The landscape for press freedom and freedom of expression has been marked by the processing of bills with potential implications for journalistic work, as well as a persistent climate of hostility toward media professionals. The debate around a “Gag Law 2.0” and the slow progress of a law to protect journalists and communications workers are the sector’s primary concerns.
The implementation of the Personal Data Protection Law (No. 21,519), which will take effect in November 2026, requires media outlets to adjust their data handling policies. While the new regulation exempts journalistic activities from the treatment of personal data for informational purposes, it imposes stricter standards for commercial uses. Progress on establishing the new Data Protection Agency has yet to be made.
Another bill, the lobbying law, is still under consideration in Congress and has sparked intense debate over its possible implications for freedom of expression. One point of concern is the proposal to merge the categories of “lobbyist” and “private interest manager” into the figure of “qualified interest representative,” which could result in any public statement being considered lobbying, thus hindering journalistic work.
The discussion around this bill also raised debate over the regulation of “indirect lobbying,” a measure seen as a potential form of prior censorship.
Another alert for the media was the debate over the legality of “clipping” services contracted by government agencies. The National Press Association (ANP) filed a submission with the Comptroller General of the Republic, questioning the legality of contracts between various government bodies and private companies that monitor and reproduce news content without proper authorization or compensation to the content-producing media outlets.
Another area of concern is the trend in some courts to impose restrictions on publishing information about judicial proceedings, particularly in criminal cases. The main concern centers on the discretionary application of the presumption of innocence principle to limit coverage of corruption and money laundering cases, under the argument of avoiding interference with Public Prosecutor investigations.
In June, public discussion intensified around a bill called “Gag Law 2.0,” which sought to criminalize leaks of criminal proceedings and their subsequent publication in the media. The initiative provoked strong reactions from various sectors, being viewed as a serious setback for transparency. Organizations such as the College of Journalists, the ANP, and the Media Ethics Council formally expressed their concerns to Congress. Their primary concern is that the law does not distinguish the source of leaks, potentially criminalizing investigative journalism, especially when the disclosures concern matters of public interest in which journalists were not involved in the original leak.
Attacks on journalists occurred mainly in the realm of online harassment. In September, staff from the newspaper El Día were targeted by individuals linked to criminal groups in retaliation for publications on crime in the area.
The bill, which aimed to provide specific protection to journalists and communications workers, has not seen significant progress in Congress.
