Country assessmentResearch confidence: Medium · Evidence coverage: Standard

Papua New Guinea · 2026

Papua New Guinea

Online debate remains plural where access is available. Threats against journalists, broad communications powers, privacy gaps, and weak institutional capacity limit protection.

Finding Scorecard Evidence Sources

Assessment windowJanuary 1–December 31, 2025

Research cutoffJuly 17, 2026

FrameworkMethodology v0.3 · 20 indicators

Territory coveragePapua New Guinea

Finding

Why Papua New Guinea received this score.

Online debate remains plural where access is available. Threats against journalists, broad communications powers, privacy gaps, and weak institutional capacity limit protection.

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]

Overall score62.0

Generally Free

This is the weighted total of the four scored pillars.

Highest pillar80.0

Open Internet & Content Controls

Targeted blocking and regulatory pressure occur without a comprehensive national filtering system.

Lowest pillar37.5

Rule of Law & Accountability

Oversight and remedies are weak, selective, or difficult to use against state digital powers.

Evidence record8

Standard coverage

8 cited sources support this assessment.

Scored assessment

Indicator 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.

30% weight

Open Internet & Content Controls

Targeted blocking and regulatory pressure occur without a comprehensive national filtering system.

80.024.0 / 30 points

B1Shutdowns and throttling3.5 / 4

Observed record

Papua New Guinea: DSP's 2025 shutdown-practice estimate 4/4; social-media shutdown estimate 3/4; OONI measurements and the Access Now shutdown record provide the incident check. [2][3][4]

Scoring judgment

Papua New Guinea's B1 evidence supports 3.5/4. Protection is strong, with a bounded exception preventing full credit.

B2Website and service blocking3.0 / 4

Observed record

Papua New Guinea: Freedom House's 2025 country scorecard recorded media freedom 3/4 and private discussion 4/4; DSP's 2025 political-filtering estimate 3/4; the country OONI dashboard supplies direct network measurements. [3][1]

Scoring judgment

Papua New Guinea's B2 evidence supports 3.0/4. Protection is generally effective, with recurring but bounded shortcomings.

B3Removal and filtering orders3.5 / 4

Observed record

Papua New Guinea: Freedom House's 2025 country scorecard recorded media freedom 3/4 and private discussion 4/4; DSP's 2025 political-content censorship estimate 4/4; online-speech legal protection 3/4. [2][1]

Scoring judgment

Papua New Guinea's B3 evidence supports 3.5/4. Protection is strong, with a bounded exception preventing full credit.

B4Intermediary liability3.0 / 4

Observed record

Papua New Guinea: Freedom House's 2025 country scorecard recorded media freedom 3/4; DSP's online-speech legal protection estimate 3/4; protection against legal abuse by political elites 3/4. [2][1]

Scoring judgment

Papua New Guinea's B4 evidence supports 3.0/4. Protection is generally effective, with recurring but bounded shortcomings.

B5Circumvention and cross-border access3.0 / 4

Observed record

Papua New Guinea: Freedom House's 2025 country scorecard recorded media freedom 3/4 and private discussion 4/4; DSP's political-filtering estimate 3/4; independence from state-controlled social platforms 3/4; OONI and Freedom House records provide the circumvention check. [3][1]

Scoring judgment

Papua New Guinea's B5 evidence supports 3.0/4. Protection is generally effective, with recurring but bounded shortcomings.

30% weight

Free Expression & Civic Space

Violence, harassment, or impunity materially limits journalism and civic participation online.

60.018.0 / 30 points

C1Legal protection for expression3.0 / 4

Observed record

Papua New Guinea: Freedom House's 2025 country scorecard recorded media freedom 3/4 and private discussion 4/4; DSP's online-speech legal protection estimate 3/4; the relevant Freedom House country score 61/100. [1][7]

Scoring judgment

Papua New Guinea's C1 evidence supports 3.0/4. Protection is generally effective, with recurring but bounded shortcomings.

C2Speech-related offenses2.5 / 4

Observed record

Papua New Guinea: Freedom House's 2025 country scorecard recorded media freedom 3/4 and due process 1/4; DSP's protection against abuse of defamation and copyright law 3/4; Freedom House country reporting supplies the offense and enforcement record. [2][1]

Scoring judgment

Papua New Guinea's C2 evidence supports 2.5/4. Meaningful safeguards coexist with material restrictions.

C3Arrests and penalties2.0 / 4

Observed record

Papua New Guinea: Freedom House's 2025 country scorecard recorded due process 1/4 and equal treatment under law 1/4; DSP's 2025 political-arrest estimate 2/3; CPJ and Freedom House records provide the documented case check. [2][5][1]

Scoring judgment

Papua New Guinea's C3 evidence supports 2.0/4. Restrictions are recurrent and safeguards are only partly effective.

C4Harassment, violence, and digital attacks2.0 / 4

Observed record

Papua New Guinea: Freedom House's 2025 country scorecard recorded media freedom 3/4 and equal treatment under law 1/4; the 2026 RSF press-freedom score 60.1/100; CPJ and Freedom House reporting provide the violence, harassment, and accountability record. [5][8][1]

Scoring judgment

Papua New Guinea's C4 evidence supports 2.0/4. Restrictions are recurrent and safeguards are only partly effective.

C5Civic participation and pluralism2.5 / 4

Observed record

Papua New Guinea: Freedom House's 2025 country scorecard recorded political choice free from domination 4/4 and assembly freedom 3/4; DSP's online-media pluralism estimate 3/4; ordinary people's online civic-mobilization estimate 2/4. [2][1]

Scoring judgment

Papua New Guinea's C5 evidence supports 2.5/4. Meaningful safeguards coexist with material restrictions.

