Ecuador: escalation of death threats against reporters exposes authorities’ willingness to restrict, not protect, the press

On 7 February 2026, in Ecuador's highlands region, freelance journalist Jonathan David Quezada Castilloreceived death threats linked to social media posts attributed to the journalist about complaints from local inhabitants in Guaranda, a city in the province of Bolívar, on a Facebook page which Jonathan David Quezada Castillo says he has never produced content for or administered. This case is a prime example of how disinformation is often used to fuel grave threats against reporters. In his complaints to the Public Prosecutor's Office, the journalist stated that he received a WhatsApp audio message containing threats from a number with a Colombian country code and that, after filing a first complaint, he received another death threat to both him and his family. According to RSF information, the Public Prosecutor's Office has recently initiated investigative proceedings in the case. RSF has documented prior threatsagainst Jonathan David Quezada Castillo in 2024.

On the northern border, on 23 January 2026, Jonathan Bonifaz, director of the digital outlet Llamingo EC, received a death threat via WhatsApp after publishing information about criminal groups operating in the area. According to information provided by the journalist to RSF, sources close to him warned that two individuals had been sent to Quito, the capital of Ecuador, to kill him in retaliation for his work. The journalist was forced to relocate and keep his whereabouts confidential, making it extremely difficult to continue investigations in a territory marked by the presence of criminal groups and cross-border violence. According to RSF information, a complaint was filed with the Public Prosecutor's Office and the local organisation Periodistas Sin Cadenas, an RSF partner, provided the journalist with psychological support. However, because the state protection mechanism relies heavily on location factors in its logistics, it is hard to implement protection measures when the individual must conceal their location.

On 6 January 2026, Joffre Paredes Ronquillo, a journalist and presenter on the programme "Sin Anestesia" on the digital channel KLN, received a text message on his cell phone that said he was being watched and threatened him and his family. The message followed the journalist's reports on alleged misconduct in land management in the city of La Libertad in Ecuador's coastal region. According to RSF information, the case was reported to the Public Prosecutor's Office and the journalist was placed under a protection scheme that includes a panic button, police escort when leaving his home and daily police patrols outside his house. Despite these security measures, his work was immediately impacted as he reduced his time spent in public and limited his reporting.

Similarly, on 15 January 2026, Fernando Muñoz, a journalist at Radio Salinas, was threatened with death both in person and via WhatsApp not to broadcast an interview with an activist on alleged corruption in land sales in the city of Salinas, also in the Santa Elena region. The messages succeeded in their goal and the interview was cancelled. This episode of self-censorship restricted the local audience's right to be informed about an issue that concerned them. According to RSF information, the case was reported to the protection mechanism, but the journalist chose not to file a legal complaint and to maintain a low profile - a common choice as journalists under threat often do not trust state institutions to protect them effectively and fear that filing a formal complaint could increase their risk to danger.

Threatened and restricted

This hostile work environment for journalists is compounded by increasing restrictions imposed on the press by the state. On 28 January 2026, the Armed Forces issued an internal document, seen by RSF, establishing rules to determine which journalists and media outlets have access to cover their official events, filtering outlets based on their editorial line and previous publications, and permitting the exclusion of outlets that, in the military's view, "damage" the institution's image. Although the measure is not currently in force, as the Armed Forces publicly stated, its issuance and announcement highlight the government's apathy towards the country's faltering press freedom.