Free and Open
This is the weighted total of the four scored pillars.
Finding
01Political information and civic participation remain broadly open under independent institutions. Privacy and enforcement gaps prevent a perfect score.
The score draws on country reporting, network measurements, shutdown records, journalist cases, privacy law, and rule-of-law data. The indicator findings below show how that evidence was converted into points. [1][2][3][4][5][6][7][8]
This is the weighted total of the four scored pillars.
No systematic political filtering or state-directed shutdown pattern was established in the reviewed record.
Independent courts, regulators, and public procedures provide meaningful checks and remedies.
8 cited sources support this assessment.
Scored assessment
02Each indicator receives 0–4 points. Five indicators form a pillar. The pillar average is converted to a percentage and multiplied by its published weight.
No systematic political filtering or state-directed shutdown pattern was established in the reviewed record.
Costa Rica: Freedom House's 2025 country scorecard recorded state control over connectivity 6/6; DSP's 2025 shutdown-practice estimate 4/4; social-media shutdown estimate 4/4; OONI measurements and the Access Now shutdown record provide the incident check. [2][3][4][1]
Costa Rica's B1 evidence supports 4.0/4. The record matches the strongest published anchor.
Costa Rica: Freedom House's 2025 country scorecard recorded content blocking 6/6; DSP's 2025 political-filtering estimate 4/4; the country OONI dashboard supplies direct network measurements. [3][1]
Costa Rica's B2 evidence supports 4.0/4. The record matches the strongest published anchor.
Costa Rica: Freedom House's 2025 country scorecard recorded content-removal pressure 4/4 and transparency and appeal safeguards 4/4; DSP's 2025 political-content censorship estimate 4/4; online-speech legal protection 4/4. [2][1]
Costa Rica's B3 evidence supports 4.0/4. The record matches the strongest published anchor.
Costa Rica: Freedom House's 2025 country scorecard recorded transparency and appeal safeguards 4/4; DSP's online-speech legal protection estimate 4/4; protection against legal abuse by political elites 3/4. [2][1]
Costa Rica's B4 evidence supports 3.5/4. Protection is strong, with a bounded exception preventing full credit.
Costa Rica: Freedom House's 2025 country scorecard recorded state control over connectivity 6/6 and anonymous and encrypted communication 3/4; DSP's political-filtering estimate 4/4; independence from state-controlled social platforms 4/4; OONI and Freedom House records provide the circumvention check. [3][1]
Costa Rica's B5 evidence supports 4.0/4. The record matches the strongest published anchor.
Online political debate is broad and legal protections generally remain effective.
Costa Rica: Freedom House's 2025 country scorecard recorded legal protection and judicial independence 6/6; DSP's online-speech legal protection estimate 4/4; WJP's effective-expression measure 3.2/4; the relevant Freedom House country score 86/100. [1][7]
Costa Rica's C1 evidence supports 3.5/4. Protection is strong, with a bounded exception preventing full credit.
Costa Rica: Freedom House's 2025 country scorecard recorded online-speech liability 3/4; DSP's protection against abuse of defamation and copyright law 3/4; Freedom House country reporting supplies the offense and enforcement record. [2][1]
Costa Rica's C2 evidence supports 3.5/4. Protection is strong, with a bounded exception preventing full credit.
Costa Rica: Freedom House's 2025 country scorecard recorded penalties for online activity 5/6; DSP's 2025 political-arrest estimate 3/3; CPJ and Freedom House records provide the documented case check. [2][5][1]
Costa Rica's C3 evidence supports 3.5/4. Protection is strong, with a bounded exception preventing full credit.
Costa Rica: Freedom House's 2025 country scorecard recorded violence and intimidation 3/5 and technical attacks 2/3; the 2026 RSF press-freedom score 72.3/100; CPJ and Freedom House reporting provide the violence, harassment, and accountability record. [5][8][1]
Costa Rica's C4 evidence supports 3.0/4. Protection is generally effective, with recurring but bounded shortcomings.
Costa Rica: Freedom House's 2025 country scorecard recorded online information diversity 4/4 and digital civic mobilization 6/6; DSP's online-media pluralism estimate 3/4; ordinary people's online civic-mobilization estimate 4/4; WJP's civic-participation measure 3.0/4. [2][1]
Costa Rica's C5 evidence supports 3.5/4. Protection is strong, with a bounded exception preventing full credit.
Privacy law provides meaningful rights, but exemptions, enforcement gaps, or intelligence powers remain material.
