Constrained
This is the weighted total of the four scored pillars.
Country assessmentResearch confidence: Low · Evidence coverage: Standard
Guinea-Bissau · 2026
Guinea-Bissau
Connectivity disruption, political instability, pressure and violence affecting media, surveillance risks, and fragile institutions leave online rights poorly protected.
Assessment windowJanuary 1–December 31, 2025
Research cutoffJuly 17, 2026
FrameworkMethodology v0.3 · 20 indicators
Territory coverageGuinea-Bissau
Finding
01Why Guinea-Bissau received this score.
Connectivity disruption, political instability, pressure and violence affecting media, surveillance risks, and fragile institutions leave online rights poorly protected.
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]
Open Internet & Content Controls
Shutdowns, throttling, or platform restrictions have been used during protests, elections, conflict, or unrest.
Rule of Law & Accountability
Oversight and remedies are weak, selective, or difficult to use against state digital powers.
Standard coverage
8 cited sources support this assessment.
Scored assessment
02Indicator scores.
Each indicator receives 0–4 points. Five indicators form a pillar. The pillar average is converted to a percentage and multiplied by its published weight.
B
30% weight
Open Internet & Content Controls
Shutdowns, throttling, or platform restrictions have been used during protests, elections, conflict, or unrest.
60.018.0 / 30 points
B1Shutdowns and throttling3.0 / 4
Observed record
Guinea-Bissau: Global services remain generally accessible without a comprehensive filtering system, though authorities can suspend media and interfere with politically sensitive reporting.; DSP's 2025 shutdown-practice estimate 3/4; social-media shutdown estimate 4/4; OONI measurements and the Access Now shutdown record provide the incident check. [2][3][4][1]
Scoring judgment
Guinea-Bissau's B1 evidence supports 3.0/4. Protection is generally effective, with recurring but bounded shortcomings.
B2Website and service blocking2.0 / 4
Observed record
Guinea-Bissau: Global services remain generally accessible without a comprehensive filtering system, though authorities can suspend media and interfere with politically sensitive reporting.; Freedom House's 2026 country scorecard recorded media freedom 1/4 and private discussion 3/4; DSP's 2025 political-filtering estimate 2/4; the country OONI dashboard supplies direct network measurements. [3][1][2]
Scoring judgment
Guinea-Bissau's B2 evidence supports 2.0/4. Restrictions are recurrent and safeguards are only partly effective.
B3Removal and filtering orders2.5 / 4
Observed record
Guinea-Bissau: Global services remain generally accessible without a comprehensive filtering system, though authorities can suspend media and interfere with politically sensitive reporting.; Freedom House's 2026 country scorecard recorded media freedom 1/4 and private discussion 3/4; DSP's 2025 political-content censorship estimate 3/4; online-speech legal protection 2/4. [2][1][3]
Scoring judgment
Guinea-Bissau's B3 evidence supports 2.5/4. Meaningful safeguards coexist with material restrictions.
B4Intermediary liability2.0 / 4
Observed record
Guinea-Bissau: Global services remain generally accessible without a comprehensive filtering system, though authorities can suspend media and interfere with politically sensitive reporting.; Freedom House's 2026 country scorecard recorded media freedom 1/4; DSP's online-speech legal protection estimate 2/4; protection against legal abuse by political elites 3/4. [2][1][3]
Scoring judgment
Guinea-Bissau's B4 evidence supports 2.0/4. Restrictions are recurrent and safeguards are only partly effective.
B5Circumvention and cross-border access2.5 / 4
Observed record
Guinea-Bissau: Global services remain generally accessible without a comprehensive filtering system, though authorities can suspend media and interfere with politically sensitive reporting.; Freedom House's 2026 country scorecard recorded media freedom 1/4 and private discussion 3/4; DSP's political-filtering estimate 2/4; independence from state-controlled social platforms 3/4; OONI and Freedom House records provide the circumvention check. [3][1][2]
Scoring judgment
Guinea-Bissau's B5 evidence supports 2.5/4. Meaningful safeguards coexist with material restrictions.
C
30% weight
Free Expression & Civic Space
Violence, harassment, or impunity materially limits journalism and civic participation online.
47.514.3 / 30 points
C1Legal protection for expression2.0 / 4
Observed record
Guinea-Bissau: Authorities suspended three Portuguese public media outlets and expelled their journalists, and reporters face physical interference amid political instability and organized crime.; Freedom House's 2026 country scorecard recorded media freedom 1/4 and private discussion 3/4; DSP's online-speech legal protection estimate 2/4; the relevant Freedom House country score 33/100. [1][7][5][8]
Scoring judgment
Guinea-Bissau's C1 evidence supports 2.0/4. Restrictions are recurrent and safeguards are only partly effective.
