Eritrea: No Free Press, No Elections, No Independent Courts

Last updated: 5 October 2026

Photo: Making Berbere - David Stanley

Eritrea is one of the most closed countries on earth. The Eritrea authoritarian regime has held power since independence in 1993 without a single national election. There is no free press. There are no independent courts. One man, President Isaias Afwerki, controls every part of the state. The constitution that was written in 1997 has never been put into effect. As a result, Eritrea has no functioning legal system that protects the rights of its people.[1]

Many organisations compare Eritrea to North Korea. In fact, journalists and human rights groups often call it "Africa's North Korea." This comparison is not an exaggeration. Furthermore, the level of control the government has over daily life is almost total. Citizens cannot leave the country freely. They cannot speak openly. They cannot organise or protest. This article explains how the Eritrea authoritarian regime suppresses elections, the press, and the courts, and what this means for people who seek asylum.

No Elections Since Independence

Eritrea gained independence from Ethiopia in 1993 after a long war. The new government, led by the People's Front for Democracy and Justice (PFDJ), promised a democratic future. A constitution was written in 1997. It included provisions for elections, a multi-party system, and basic rights. However, the 1997 Constitution was never implemented. Not a single article of the constitution has ever been put into practice.[2]

President Isaias Afwerki has ruled the country by decree since 1993. He was never elected by the people in a general election. The National Assembly, which was meant to be the country's parliament, has not met since 2002. It was dissolved in practice, though not officially. As a result, there is no body that checks the power of the president. There is no opposition. There is no debate.

The PFDJ is the only legal political party. All other political organisations are banned. Anyone who tries to form a new party, or who criticises the government, faces arrest and disappearance. In 2001, a group of senior officials known as the "G-15" wrote an open letter calling for democratic reform. They were arrested immediately. Most of them have not been seen since. Nobody knows for certain if they are alive.[3]

Consequently, there is no political process in Eritrea. The president makes all major decisions. He appoints regional governors, military commanders, and judges. Moreover, he controls the budget and the economy. No law limits his power because the constitution that was meant to do so was never put into effect.

No Free Press: Eritrea's Media Blackout

In September 2001, the Eritrean government shut down all independent media. Every private newspaper was closed. Journalists who worked for those newspapers were arrested. Many of them have been held in secret detention ever since. Some have now been detained for over 23 years without charge, without trial, and without access to lawyers or family.[4]

Since 2001, Eritrea has had only state-controlled media. There is one television channel, one radio station, and one newspaper. All of them are run by the government. They do not report news independently. Instead, they publish only what the government approves. As a result, the people of Eritrea have almost no access to independent information about their own country or the world.

Reporters Without Borders (RSF) ranks Eritrea last or near-last in its annual World Press Freedom Index. In 2024, Eritrea ranked 180th out of 180 countries. This makes it the worst country in the world for press freedom. Furthermore, the Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ) lists Eritrea as one of the world's worst jailers of journalists.[5]

The Case of Dawit Isaak

One of the most well-known cases is that of Dawit Isaak. He is a Swedish-Eritrean journalist who was arrested in September 2001 along with other independent journalists. He has been held without charge ever since. Sweden has repeatedly demanded his release, but Eritrea has refused to respond. His case highlights how the Eritrea authoritarian regime treats anyone who practises journalism independently. The country conditions make it clear that no journalist is safe.

No Independent Judiciary

The court system in Eritrea is not independent. Judges are appointed by the president. They can be removed at any time. There is no security of tenure, which means judges have no protection if they make decisions the government does not like. As a result, judges follow the orders of the executive branch. They do not act independently.[6]

Special Courts were created to handle cases that the government considers important. These courts use military judges. Defendants have no right to a lawyer. There is no right to appeal. Trials are held in secret. In many cases, people are convicted without knowing the evidence against them. Furthermore, the concept of habeas corpus does not exist in practice. This means that the government can hold anyone in prison without ever bringing them before a court.

Political detainees are held in underground cells, shipping containers in the desert, and military prisons. They are not told what they are charged with. They are not given a chance to defend themselves. Many are held for years or even decades. The G-15 officials arrested in 2001 are believed to still be in detention. Some may have died. The government refuses to confirm anything about their situation.[7]

No Civil Society and No Human Rights Defenders

All independent organisations in Eritrea are banned. There are no independent non-governmental organisations (NGOs). There are no human rights groups. There are no trade unions that operate freely. There are no women's rights organisations. The government controls every organisation that exists in the country.[8]

International NGOs are also heavily restricted. Most have been expelled or forced to leave. Those that remain must work within strict limits set by the government. They cannot report on human rights conditions. They cannot criticise government policy. As a result, there is almost no independent monitoring of what happens inside Eritrea.