Costa Rica: Freedom House's 2025 country scorecard recorded privacy protection 5/6; DSP's privacy-law existence measure 1/1; privacy-law constraint on government access 4/4; WJP's effective-privacy measure 3.2/4. [6][1]
Costa Rica's D1 evidence supports 3.5/4. Protection is strong, with a bounded exception preventing full credit.
Costa Rica: Freedom House's 2025 country scorecard recorded state surveillance constraints 5/6 and privacy protection 5/6; DSP's protection from political social-media monitoring 3/4; WJP's effective-privacy measure 3.2/4. [1][7]
Costa Rica's D2 evidence supports 3.0/4. Protection is generally effective, with recurring but bounded shortcomings.
Costa Rica: Freedom House's 2025 country scorecard recorded anonymous and encrypted communication 3/4 and state surveillance constraints 5/6; DSP's privacy-law constraint on government access 4/4; protection from political monitoring 3/4; UNCTAD and Freedom House records provide the retention and identity-law check. [1][6]
Costa Rica's D3 evidence supports 3.5/4. Protection is strong, with a bounded exception preventing full credit.
Costa Rica: Freedom House's 2025 country scorecard recorded state surveillance constraints 5/6 and technical attacks 2/3; DSP's protection from political monitoring 3/4; the RSF press-freedom environment 72.3/100; CPJ and Freedom House reporting provide the targeted-surveillance case record. [5][1]
Costa Rica's D4 evidence supports 3.0/4. Protection is generally effective, with recurring but bounded shortcomings.
Costa Rica: Freedom House's 2025 country scorecard recorded anonymous and encrypted communication 3/4; DSP's political-filtering estimate 4/4; protection from political monitoring 3/4; OONI and Freedom House records provide the encryption and anonymity check. [3][1]
Costa Rica's D5 evidence supports 3.5/4. Protection is strong, with a bounded exception preventing full credit.
Independent courts, regulators, and public procedures provide meaningful checks and remedies.
Costa Rica: Freedom House's 2025 country scorecard recorded legal protection and judicial independence 6/6; WJP's judicial-constraint measure 2.7/4; administrative due-process measure 2.8/4; civil-justice independence measure 2.8/4. [7][1]
Costa Rica's E1 evidence supports 3.0/4. Protection is generally effective, with recurring but bounded shortcomings.
Costa Rica: Freedom House's 2025 country scorecard recorded legal protection and judicial independence 6/6 and privacy protection 5/6; WJP's independent-review measure 3.1/4; regulatory independence measure 3.0/4. [7][1]
Costa Rica's E2 evidence supports 3.5/4. Protection is strong, with a bounded exception preventing full credit.
Costa Rica: Freedom House's 2025 country scorecard recorded transparency and appeal safeguards 4/4 and privacy protection 5/6; WJP's publicized-laws measure 1.9/4; right-to-information measure 2.8/4. [7][1]
Costa Rica's E3 evidence supports 3.0/4. Protection is generally effective, with recurring but bounded shortcomings.
Costa Rica: Freedom House's 2025 country scorecard recorded transparency and appeal safeguards 4/4 and legal protection and judicial independence 6/6; WJP's complaint-mechanisms measure 3.2/4; civil-justice access measure 2.8/4; civil-justice enforcement measure 1.8/4. [7][1]
Costa Rica's E4 evidence supports 3.0/4. Protection is generally effective, with recurring but bounded shortcomings.
Costa Rica: Freedom House's 2025 country scorecard recorded online information diversity 4/4 and digital civic mobilization 6/6; WJP's civic-participation measure 3.0/4; DSP's online civic-mobilization estimate 4/4. [2][1]
Costa Rica's E5 evidence supports 3.5/4. Protection is strong, with a bounded exception preventing full credit.
Country findings
03These are the principal findings for each scored part of the report. The indicator records above provide the supporting detail.
No systematic political filtering or state-directed shutdown pattern was established in the reviewed record.
[2][3][4]Online political debate is broad and legal protections generally remain effective.
[2][5][8]Privacy law provides meaningful rights, but exemptions, enforcement gaps, or intelligence powers remain material.
[6][1]Independent courts, regulators, and public procedures provide meaningful checks and remedies.
[7][1]Research record
04Costa Rica, assessed from January 1 through December 31, 2025.
Network measurements, legal and institutional datasets, shutdown records, and documented cases support the findings.
Twenty indicators measure content openness, expression, privacy, security, and institutional checks under Methodology v0.3.
Source register
05Country reporting, open measurements, and cross-national datasets form the report record.