Ecuador Intelligence Law: EFF Challenges Human Rights Violation
- In early September, EFF submitted an amicus brief to Ecuador's Constitutional Court supporting a constitutional challenge filed by Ecuadorian NGOs,including INREDH and LaLibre.The case challenges the constitutionality of...
- EFF's amicus brief argues that the LOI enables disproportionate surveillance and secrecy that undermine constitutional and Inter-American human rights standards.
“`html
EFF Challenges Ecuador’s Intelligence law as a Threat to Human Rights
Table of Contents
In early September, EFF submitted an amicus brief to Ecuador’s Constitutional Court supporting a constitutional challenge filed by Ecuadorian NGOs,including INREDH and LaLibre.The case challenges the constitutionality of the Ley Orgánica de Inteligencia (LOI) and its implementing regulation,the General Regulation of the LOI.
EFF’s amicus brief argues that the LOI enables disproportionate surveillance and secrecy that undermine constitutional and Inter-American human rights standards. EFF urges the Constitutional Court to declare the LOI and its regulation unconstitutional in their entirety.
More specifically,our submission notes that:
“The LOI presents a structural flaw that undermines compliance with the principles of legality, legitimate purpose, suitability, necessity, and proportionality; it inverts the rule and the exception, with serious harm to rights enshrined constitutionally and under the Convention; and it prioritizes indeterminate state interests, in contravention of the ultimate aim of intelligence activities and state action, namely the protection of individuals, their rights, and freedoms.”
Core legal Problems Identified
Vague and Overbroad Definitions
The LOI contains key terms like “national security,” “integral security of the State,” “threats,” and “risks” that are left either undefined or so broadly framed that they could mean almost anything.This vagueness grants intelligence agencies wide, unchecked discretion, and fails short of the standard of legal certainty required under the American Convention on Human Rights (CADH). This lack of clarity creates a chilling effect on