C2Speech-related offenses2.0 / 4
Observed record
Guinea-Bissau: Authorities suspended three Portuguese public media outlets and expelled their journalists, and reporters face physical interference amid political instability and organized crime.; Freedom House's 2026 country scorecard recorded media freedom 1/4 and due process 0/4; DSP's protection against abuse of defamation and copyright law 3/4; Freedom House country reporting supplies the offense and enforcement record. [2][1][5][8]
Scoring judgment
Guinea-Bissau's C2 evidence supports 2.0/4. Restrictions are recurrent and safeguards are only partly effective.
C3Arrests and penalties1.5 / 4
Observed record
Guinea-Bissau: Authorities suspended three Portuguese public media outlets and expelled their journalists, and reporters face physical interference amid political instability and organized crime.; Freedom House's 2026 country scorecard recorded due process 0/4 and equal treatment under law 2/4; DSP's 2025 political-arrest estimate 1/3; CPJ and Freedom House records provide the documented case check. [2][5][1][8]
Scoring judgment
Guinea-Bissau's C3 evidence supports 1.5/4. Restrictions are widespread, although limited protection remains.
C4Harassment, violence, and digital attacks2.0 / 4
Observed record
Guinea-Bissau: Authorities suspended three Portuguese public media outlets and expelled their journalists, and reporters face physical interference amid political instability and organized crime.; Freedom House's 2026 country scorecard recorded media freedom 1/4 and equal treatment under law 2/4; the 2026 RSF press-freedom score 52.0/100; CPJ and Freedom House reporting provide the violence, harassment, and accountability record. [5][8][1]
Scoring judgment
Guinea-Bissau's C4 evidence supports 2.0/4. Restrictions are recurrent and safeguards are only partly effective.
C5Civic participation and pluralism2.0 / 4
Observed record
Guinea-Bissau: Authorities suspended three Portuguese public media outlets and expelled their journalists, and reporters face physical interference amid political instability and organized crime.; Freedom House's 2026 country scorecard recorded political choice free from domination 1/4 and assembly freedom 1/4; DSP's online-media pluralism estimate 3/4; ordinary people's online civic-mobilization estimate 2/4. [2][1][5][8]
Scoring judgment
Guinea-Bissau's C5 evidence supports 2.0/4. Restrictions are recurrent and safeguards are only partly effective.
D
20% weight
Privacy, Anonymity & User Security
Broad surveillance powers and limited independent authorization weaken privacy and anonymity.
37.57.5 / 20 points
D1Data protection rights1.5 / 4
Observed record
Guinea-Bissau: Weak institutions, security influence, and organized criminal activity limit privacy safeguards and increase exposure for journalists and political actors.; DSP's privacy-law existence measure 0/1; privacy-law constraint on government access 4/4. [6][1][2][7]
Scoring judgment
Guinea-Bissau's D1 evidence supports 1.5/4. Restrictions are widespread, although limited protection remains.
D2Surveillance law and authorization1.0 / 4
Observed record
Guinea-Bissau: Weak institutions, security influence, and organized criminal activity limit privacy safeguards and increase exposure for journalists and political actors.; Freedom House's 2026 country scorecard recorded judicial independence 1/4 and due process 0/4; DSP's protection from political social-media monitoring 2/4. [1][7][2]
Scoring judgment
Guinea-Bissau's D2 evidence supports 1.0/4. The right is severely restricted and effective safeguards are weak.
D3Retention, access, and identity mandates1.5 / 4
Observed record
Guinea-Bissau: Weak institutions, security influence, and organized criminal activity limit privacy safeguards and increase exposure for journalists and political actors.; Freedom House's 2026 country scorecard recorded private discussion 3/4 and due process 0/4; DSP's privacy-law constraint on government access 4/4; protection from political monitoring 2/4; UNCTAD and Freedom House records provide the retention and identity-law check. [1][6][2][7]
Scoring judgment
Guinea-Bissau's D3 evidence supports 1.5/4. Restrictions are widespread, although limited protection remains.
D4Targeted surveillance and spyware1.5 / 4
Observed record
Guinea-Bissau: Weak institutions, security influence, and organized criminal activity limit privacy safeguards and increase exposure for journalists and political actors.; Freedom House's 2026 country scorecard recorded media freedom 1/4 and equal treatment under law 2/4; DSP's protection from political monitoring 2/4; the RSF press-freedom environment 52.0/100; CPJ and Freedom House reporting provide the targeted-surveillance case record. [5][1][2][7]
Scoring judgment
Guinea-Bissau's D4 evidence supports 1.5/4. Restrictions are widespread, although limited protection remains.
