The document, which was not released publicly and which Romero obtained through his own research, establishes parameters to authorize or restrict accreditations in official events and coverage. Organizations defending freedom of expression have warned that these guidelines could constitute prior censorship, by subjecting access to public information to the subjective assessment of the editorial approach of each media.
In dialogue with The CommerceRomero, journalist Ecuavisaindicated that he had access to a letter from the head of the Joint Command, Henry Delgadodated January 28, where it is ordered to the commanders of the Army, Navy and Aviation to evaluate to each media and to the communicators for any journalistic coverage.
A soldier aboard an armored vehicle patrols a street as the military conducts weapons and drug inspections in Quito on February 10, 2026, as part of measures to combat crime. (Photo by Rodrigo BUENDIA / AFP).
/ RODRIGO BUENDIA
This directive establishes four parameters for authorize coverage and accreditations. The first is the editorial line of the medium, where it is assessed whether the company or the journalist has an editorial position that, according to the institution, is favorable, neutral or critical with respect to the Armed Forces.
The second is the historical informative treatmentwhich reviews how that medium has historically covered the Armed Forces, including whether it has been positive or critical.
The third is the informative rigor and professional conductwhich includes aspects such as the level of precision, journalistic ethics and professionalism in coverage.
And the fourth is the institutional position regarding the constitutional rolethat evaluates whether the coverage respects or questions the function that, constitutionally, the Armed Forces must fulfill.
Through a statement, on February 10 The Joint Command confirmed the existence of the order and criticized “the recent dissemination of official documentation by a media outlet”. He said that the guidelines “are not intended to restrict, limit or impede the exercise of journalistic work or affect the right to information,” but rather “to order, plan and guarantee that information work is carried out in an adequate, timely and safe manner during official events organized by the Armed Forces.”
Vetoed after publishing irregularities in Defense
Ecuavisa journalist Paúl Romero.
Paúl Romero told this newspaper that Its exclusion from official coverage of the Ministry of Defense and the Armed Forces responds to a series of reports in which revealed alleged negligence in the acquisition of a strategic radar for the fight against drug trafficking.
He explained that his investigations focused on a radar purchased in 2021 from a Spanish company for more than $24 million. The equipment, which exploded that same year, was to be installed at a key point for the control of airspace on the Pacific coast, an area considered strategic due to the departure of drugs from Ecuador. However, five years later—already in 2026— the system has not been reinstalleddespite the suspension of the initial contract.
“That publication bothered and worried the Armed Forces and the mMinistry of Defense he stated. According to him, after the dissemination of the reports he began to face restrictions: He was prohibited from accessing official events and denied institutional information.
The journalist indicated that on January 26 he was invited by the Land Force to a commemorative event for the 31 years of the Alto Cenepa War, on the southern border with Peru. However, Upon arriving at the scene, he was informed that there was an order from the Ministry of Defense that prevented him from participating in the coverage.. Two days later, on January 28, the resolution that formalized the evaluation criteria was issued. The journalist indicated that, when investigating what happened, he discovered the existence of the order.
Romero described these guidelines as “prior censorship” and maintained that they contravene international commitments signed by Ecuadorsuch as the Declaration of Chapultepec and the principles of the Inter-American Human Rights System, in addition to provisions of the Constitution and the current Organic Law of Communication.
With more than 15 years covering security and defense issues, Romero pointed out that this is not the first time he has faced this type of situation. He remembered that During Rafael Correa’s government he was also subject to restrictions, threats and monitoring for critical publications.
“That happened before and it happens to me now. It doesn’t surprise me and it doesn’t scare me either. I’m going to continue reporting,” he concluded.
“These guidelines are equivalent to a state of prior censorship in Ecuador”
A soldier checks a man’s bag while the military carries out weapons and drug inspections in Quito on February 10, 2026. (Photo by Rodrigo BUENDIA / AFP).
/ RODRIGO BUENDIA
The executive director of Fundamedios, César Ricaurte, classified as a form prior censorship the guidelines issued by the Armed Forces.
In dialogue with The CommerceRicaurte pointed out that, although the directive is presented under technical parameters, in practice The determining criterion for allowing or denying information would be the editorial position of the media. and whether this is considered favorable or not to the military institution.
The representative of the organization that defends freedom of the press and expression recalled that Prior censorship is prohibited by the Ecuadorian Constitution and international human rights treaties. that have supraconstitutional rank in the country. In his opinion, the application of these guidelines not only violates these principles, but also implies “a serious breach of the constitutional order.”
Ricaurte contextualized the situation in the growing role of the Armed Forces in internal security, in the field of conflict against organized crime. However, he warned that A greater institutional role must be accompanied by more democratic controls, transparency and accountability.
“Journalistic work is one of the main control mechanisms in a democracy. It may cause discomfort, but it is an essential part of the rule of law,” held. In that sense, He considered that the military institution “is not understanding that its work occurs within the framework of respect for the Constitution and international treaties that prohibit prior censorship.”
Asked about historical background, Ricaurte assured that he does not remember a similar institutional imposition by the Armed Forces in recent decades. “There can always be friction between the press and security forces, but from there to establishing an internal regulation that imposes this state of prior censorship, we honestly had not seen it,” he stated.
Although he avoided equating the situation with authoritarian stages of the past, he warned that It does not find comparable precedents since the return to democracy in the late 1970s.
