Peru’s Controversial Anti-NGO Bill Sparks Human Rights Concerns

Peruvian rights groups have decried a newly adopted bill that restricts NGOs from taking legal action against the state for human rights abuses, labeling it an attack on democracy. The bill, which poses serious penalties for NGOs and enhances scrutiny of foreign funds, has drawn comparisons to repressive measures in authoritarian regimes. Critics argue the law provides undue government control over civil society organizations.

Peruvian rights organizations have expressed significant concern regarding the passage of a bill by Congress that prevents non-governmental organizations (NGOs) from initiating legal actions against the state in cases of human rights violations. Adopted on a Wednesday by Congress, which is predominantly controlled by right-wing parties, the legislation categorizes it as a “serious offense” for NGOs to provide support, advice, or funding for lawsuits against the government. Furthermore, the bill imposes heightened scrutiny on the sources of foreign funding for these organizations.

The government has a two-week period to either enact the law or return it to Congress with suggested modifications. Promsex, an NGO focused on advocating for women’s sexual and reproductive rights, condemned the legislation as an “anti-NGO law,” characterizing it as detrimental to democracy and human rights in Peru. They asserted, “We reject this law, which hinders access to justice and perpetuates impunity.”

Similarly, the Press and Society Institute, an NGO dedicated to media rights, likened the bill to measures enacted by authoritarian governments across Latin America. The intent behind the legislation seems to be to augment the state’s oversight over NGOs, particularly those that have taken legal actions against the government for alleged human rights abuses.

One prominent case currently under consideration by the Inter-American Court for Human Rights involves Celia Ramos, who tragically passed away following a forced sterilization during a governmental initiative in the 1990s. Congress President Eduardo Salhuana defended the bill, stating that it aims to guarantee that international development aid reaches its intended recipients rather than being utilized by NGOs to conduct actions against the state.

Civil society organizations contend that this new law is unconstitutional, providing the government with de facto veto authority over the operational activities of associations. Notably, Peru has an existing state agency responsible for overseeing NGO operations and ensuring transparency in their funding practices.

The adoption of the anti-NGO legislation in Peru has provoked widespread condemnation from human rights organizations due to its implications for democracy and legal recourse against the state. By curbing NGO activities and increasing government oversight, the bill is viewed as a threat to human rights advocacy. Critics maintain that the legislation undermines constitutional rights and may hinder justice for victims of state abuses.

Original Source: www.batimes.com.ar