This report summarises the main concerns regarding the intersection of human rights and technology in Paraguay, based on three stakeholder submissions for the 52nd session of the Universal Periodic Review (UPR) by TEDIC, produced jointly with APC, Derechos Digitales and ARTIGO 19. Key findings reveal a deterioration in the environment for civil society and fundamental freedoms.
First, there has been a significant restriction of civic space through the enactment of Law No. 7363/24, known as the “Anti-NGO Law.” This ambiguous and punitive legislation imposes excessive controls that threaten the autonomy and work of civil society organisations, in a context of attacks and disinformation against entities such as TEDIC.
Second, the expansion of state surveillance capacities is taking place without an adequate legal framework, transparency or independent oversight. The acquisition and use of technologies such as facial recognition, IMSI catchers and drones, partly financed with public funds intended to reduce the digital divide, pose serious risks to the right to privacy. The monitoring of peaceful protests demonstrates the use of these tools for social control.
Third, technology-facilitated gender-based violence (TFGBV) is a widespread and structural phe- nomenon. The existing legal framework, mainly Law No. 5777/16, is insufficient to address the com- plexity of these attacks and, moreover, has been used in a distorted manner to censor freedom of expression, especially of journalists. Emblematic cases such as that of Belén Whittingslow expose the profound shortcomings of the judicial system in providing justice and redress to victims.
Finally, deep digital divides persist, perpetuating inequality, especially between urban and rural areas and for Indigenous communities. The lack of robust regulation of net neutrality and the misuse of personal data in the electoral sphere exacerbate citizens’ vulnerability and weaken democratic integrity. The country enacted its first comprehensive personal data protection law in November 2025. It will be important to urgently develop regulations for the implementation of the law. Unfortunately, the law does not provide for an independent supervisory authority and includes a controversial article that limits the exercise of the right of access to public information.