Cuba is the chief “rogue” regime in terms of its foreign policy and human rights. On the UNHRC it has voted consistently against resolutions condemning human rights conditions in Syria (16 times), Ukraine and (with only two exceptions) North Korea. And Cuba’s participation in the UNHRC’s UPR process has been limited to raising social and economic issues—if any at all—and remaining mute on human rights violations in countries like North Korea, Iran and Turkey. On the UN ECOSOC, Cuba helped lead the charge to deny accreditation to 34 independent NGOs, including the Committee to Protect Journalists, that would allow them to participate in the UN ECOSOC committees and bodies, including the UN Human Rights Council. And in the Organization of American States, despite being invited to join if it agreed to accept the various conventions and authorities of OAS bodies, Cuba has failed to re-join the regional body and refuses to accept the legitimacy of the inter-American human rights system.
Below is a breakdown of Cuba’s actions and votes at the various venues we are monitoring. For more information click on each title and summary.
Scoreboard:
| Freedom House | |
| Freedom Status | Not Free |
| Aggregate Score (100 is perfect freedom and protection of rights) | 14 |
| Political Rights (scores out of 40, with 40 being the best) | 1/40 |
| Civil Liberties (scores out of 60, with 60 being the best) | 13/60 |
| Reporters Without Borders | |
| World Press Freedom Index (scores out of 100, with 1 being the best) | 63 |
| Transparency International | |
| Corruption Perception Index (CPI) | 48/100 |
| Global Rank | 60/180 |
| World Justice Project [1] | |
| Rule-of-Law Index | N/A |
| Regional rank | N/A |
| Global rank | N/A |
| UN Human Development Index | |
| Human Development Index | 0.783 |
| Global rank | 70 |
| Americas Quarterly (last report 2016) | |
| Social Inclusion Index | N/A |
| Regional rank | N/A |
United Nations System:
United Nations Human Rights Council (UNHRC or Council)
Cuba is currently on the Council and serving a new term from 2021-2023. They were previously on the Council from 2006-2009, 2010-2012, 2014-2016, and 2017-2019. It is one of the countries that consistently votes against human rights at the Council on the issue of Syria, North Korea, and on Ukraine.
[expandableHeadline]Read more[/expandableHeadline][expandableContent]
UNHRC Resolutions on the conflict in Syria
UNHRC resolutions on the conflict in Ukraine:
| Resolution 29/23 | Cooperation and assistance to Ukraine in the field of human rights | Against |
| Resolution 26/30 | Cooperation and assistance to Ukraine in the field of human rights | Against |
| Resolution 32/29 | Cooperation with and assistance to Ukraine in the field of human rights | Against |
UNHRC resolutions on the conflict in North Korea:
| Resolution 28/22 | Situation of human rights in the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea | voted Against |
| Resolution 25/25 | Situation of human rights in the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea | voted Against |
| Resolution 19/13 | The situation of human rights in the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea | Consensus |
| Resolution 31/18 | Situation of human rights in the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea | Consensus |
| Resolution 16/08 | Situation of human rights in the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea | voted Against |
| Resolution 13/14 | Situation of human rights in the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea | voted Against |
| Resolution 10/16 | Situation of human rights in the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea | voted Against |
| Resolution 7/15 | Situation of human rights in the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea | voted Against |
[/expandableContent]
UNHRC’s Universal Periodic Review
As part of its mandate to promote human rights around the globe, the UNHRC has instituted a Universal Periodic Review, where, once every four years, each country’s human rights record is examined. Other countries are invited to review the record and make comments and suggestions for improvement. The country under review then acknowledges each comment by either “accepting” the comment, meaning typically that they agree to focus on, or “noting” it, indicating that they disagree and will not be focusing on improvements in this area.
