The Gap Between What Heritage Claims about El Salvador and Its Own Data
<p>Speaking before a U.S. Congressional commission, the Heritage Foundation sought to normalize deficiencies in the protection of citizens in El Salvador by framing them as par for the regional course. Except that their own data does not support that notion.</p>
Daniel Olmedo
On March 27, El Salvador marked four years under a state of exception. On April 16, the Tom Lantos Human Rights Commission of the U.S. House of Representatives held a hearing to examine the human rights impact of this ongoing measure.
The witnesses who testified before members of the Commission included representatives from the Salvadoran Journalists’ Association, the Robert and Ethel Kennedy Human Rights Center, Cristosal, Human Rights Watch, and the Washington College of Law of the American University, as well as the Heritage Foundation.
The first five witnesses raised concerns regarding serious human rights violations and the possible commission of crimes against humanity in El Salvador during the state of exception.
By contrast, the representative of the Heritage Foundation acknowledged that the Salvadoran policy presents certain challenges, but broadly characterized it as reasonable and necessary to combat gang-related violence in the country. He further argued that some allegations of human rights violations lack credibility.
[rel1]
While acknowledging specific concerns –particularly the use of pretrial detention– he maintained that these issues are not unique to El Salvador, but rather form part of broader regional patterns, and that they were already present prior to the current administration.
One way to assess such claims is to view them in the mirror of the Heritage Foundation’s own analytical framework, by confronting them with the standards it uses to evaluate protections against government abuse.
Since 1995, the foundation has published its Index of Economic Freedom, which measures 12 freedoms across 184 countries, including judicial effectiveness. According to its own methodology, judicial effectiveness requires “efficient and fair judicial systems to ensure that laws are fully respected and that appropriate legal actions are taken against violations.”
[rel2]
In order to score it, the Index evaluates factors such as judicial independence, the quality of judicial processes, and perceptions regarding the quality of public services and the independence of the civil service.
The Heritage Foundation website publishes data on judicial effectiveness for 29 countries in the Western Hemisphere, covering the period since 2017 as part of its Index of Economic Freedom.
In 2026, El Salvador received a score of 15.3 out of 100 in judicial effectiveness. According to the Index’s classification, this places the country in the “repressed” category, indicating performance “below the world average.”
[newsletter]
A closer look at the regional context further underscores the extent of this result. Within the Western Hemisphere, El Salvador ranks third-to-last among the 29 countries evaluated in this dimension. Only Nicaragua and Venezuela register lower scores.
The Heritage Foundation data further indicate that countries such as Cuba and Haiti —as well as all other Central American states— perform better than El Salvador in terms of judicial effectiveness.
Focusing specifically on El Salvador’s performance over time, the Index of Economic Freedom shows that, since 2017, the country has consistently recorded judicial effectiveness scores below 50 points, but at a level shared with many other countries in the region.
However, a historical view reveals a marked deterioration beginning in 2022, the year in which the state of exception was introduced. From that point onward, El Salvador experienced an abrupt decline, placing it within the “repressed” category.
The statements made by the Heritage Foundation representative during the hearing before the U.S. Congressional commission sought to normalize deficiencies in the protection of citizens in El Salvador by framing them as ordinary regional conditions unrelated to the state of exception.
When these claims are checked against the Index of Economic Freedom, also produced by the Heritage Foundation, they reveal a tension between the institution’s public discourse on El Salvador and the reality reflected in its own data.
Daniel Olmedo is a human rights lawyer and consultant focused on international law, rule of law, and accountability in Central America.