D5Encryption and anonymity2.0 / 4
Observed record
Guinea-Bissau: Weak institutions, security influence, and organized criminal activity limit privacy safeguards and increase exposure for journalists and political actors.; Freedom House's 2026 country scorecard recorded private discussion 3/4; DSP's political-filtering estimate 2/4; protection from political monitoring 2/4; OONI and Freedom House records provide the encryption and anonymity check. [3][1][2][7]
Scoring judgment
Guinea-Bissau's D5 evidence supports 2.0/4. Restrictions are recurrent and safeguards are only partly effective.
E
20% weight
Rule of Law & Accountability
Oversight and remedies are weak, selective, or difficult to use against state digital powers.
10.02.0 / 20 points
E1Judicial independence and due process0.5 / 4
Observed record
Guinea-Bissau: The late-2025 military coup suspended the constitution after disputed elections, displaced elected authority, and left no dependable independent remedy during the transition.; Freedom House's 2026 country scorecard recorded judicial independence 1/4 and due process 0/4. [7][1]
Scoring judgment
Guinea-Bissau's E1 evidence supports 0.5/4. Only narrow residual protection remains.
E2Independent regulators0.5 / 4
Observed record
Guinea-Bissau: The late-2025 military coup suspended the constitution after disputed elections, displaced elected authority, and left no dependable independent remedy during the transition.; Freedom House's 2026 country scorecard recorded government safeguards against corruption 1/4 and government openness and transparency 0/4. [7][1]
Scoring judgment
Guinea-Bissau's E2 evidence supports 0.5/4. Only narrow residual protection remains.
E3Government transparency0.5 / 4
Observed record
Guinea-Bissau: The late-2025 military coup suspended the constitution after disputed elections, displaced elected authority, and left no dependable independent remedy during the transition.; Freedom House's 2026 country scorecard recorded government openness and transparency 0/4. [7][1]
Scoring judgment
Guinea-Bissau's E3 evidence supports 0.5/4. Only narrow residual protection remains.
E4Notice, appeal, and remedy0.5 / 4
Observed record
Guinea-Bissau: The late-2025 military coup suspended the constitution after disputed elections, displaced elected authority, and left no dependable independent remedy during the transition.; Freedom House's 2026 country scorecard recorded judicial independence 1/4 and due process 0/4. [7][1]
Scoring judgment
Guinea-Bissau's E4 evidence supports 0.5/4. Only narrow residual protection remains.
E5Open and multistakeholder policymaking0.0 / 4
Observed record
Guinea-Bissau: The late-2025 military coup suspended the constitution after disputed elections, displaced elected authority, and left no dependable independent remedy during the transition.; Freedom House's 2026 country scorecard recorded elected officials' authority 0/4 and assembly freedom 1/4; DSP's online civic-mobilization estimate 2/4. [2][1][7]
Scoring judgment
Guinea-Bissau's E5 evidence supports 0.0/4. The record matches the zero-point anchor.
Country findings
03Findings by pillar.
These are the principal findings for each scored part of the report. The indicator records above provide the supporting detail.
Open Internet & Content Controls
Shutdowns, throttling, or platform restrictions have been used during protests, elections, conflict, or unrest.
[2][3][4]Free Expression & Civic Space
Violence, harassment, or impunity materially limits journalism and civic participation online.
[2][5][8]Privacy, Anonymity & User Security
Broad surveillance powers and limited independent authorization weaken privacy and anonymity.
[6][1]Rule of Law & Accountability
Oversight and remedies are weak, selective, or difficult to use against state digital powers.
[7][1]Research record
04Coverage
Guinea-Bissau, assessed from January 1 through December 31, 2025.
Evidence
Network measurements, legal and institutional datasets, shutdown records, and documented cases support the findings.
Scoring
Twenty indicators measure content openness, expression, privacy, security, and institutional checks under Methodology v0.3.
Source register
05Sources used for this report.
Country reporting, open measurements, and cross-national datasets form the report record.
- 01Freedom HouseGuinea-Bissau: Freedom in the World 2026 country report ↗Civil society · 2026 edition
- 02Digital Society ProjectDigital Society Project Dataset v8 ↗Independent measurement · 2000–2025 country-year data
- 03Open Observatory of Network InterferenceGuinea-Bissau measurement dashboard ↗Independent measurement · Accessed July 17, 2026
- 04Access Now and the #KeepItOn coalitionInternet Shutdowns in 2025 Annual Report ↗Civil society · March 2026
- 05Committee to Protect Journalists2025 journalist prison census and case database ↗Civil society · January 21, 2026
- 06UN Trade and DevelopmentData protection and privacy legislation worldwide ↗International organization · Accessed July 17, 2026
- 07World Justice ProjectRule of Law Index 2025 ↗Independent measurement · October 28, 2025
- 08Reporters Without BordersGuinea-Bissau: World Press Freedom Index 2026 profile ↗Civil society · May 2026