Mauritania: Country Profile

Research & Recommendations

Freedom in the World 2025

PR Political Rights	15 40
CL Civil Liberties	24 60

Last Year's Score & Status

39 100 Partly 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

While Mauritania has experienced multiple periods of military rule, recent presidential and parliamentary elections have been relatively credible. A variety of media outlets operate, but journalists risk arrest for reporting on sensitive topics, and restrictive laws limit freedom of expression. Afro-Mauritanians, the Haratin population, women, and LGBT+ people face discrimination. The government has taken steps to address the problems of institutionalized slavery and discrimination but has also arrested activists who work on those issues.

Read the full Mauritania 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.