Religious freedom is also severely restricted. The government recognises only four religious groups: the Eritrean Orthodox Church, Sunni Islam, the Roman Catholic Church, and the Evangelical Lutheran Church. All other religious groups are banned. Members of unregistered churches face arrest and detention. Jehovah's Witnesses, Pentecostal Christians, and other minority groups have been particularly targeted. Some have been held in detention for over 20 years because of their faith.

Eritrea is the biggest prison for the press on the African continent. Not a single independent journalist has been able to work there since 2001. The fate of those who were arrested remains unknown.
Reporters Without Borders (RSF), 'Eritrea Country Profile,' 2024

Total Surveillance and Control

The Eritrea authoritarian regime maintains control through a system of total surveillance. Neighbourhood committees, known as local administration units, monitor the daily activities of citizens. They report to the government on who lives in each area, who has visitors, and who is absent. This system makes it very difficult for people to move freely or to hold private conversations.[9]

The government also uses a network of informants. People are encouraged to report on their neighbours, colleagues, and even family members. As a result, trust between people has broken down. Many Eritreans say they are afraid to speak openly, even in their own homes. Furthermore, phone calls are monitored. The government controls the only telecommunications provider, EriTel. Internet access is extremely limited. Fewer than 2% of the population has access to the internet, making Eritrea one of the least connected countries in the world.

Moreover, there is no social media, no independent blogs, and no online news. The government blocks most international websites. People who try to access forbidden information risk arrest. This level of control ensures that the government knows about any sign of dissent before it can grow into a real challenge.

Comparison with North Korea

Eritrea is frequently called "Africa's North Korea." The comparison is based on several similarities between the two countries. Both have a single leader who controls all branches of government. Both have no free press. Both hold political prisoners in secret for decades. Both restrict movement and prevent citizens from leaving. Both use forced labour as a tool of state control.[10]

However, there are also differences. North Korea has a more developed propaganda system and a nuclear weapons programme. Eritrea's economy is smaller and less industrialised. Nevertheless, in terms of personal freedom, the two countries are remarkably similar. The Freedom House "Freedom in the World" report gives Eritrea a score of just 1 out of 100, placing it among the least free countries on earth alongside North Korea, South Sudan, and Syria.

Implications for Asylum Claims

The complete absence of democratic institutions in Eritrea has direct implications for asylum claims. In asylum law, one important question is whether a person can get protection from their own state. In Eritrea, the answer is clearly no. The state itself is the persecutor. There is no institution that can protect people from government abuse.[11]

Courts in the UK and other countries have recognised this. The Upper Tribunal in the UK has accepted that Eritrea is a country where the state exercises totalitarian control. UNHCR has issued guidance noting that Eritreans who have fled the country, or who have evaded national service, may have a well-founded fear of persecution on return. Furthermore, the UN Commission of Inquiry on Human Rights in Eritrea found that the government commits systematic violations that may amount to crimes against humanity.[12]

For asylum applicants, the evidence of the Eritrea authoritarian regime supports several types of claims. These include claims based on political opinion, claims based on membership of a particular social group (such as draft evaders or people perceived as disloyal), and claims based on religious persecution. An expert witness who specialises in East African country conditions can provide detailed evidence about the nature of the regime and its impact on the individual claimant.

Conclusion

The Eritrea authoritarian regime is one of the most repressive governments in the world. Since 1993, there have been no elections, no free press, and no independent courts. President Isaias Afwerki rules by decree. Journalists who tried to report independently have been imprisoned for over two decades. The courts serve the government, not the people. Civil society does not exist. Surveillance reaches into every neighbourhood and every home.

For people who flee Eritrea, these facts form the foundation of their asylum claims. The state offers no protection because the state is the source of the threat. Moreover, international bodies including the United Nations, UNHCR, and Reporters Without Borders have documented these conditions extensively. Consequently, asylum decision-makers must take this evidence seriously. If you are preparing an asylum case involving Eritrea, obtaining a detailed expert witness report on country conditions can significantly strengthen your claim.