[expandableHeadline]Read more[/expandableHeadline][expandableContent]
As recipient: Cuba received 386 recommendations. Accepted 260, noted 126. (only select topics listed below)
| Area | Received | Accepted | Noted |
| Civil society | 5 | 3 | 2 |
| Elections | 7 | 7 | – |
| Enforced disappearances | 1 | – | 1 |
| Extrajudicial executions | – | – | – |
| Freedom of association and peaceful assembly | 12 | 2 | 10 |
| Freedom of opinion and expression | 32 | 9 | 23 |
| Freedom of religion and belief | 4 | 4 | – |
| Freedom of press | 7 | – | 7 |
| Human rights defenders | 7 | – | 7 |
| Human rights violations by state agents | – | – | – |
| Impunity | – | – | – |
| Indigenous peoples | – | – | – |
| Internally displaced persons | – | – | – |
| International instruments | 77 | 10 | 67 |
| Justice | 16 | 7 | 9 |
| Migrants | 2 | – | 2 |
| Minorities | – | – | – |
| Racial discrimination | 3 | 3 | – |
| Sexual orientation and gender identity | 4 | 4 | – |
| Torture and CID treatment | 8 | – | 8 |
| Women’s rights | 30 | 28 | 2 |
| Total | 386 | 260 | 126 |
Note: some comments are classified under multiple categories.
As commenter: Cuba is an active participant in the UPR process, with 333 comments made so far in the 2nd cycle (for data available) but entirely on second generation economic and social rights, and not political and civil rights. Only 18% made towards other Latin American countries, but consistently made 2-4 comments for most countries around the globe. Israel, Poland, and the Russian Federation were exceptions, with Israel receiving 6 comments and Poland and Russia receiving 5 comments from Cuba.
Main topics of comments included: right to health (58 comments), right to education (50 comments), women’s rights (47 comments), and poverty (38 comments).
Note: This data is for the 2nd cycle of the UPR. However, the final round of countries were reviewed in November/December 2016, and that data is not yet available to include in our analysis here.[/expandableContent]
UN NGO Committee
Cuba has not been on the committee since at least 1993.
Inter-American System:
OAS Permanent Council
Despite having its Cold War-era suspension lifted, the Cuban regime has refused to apply for readmission to the regional body.
[expandableHeadline]Read more[/expandableHeadline][expandableContent]
.[/expandableContent]
Inter-American Commission for Human Rights (IACHR or Commission)
Cuba has a number of pending cases before the Commission but does not accept the legitimacy of the regional human rights body.
[expandableHeadline]Read more[/expandableHeadline][expandableContent]
Hearings:[3]
| Hearing | Issue | Score |
| 173rd | Serious Human Rights Violations in Cuba | |
| 171st | Constitutional Reform and Human Rights in Cuba | |
| 169th | Reports on the Criminalization of Social Activists and Journalists in Cuba | |
| 164th | Human Rights Situation of Persons with Disabilities in Cuba | 0/3 |
| 161st | Human Rights Situation of Afro-Descendants in Cuba | 0/3 |
| 159th | Situation of human rights defenders in Cuba | 0/3 |
| 157th /158th | Situation of human rights defenders in Cuba | 0/3 |
| 156th | LGBT Persons | 0/3 |
Voluntary financial contributions to IACHR (as of Sept. 16, 2016)
| Year | Contributions by Cuba | Percentage of Total Contributions to IACHR |
| 2011 | $0 | 0% |
| 2012 | $0 | 0% |
| 2013 | $0 | 0% |
| 2014 | $0 | 0% |
| 2015 | $0 | 0% |
| 2016 | $0 | 0% |
[/expandableContent]
Electoral Missions
Cuba has not had any OAS missions to monitor their elections.
Freedom of Information Laws
Since 2000 the right to information and freedom of information laws have expanded across the region. However, the existence of the laws on the books does not necessarily mean full enforcement.