20% weight

Privacy, Anonymity & User Security

Broad surveillance powers and limited independent authorization weaken privacy and anonymity.

62.512.5 / 20 points

D1Data protection rights2.0 / 4

Observed record

Papua New Guinea: DSP's privacy-law existence measure 0/1; privacy-law constraint on government access 3/4. [6][1]

Scoring judgment

Papua New Guinea's D1 evidence supports 2.0/4. Restrictions are recurrent and safeguards are only partly effective.

D2Surveillance law and authorization2.5 / 4

Observed record

Papua New Guinea: Freedom House's 2025 country scorecard recorded judicial independence 3/4 and due process 1/4; DSP's protection from political social-media monitoring 3/4. [1][7]

Scoring judgment

Papua New Guinea's D2 evidence supports 2.5/4. Meaningful safeguards coexist with material restrictions.

D3Retention, access, and identity mandates2.5 / 4

Observed record

Papua New Guinea: Freedom House's 2025 country scorecard recorded private discussion 4/4 and due process 1/4; DSP's privacy-law constraint on government access 3/4; protection from political monitoring 3/4; UNCTAD and Freedom House records provide the retention and identity-law check. [1][6]

Scoring judgment

Papua New Guinea's D3 evidence supports 2.5/4. Meaningful safeguards coexist with material restrictions.

D4Targeted surveillance and spyware2.5 / 4

Observed record

Papua New Guinea: Freedom House's 2025 country scorecard recorded media freedom 3/4 and equal treatment under law 1/4; DSP's protection from political monitoring 3/4; the RSF press-freedom environment 60.1/100; CPJ and Freedom House reporting provide the targeted-surveillance case record. [5][1]

Scoring judgment

Papua New Guinea's D4 evidence supports 2.5/4. Meaningful safeguards coexist with material restrictions.

D5Encryption and anonymity3.0 / 4

Observed record

Papua New Guinea: Freedom House's 2025 country scorecard recorded private discussion 4/4; DSP's political-filtering estimate 3/4; protection from political monitoring 3/4; OONI and Freedom House records provide the encryption and anonymity check. [3][1]

Scoring judgment

Papua New Guinea's D5 evidence supports 3.0/4. Protection is generally effective, with recurring but bounded shortcomings.

20% weight

Rule of Law & Accountability

Oversight and remedies are weak, selective, or difficult to use against state digital powers.

37.57.5 / 20 points

E1Judicial independence and due process1.5 / 4

Observed record

Papua New Guinea: Freedom House's 2025 country scorecard recorded judicial independence 3/4 and due process 1/4. [7][1]

Scoring judgment

Papua New Guinea's E1 evidence supports 1.5/4. Restrictions are widespread, although limited protection remains.

E2Independent regulators1.0 / 4

Observed record

Papua New Guinea: Freedom House's 2025 country scorecard recorded government safeguards against corruption 0/4 and government openness and transparency 1/4. [7][1]

Scoring judgment

Papua New Guinea's E2 evidence supports 1.0/4. The right is severely restricted and effective safeguards are weak.

E3Government transparency1.5 / 4

Observed record

Papua New Guinea: Freedom House's 2025 country scorecard recorded government openness and transparency 1/4. [7][1]

Scoring judgment

Papua New Guinea's E3 evidence supports 1.5/4. Restrictions are widespread, although limited protection remains.

E4Notice, appeal, and remedy1.5 / 4

Observed record

Papua New Guinea: Freedom House's 2025 country scorecard recorded judicial independence 3/4 and due process 1/4. [7][1]

Scoring judgment

Papua New Guinea's E4 evidence supports 1.5/4. Restrictions are widespread, although limited protection remains.

E5Open and multistakeholder policymaking2.0 / 4

Observed record

Papua New Guinea: Freedom House's 2025 country scorecard recorded elected officials' authority 2/4 and assembly freedom 3/4; DSP's online civic-mobilization estimate 2/4. [2][1]

Scoring judgment

Papua New Guinea's E5 evidence supports 2.0/4. Restrictions are recurrent and safeguards are only partly effective.

Country findings

Findings by pillar.

These are the principal findings for each scored part of the report. The indicator records above provide the supporting detail.

Pillar B

Open Internet & Content Controls

Targeted blocking and regulatory pressure occur without a comprehensive national filtering system.

[2][3][4]

Pillar C

Free Expression & Civic Space

Violence, harassment, or impunity materially limits journalism and civic participation online.

[2][5][8]

Pillar D

Privacy, Anonymity & User Security

Broad surveillance powers and limited independent authorization weaken privacy and anonymity.

[6][1]

Pillar E

Rule of Law & Accountability

Oversight and remedies are weak, selective, or difficult to use against state digital powers.

[7][1]

Research record

Coverage

Papua New Guinea, 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.

Read the full methodology →

Source register

Sources used for this report.

Country reporting, open measurements, and cross-national datasets form the report record.

01
Freedom HousePapua New Guinea: Freedom in the World 2025 country report ↗Civil society · 2025 edition
02
Digital Society ProjectDigital Society Project Dataset v8 ↗Independent measurement · 2000–2025 country-year data
03
Open Observatory of Network InterferencePapua New Guinea measurement dashboard ↗Independent measurement · Accessed July 17, 2026
04
Access Now and the #KeepItOn coalitionInternet Shutdowns in 2025 Annual Report ↗Civil society · March 2026
05
Committee to Protect Journalists2025 journalist prison census and case database ↗Civil society · January 21, 2026
06
UN Trade and DevelopmentData protection and privacy legislation worldwide ↗International organization · Accessed July 17, 2026
07
World Justice ProjectRule of Law Index 2025 ↗Independent measurement · October 28, 2025
08
Reporters Without BordersPapua New Guinea: World Press Freedom Index 2026 profile ↗Civil society · May 2026