(Washington DC) – Authorities in Ecuador have used secret intelligence reports to freeze the bank accounts of Ecuadorian Indigenous and environmental groups, Human Rights Watch said today.
Since September 19, 2025, the Financial and Economic Analysis Unit, the government agency responsible for preventing financial crimes, has ordered the banking regulatory authority to freeze the accounts of several Indigenous and environmental organizations along with their leaders and members. The decisions came as some Indigenous and environmental groups were protesting the government’s decision to scrap diesel subsidies and to greenlight a mining project in the southern province of Azuay. Judges lifted at least some of the bank freezes after authorities failed to disclose the evidence behind these decisions in court.
“Safeguards intended to prevent money laundering should never be used to target civil society groups for their work or to stop peaceful protests.” said Juanita Goebertus, Americas director at Human Rights Watch. “These mechanisms should be used to fight crime, not environmental groups.”
Human Rights Watch interviewed 16 people, including members of the affected organizations and individuals whose bank accounts were frozen as well as their lawyers. Researchers also reviewed documents from court proceedings challenging the account-freezing measures against 21 groups and individuals and attended two hearings in which judges lifted the bank freezes after authorities failed to present any documentation justifying the measures. Human Rights Watch also sought comment from the financial crimes agency regarding these decisions but received no response.
President Daniel Noboa said publicly that frozen funds were intended to “destabilize” his administration with demonstrations.
The financial crimes agency applied a provision in Ecuador’s new Social Transparency Law to freeze the accounts. The law, passed in August, allows the agency to freeze accounts without a court order when it claims to have “objective, serious, and verifiable evidence” of suspicious activity. The law provides that judges will review the decision after the fact and says that freezing accounts should be “exceptional,” “proportionate to risk,” and “limited exclusively to the amount of the [suspicious] transaction.” Some civil society organizations have challenged the constitutionality of the law before the Constitutional Court.
The bank freezes paralyzed the work of several organizations, halting education, health and environmental programs, the affected groups said. Their members said they could not pay salaries or basic expenses.
Members of some groups said they were not notified about the freezing of their bank accounts and only learned about it when they tried to access funds. The Pueblo Indio Foundation, which has supported Indigenous communities for nearly 40 years, discovered the freeze after donors were unable to transfer project funds.
On October 5, the agency cited intelligence reports when freezing three bank accounts of the Indigenous organization Alianza Ceibo, blocking funds for projects funded by the European Union and US-based donors. The organization, made up of Waorani, Siekopai, A’i Cofán, and Siona Indigenous peoples, has defended the economic, social, cultural, and collective rights of Indigenous people for 10 years.
On October 8, a judge confirmed the decision to freeze the funds, but Alianza Ceibo only learned about the decision 10 days later, a lawyer said. On November 5, a judge ordered the accounts unfrozen after the authorities failed to submit any evidence justifying the measure. The bank authority unblocked the accounts on November 18.
Several groups said they sought information from the authorities but received no response. Some said they initially did not know which judge was assigned to their cases, and that authorities did not disclose which were the allegedly suspicious transactions nor the bank account involved, making it harder for the groups to defend themselves.
Authorities froze all 14 bank accounts associated with the Unión de Afectados y Afectadas por las Operaciones Petroleras de Texaco (Union of Those Affected by Texaco Petroleum Operations or UDAPT), which supports communities affected by oil contamination in the Ecuadorian Amazon. On November 5, a judge ordered the accounts unfrozen, after the agency failed to disclose any information that would justify the decision. The banking regulatory agency only unfroze the accounts almost two weeks later, after repeated court orders.
During court hearings, officials at the financial crimes agency and the National Intelligence Center, the agency in charge of overseeing the country’s intelligence system, cited the Intelligence Law, approved on June 10, to deny lawyers and judges information about alleged evidence of wrongdoing. Human rights groups have also challenged the constitutionality of the Intelligence Law, claiming it undermines human rights safeguards on intelligence gathering.
Provisions allowing the freezing of bank accounts on the basis of intelligence reports should be urgently reviewed to ensure they align with Ecuador’s Constitution and the country’s international human rights obligations, Human Rights Watch said.
The financial crimes agency cited a recommendation by the Financial Action Task Force, a global terrorism financing and money laundering watchdog, that governments should promptly freeze or seize assets linked to criminal activity. However, the task force has said that measures aimed at nonprofit organizations should be “focused, proportionate, and risk-based… [and] should not unduly disrupt or discourage legitimate [nonprofit organization] activities.” The Inter-American Court of Human Rights has also held that restrictions to the right to property must be exceptional and imposed only to the extent that they are necessary and proportionate to achieve a legitimate goal.
Several people whose accounts were later unfrozen by court order are also facing criminal proceedings for alleged “unjustified private enrichment” and “terrorism financing.” Investigations started around the same time as the decision to freeze the accounts.
“Prosecutors and judges should make sure these criminal investigations follow due process, are based on credible evidence, and are not used to unduly restrict the work of environmental and Indigenous groups,” Goebertus said.
