AA
Share
Last Thursday, the respected independent organization Reporters Without Borders revealed another setback for freedom of expression in Costa Rica. In its 2026 World Press Freedom Index, we fell two places, down to 38th. In 2021, we had ranked fifth, surpassed only by Norway, Finland, Sweden, and Denmark. But beginning the following year, we started a dizzying decline. The reason is well known: the government offensive against journalists and independent media.
Two days after that announcement, a new and unexpected blow to independent journalism became public. This time it was extraterritorial in nature: the revocation of US entry visas from five of the seven members of the Board of Directors of La Nacion S.A., the publishing company behind this newspaper, La Teja, and El Financiero.
In the absence of any explanation for the decision or objective reasons to support it, only one conclusion is possible: its purpose was to punish La Nacion’s editorial line and, at the same time, attempt to undermine our journalistic autonomy. Therefore, although it falls within the sovereign authority of the US government, we consider it a serious attack on freedom of expression.
Applying such a measure to nearly the entire governing body of a news organization has no precedent in our history. In fact, we know of no similar case in other democratic countries. Its seriousness cannot be underestimated.
The punishment has already been carried out, harming five individuals with impeccable records. The attempt to make us renounce our independence and the principles that have guided us for nearly eight decades will not succeed. On the contrary, it gives us renewed strength to move forward. As our Board of Directors stated in a communiqué following the decision:
“Under no circumstances will these events alter the commitment to and independent practice of journalism that has characterized La Nacion for 79 years.
“We renew our fundamental commitment: to report rigorously and truthfully on matters of public interest, to investigate them thoroughly, to maintain reasoned criticism of national and international events, and to contribute to preserving the democratic values and fundamental freedoms that sustain our coexistence as a society.”
We do not seek to portray ourselves as martyrs or heroes because of what happened, but rather to denounce its possible motives and reaffirm that, as a journalistic team, we will continue fulfilling our ethical, professional, and civic duties. These are the principal reasons for our existence and deep roots in society.
Perhaps the content the visa revocations sought to penalize was that in which we questioned, respectfully, substantively, and clearly, decisions made by the current US government. If that were the case, many other media outlets in many other countries, equally or even more severe in their criticism, would have experienced the same treatment.
The fact that this has not happened leads to another hypothesis, more plausible and more disturbing: that the purpose is to make us pay for our vigorous independence of judgment and criticism toward President Rodrigo Chaves and his government. It is difficult to believe, because it would imply that the government of the United States decided to become an instrument of his autocratic impulses, but unfortunately other events lend even more support to that assumption.
The decision was leaked in three media outlets usually close to the Presidency, including details such as names and expiration dates of the current visas of those affected, before they themselves had been informed. It is almost impossible that this information came from the US Embassy. Moreover, this has been the same pattern observed since February 2025 in other cases involving Costa Ricans stripped of their US visas.
In some of those cases, it was possible to point to close ties with the Chinese company Huawei as a possible (though not legitimate) reason. In most cases, however, the common factor has been President Chaves’ animosity toward the affected individuals, nearly all of them elected officials or people in positions of high responsibility. Among them are constitutional magistrates Paul Rueda and Fernando Cruz; former president and Nobel Peace Prize laureate Oscar Arias; the then-serving president of the Legislative Assembly, Rodrigo Arias; and lawmakers Francisco Nicolas and Vanessa Castro.
In our April 2, 2025 editorial, following the revocation of Oscar Arias’ visa, we wrote the following: “…if something so serious and unjustified can be done against a former president and lawmakers, what could happen to other people whose positions are considered unacceptable by the White House, or who simply provoke anger among its highest officials?”
Today we have very strong reasons to suppose that this is not only, or even primarily, about what is thought in Washington; many elements also point toward Zapote, the presidential offices. The convergence of both makes both the method and the purposes behind it alarming. They not only seriously undermine freedom of expression, but also the integrity of our democracy.
*This article was originally published in La Nacion.
