s report reveals increased attacks on journalists and state power abuses
The tenth edition of Cainfo’s Monitoring of Threats and Restrictions to Journalists’ Freedom of Expression recorded 59 cases of violations against press freedom in Uruguay between April 2023 and March 2024. Although this represents a decline compared to 66 cases in 2023 and 69 in 2022, there has been a worrying surge in assaults and attacks.
These incidents have doubled, rising from 6 cases in 2023 to 13 in 2024—the highest figure in the monitoring’s ten-year history. A significant proportion of these incidents involved threats from unidentified people using electronic means, hindering investigations and contributing to a sense of impunity. Criminal organisations were implicated in several cases, highlighting the urgent need for a robust protection mechanism for journalists, similar to those implemented in other countries within the region.
Threats and intimidation have particularly escalated, placing journalists—especially those covering corruption and organised crime—in a vulnerable position. For instance, on 23rd March 2024, military officials sent an intimidating message to Ricardo Pose, a journalist and member of the Uruguayan Press Association, expressing displeasure with his reporting on military matters. The message warned, “They are already monitoring you; you know what I mean,” in a clear attempt to intimidate him.
The report also documented 18 cases of denial of access to information. For example, on 31st March 2024, TV Florida director Fabricio Álvarez reported to Cainfo that Andrea Herrera, the Departmental Director of Health in Florida, obstructed access to crucial public health information. She refused to respond to requests from journalists at FM Florida 89.3, TV Florida, and the news portal floridanoticias.com.uy regarding issues affecting the health conditions of local communities.
Proposed legislation on misleading content faces opposition from civil society
On 9th April 2024, members of the ruling party, including congressmen Rodrigo Goñi, Sebastián Cal and Felipe Schipani, introduced a bill to criminalise the creation and dissemination of misleading content aimed at harming candidates or causing disinformation during the 2024 election period. The bill targets AI-generated “deep fakes” and proposes prison sentences ranging from six months to two years for offenders. It applies to content distributed three months before and one month after the elections, with exceptions for parody and satire. Media outlets and digital platforms are exempt from liability.
Civil society organisations, such as Cainfo and Observacom, criticised the bill, arguing that criminalisation of false content does not align with international freedom of expression standards. They warned that vague provisions in the bill may lead to self-censorship and limit public debate during the electoral period. Critics also highlighted the disproportionate nature of prison sentences, noting that Uruguay does not currently face a significant problem with disinformation on the scale the bill’s proponents envisioned.
Prosecutor dismisses antisemitism complaint over Women’s Day protesters
As previously reported by the CIVICUS Monitor, on 11th March 2024, the Israelite Central Committee of Uruguay filed a criminal complaint against the artistic organisation Our Voice for displaying alleged antisemitic imagery during the Women’s Day march. According to media reports, on 26th July 2024, the Prosecutor’s Office dismissed the complaint, ruling that Our Voice’s actions did not meet the legal criteria for “incitement to hatred.”
Our Voice celebrated the decision as a victory, asserting that certain political movements in Uruguay, including feminist and student groups that support Palestine, face increasing persecution.
Court rejects SLAPP suit against La Diaria
On 16th April 2024, a Civil Court in Montevideo dismissed a US $450,000 defamation lawsuit filed against La Diaria, a Uruguayan media outlet. The lawsuit, brought by a former senior official from the Ministry of Social Development, accused the outlet of publishing misleading content about her role in a government-backed programme. La Diaria’s December 2020 report revealed that the programme had been under criminal investigation, especially due to several cases where children were adopted by affluent families backing the initiative.
The court ruled that La Diaria’s report, addressing a matter of public interest, did not constitute an illicit act. It also emphasised that public officials are subject to scrutiny and do not enjoy special legal protection from criticism.
According to Columbia Global Freedom of Expression, this is a landmark ruling as it addresses SLAPP-related issues for the first time in Uruguay, offering key protections despite the absence of specific legislation:
“This landmark ruling was the first to recognize aspects of Strategic Litigation Against Public Participation (SLAPP) and to offer remedies. Although Uruguayan legislation does not have any special protections against these kind of lawsuits, and the Court did not use the term SLAPP, the judicial opinion establishes a relevant protection against them. Civil lawsuits like the one in this case constitute a threat, and can have a chilling effect on independent news outlets and investigative journalists.”
Peaceful Assembly
Police clash with fishermen’s union protest in Montevideo
On 5th June 2024, a protest by the Sindicato Único de Trabajadores del Mar y Afines (SUNTMA), representing workers in the fishing industry, took place outside the headquarters of the Ministry of Labour and Social Security (MTSS) in Montevideo. The protest, organised to voice grievances over the inability of fishermen to work for six months due to actions attributed to private companies, escalated into a confrontation with police.
Initially, a small group of police officers monitored the protest. However, as tensions rose, additional reinforcements arrived, including four vans carrying more officers. The situation escalated, and police fired rubber bullets to disperse the protesters. Police authorities stated that their objective was to ensure the free movement of people, as required by law. Following this, at least one protester was injured.
In response, the Executive Secretariat of the Plenario Intersindical de Trabajadores – Convención Nacional de Trabajadores (PIT-CNT), Uruguay’s largest trade union confederation, issued a statement condemning the police response. The union described the use of rubber bullets and pellets as a serious violation of the fundamental right to peaceful assembly, a right protected under the Uruguayan Constitution.
29th March of Silence calls for justice for Uruguay’s disappeared
On 20th May 2024, Uruguay held the 29th March of Silence, organised by the Association of Mothers and Relatives of the Disappeared during the dictatorship (1973-1985). A silent crowd marched through Montevideo, demanding justice under the slogan, “They know where they are. We demand answers.”
This year’s march brought together several generations of Uruguayans from various backgrounds to honour the memory of the 197 people who disappeared during the dictatorship. Protesters carried images of the missing, reminding the nation of the ongoing search for truth and accountability.
The March of Silence takes place annually on 20th May, the day that marks the murders of Uruguayans Zelmar Michelini, Héctor Gutiérrez Ruiz, William Whitelaw and Rosario Barredo in Argentina in 1976. The march is known not only for its large turnout but also for its impact beyond the event itself. Athletes, musicians, photographers and filmmakers continue to support the cause, using their platforms to promote remembrance and denounce state terrorism.