Earlier this month, the Department of State released its annual Report on human rights practices, offering assessments of human rights conditions in various countries. While these reports often involve some political trade-offs, this year’s report, under Secretary of State Marco Rubio, appears to present a significantly skewed view of the human rights records of various oppressive governments, especially those considered beneficial to U.S. interests.
El Salvador stands out in this context, with critics arguing that the State Department is, frankly, misrepresenting the situation to the global community.
As an expert witness regarding El Salvador for the U.S. immigration court, I provide assessments for individuals seeking asylum or protection under the Convention against Torture. My commitment, which I affirm under oath, ensures that I present the truth in both my reports and my testimonies.
This obligation is similar to the nonpartisan approach expected from those compiling reports from nations; the aim is to remain politically neutral.
President Nayib Bukele of El Salvador has garnered attention due to his complex relationship with former President Trump. Many reports and discussions highlight that the conditions in Salvadoran prisons—where space can be commercially sold—encourage the State Department’s argument that these facilities are devoid of human rights violations—supporting actions to deport U.S. immigrants. This stands in stark contrast to findings from human rights organizations that contest the claims made in these official reports.
Utilizing research methods from social sciences, I assess the Salvadoran government’s efficacy in protecting its citizens from multiple forms of violence. By examining reports from both national and international human rights groups, analyzing articles from independent media, and referencing academic literature on related issues, I bring nearly two decades of experience in understanding the country’s dynamics. A recent 2024 analysis shed light on various human rights abuses that align with my observations.
Having referenced the State Department’s human rights reports for years, I often cite them in relation to my assessments of risks faced by specific social groups. The 2023 report on El Salvador confirmed a “severe and perilous prison situation,” consistent with my own findings.
In essence, I triangulate data regarding human rights violations in El Salvador when working on these cases. Along with a recent visit in 2024, I draw from several government and non-governmental resources to search for the truth.
Considering new information regarding the conditions in El Salvador, I am increasingly concerned about relying on the U.S. State Department as a trustworthy source. The latest report from El Salvador claims there are “no trustworthy reports of serious human rights abuses” in the country, which I strongly dispute. Numerous human rights organizations—like Cristól, Human Rights First, Human Rights Watch, and Amnesty International—seem to agree with my assessment.
In my academic pursuits, including a peer-reviewed article focused on the mega prison situation in El Salvador, my co-author and I discuss documented human rights abuses and the justifications provided by the Bukele administration. We offer substantial quotations from credible sources to support our claims, which I’ve referenced in court.
Reports indicate that inmates in Salvadoran prisons suffer from severe overcrowding, frequent beatings by staff, and are often deprived of essential substances. Conditions like food deprivation and electric shocks are part of a troubling pattern of mistreatment that remains unresolved.
The recent leaked report contrasts the Rubio-led assessment, which attempts to “recognize” El Salvador for purportedly supporting the rule of law while disregarding the harsh realities on the ground.
For the people of El Salvador, particularly those facing abuse or seeking safety within the United States, an accurate representation is crucial for achieving justice and upholding the rule of law. If American policies lack transparency, human rights are jeopardized.