[expandableHeadline]Read more[/expandableHeadline][expandableContent]
| Signatory/Participant in MESICIC | No |
| Constitutional protection | N/A |
| Specific law enacted | N/A |
| Is there a presumption of right | N/A |
| Scope/Exceptions/Overrides | N/A |
| Received information under FOIA law? | N/A |
| Received information within a week? | N/A |
| Received the appropriate information? | N/A |
[/expandableContent]
Women’s rights:
Protecting women against gender-based violence is a human rights issue often overlooked globally even though it crosses social, economic and national boundaries. And according to the United Nations Population Fund, gender-based violence undermines the health, security, dignity, and autonomy of its victims. Although 16 countries in Latin America had modified their laws to include a specific type of crime referring to the murder of women by 2015, they are not uniformly implemented, and practices to convict perpetrators of gender-based violence are still extremely weak. A 2016 report published by the Small Arms Survey found that Latin America and the Caribbean is home to 14 of the 25 countries with the highest rates of femicide in the world.
[expandableHeadline]Read more[/expandableHeadline][expandableContent]
2015 data shows that the female homicide rate is 2.4 per 100,000 women. Little information beyond the basics is available.
[/expandableContent]
Indigenous rights:
7.8 percent of the population in Latin America, roughly 41,813,039 people, identify as indigenous, 49 percent of them live in urban areas and 51 percent live in rural areas.
The Labour Organization’s Convention 169 (ILO 169)
The Labour Organization’s Convention 169 (ILO169)—which has the status of an international treaty—establishes the right of indigenous and tribal peoples to be consulted when a policy or project affects their culture or heritage through what is commonly called “previous and informed consent.” The vaguely worded treaty has been a point of contention in some countries, among governments, investors and communities; and progress in implementing it has been uneven. The Convention has been interpreted, in particular, as applying to issues of national resource extraction and infrastructure development that affect communal lands. In Latin America 16 countries have signed ILO 169.
United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous People’s (UNDRIP)
Adopted by the UN General Assembly in September 2007, all Latin American countries, except Colombia, which abstained, voted in favor of this declaration. The only four countries to initially reject this declaration were the U.S., Canada, Australia and New Zealand. While it is not a legally binding instrument, it is an “important standard” for the treatment of indigenous people. The declaration sets out the collective and individual rights of indigenous peoples, as well as their rights to culture, identity, language, employment, health, education, and other issues. It prohibits discrimination against indigenous peoples and promotes their full and effective participation in all matters that concern them and their right to remain distinct and to pursue their own visions of economic and social development. The end goal is to encourage countries to work alongside indigenous communities to solve global issues, like development, multicultural democracy and decentralization.
American Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous People
In 2016, the General Assembly of the Organization of American States (OAS) approved the American Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples after a long negotiation of 17 years. The declaration recognizes the collective organization and multicultural character of indigenous peoples, the self-identification of people who consider themselves indigenous and special protection for peoples in voluntary isolation or initial contact. However, the declaration was met with resistance by members of the indigenous community, who complained that they did not have full participation in the negotiations and that the declaration rolled back several rights recognized in UNDRIP. The declaration does not mention the right to previous and informed consultation.
Previous to the declaration, in 1990, the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (IACHR) had created the Office of the Special Rapporteur on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples to devote attention to Indigenous Peoples in the Americas and to “strengthen, promote, and systemize the IACHR’s own work in this area. The current Rapporteur on the Right of Indigenous Peoples is Francisco José Eguiguren Praeli, Ambassador of Peru to Spain from 2012 to 2014 and Minister of the Office of Justice. He received a law degree from the Pontifical Catholic University of Peru with a master’s degree in Constitutional Law and a PhD in Humanities. Former Rapporteurs include, Rose-Marie Belle Antoine a former IACHR Commissioner and Dinah Shelton an international law consultant for the World Health Organization, the United Nations Environment Programme among other organizations.
[expandableHeadline]Read more[/expandableHeadline][expandableContent]
Not a signatory to ILO 169 or the American Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, but voted in favor of UNDRIP.
[/expandableContent]