Equatorial Guinea: Country Profile

Research & Recommendations

Freedom in the World 2025

PR Political Rights	0 40
CL Civil Liberties	5 60

Last Year's Score & Status

5 100 Not Free

A country or territory’s Freedom in the World status depends on its aggregate Political Rights score, on a scale of 0–40, and its aggregate Civil Liberties score, on a scale of 0–60. See the methodology.

Overview

Equatorial Guinea holds regular elections, but voting is neither free nor fair. The current president, who took power in a military coup, has led a highly repressive authoritarian regime since 1979. Oil wealth and political power are concentrated in the hands of the president’s family. The government frequently detains opposition politicians, cracks down on civil society, and censors journalists. The judiciary is under presidential control, and security forces engage in torture and other violence with relative impunity.

Read the full Equatorial Guinea Report

Previous Reports: 2021 | 2022 | 2023 | 2024 | 2025

Freedom in the World 2025 Policy Recommendations

Read all recommendations

Prioritize strengthening the rule of law and delivering economic dividends in the aftermath of political transitions

In countries where democratic forces have come to power after periods of antidemocratic rule, the new governments should pursue an agenda that protects and expands freedoms even as it delivers tangible economic and social benefits to citizens.

In countries emerging from war or the collapse of authoritarian regimes, focus on safety, reconciliation, reform

These countries must act swiftly to release all political prisoners, build or revitalize democratic institutions, reform police and other security forces, organize and hold competitive multiparty elections, and ensure accountability for past human rights violations.

Bolster checks and balances to mitigate the threat of democratic backsliding

In countries where there has been significant erosion of political rights and civil liberties, policymakers, legislators, jurists, civic activists, and donor communities should work to strengthen institutional guardrails and norms that serve to constrain elected leaders with antidemocratic or illiberal aims.