# Eritrea - United States Department of State

- Eritrea HomeReportsBureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor2023 Country Reports on Human Rights Practices&#8230;Eritrea				hide	document.addEventListener("DOMContentLoaded", function(event) {	if(window.jQuery) {		jQuery( document ).ready(function() {			if (jQuery(".bc_middle").hasClass("collapse")) {				jQuery(".bc_ellipse").click(function(){					jQuery(".bc_hide").toggleClass("visible");					jQuery(".bc_middle").toggle();					jQuery(".bc_ellipse").toggle();					jQuery(".bc_content").toggleClass("noflex");					jQuery(".block_breadcrumbs_content").toggleClass("noflex");				});				jQuery(".bc_hide").click(function(){					jQuery(".bc_hide").toggleClass("visible");					jQuery(".bc_middle").toggle();					jQuery(".bc_ellipse").toggle();					jQuery(".bc_content").toggleClass("noflex");					jQuery(".block_breadcrumbs_content").toggleClass("noflex");				});			} else {				jQuery(".bc_ellipse").hide();			}		});	}});																							2023 Country Reports on Human Rights Practices: Eritrea																																					Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor																																																																																							Download Report																																																							Translations																																																																 In this section										/																							EXECUTIVE SUMMARY																																													EXECUTIVE SUMMARY																															Section 1. Respect for the Integrity of the Person																																																									a. Arbitrary Deprivation of Life and Other Unlawful or Politically Motivated Killings																																																																											b. Disappearance																																																																											c. Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman, or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, and Other Related Abuses																																																																			Prison and Detention Center Conditions																																																																																																																		d. Arbitrary Arrest or Detention																																																																			Arrest Procedures and Treatment of Detainees																																																																																																																		e. Denial of Fair Public Trial																																																																			Trial Procedures																																																								Political Prisoners and Detainees																																																																																																																		f. Transnational Repression																																																																											g. Property Seizure and Restitution																																																																											h. Arbitrary or Unlawful Interference with Privacy, Family, Home, or Correspondence																																																																											i. Conflict-related Abuses																																																																																	Section 2. Respect for Civil Liberties																																																									a. Freedom of Expression, Including for Members of the Press and Other Media																																																																			Internet Freedom																																																																																																																		b. Freedoms of Peaceful Assembly and Association																																																																			Freedom of Peaceful Assembly																																																								Freedom of Association																																																																																																																		c. Freedom of Religion																																																																											d. Freedom of Movement and the Right to Leave the Country																																																																											e. Protection of Refugees																																																																																	Section 3. Freedom to Participate in the Political Process																																																									Elections and Political Participation																																																																																	Section 4. Corruption in Government																															Section 5. Governmental Posture Towards International and Nongovernmental Monitoring and Investigation of Alleged Abuses of Human Rights																															Section 6. Discrimination and Societal Abuses																																																									Women																																																																											Systemic Racial or Ethnic Violence and Discrimination																																																																											Children																																																																											Antisemitism																																																																											Trafficking in Persons																																																																											Acts of Violence, Criminalization, and Other Abuses Based on Sexual Orientation, Gender Identity or Expression, or Sex Characteristics																																																																											Persons with Disabilities																																																																											Other Societal Violence or Discrimination																																																																																	Section 7. Worker Rights																																																									a. Freedom of Association and the Right to Collective Bargaining																																																																											b. Prohibition of Forced or Compulsory Labor																																																																											c. Prohibition of Child Labor and Minimum Age for Employment																																																																											d. Discrimination (see section 6)																																																																											e. Acceptable Conditions of Work																																																																																																							EXECUTIVE SUMMARY				There were no significant changes in the human rights situation in Eritrea during the year.  In March the U.S. Secretary of State determined that the Eritrean Defense Forces committed war crimes during the conflict in northern Ethiopia, as well as crimes against humanity including murder, rape, and other forms of sexual violence.Significant human rights issues included credible reports of enforced disappearance; torture or cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment or punishment by the government; harsh and life-threatening prison conditions; arbitrary arrest or detention; serious problems with the independence of the judiciary; political prisoners or detainees; transnational repression against individuals in another country; arbitrary or unlawful interference with privacy; punishment of family members for alleged offenses by a relative; serious abuses in a conflict, including reportedly unlawful civilian deaths, abductions, physical abuses, and conflict-related sexual violence; unlawful recruitment or use of children in armed conflict by the government; serious restrictions on freedom of expression and media freedom, including unjustified arrests or prosecution of journalists and censorship; serious restrictions on internet freedom; substantial interference with the freedom of peaceful assembly and freedom of association, including overly restrictive laws on the organization, funding, or operation of nongovernmental and civil society organizations; restrictions on religious freedom; restrictions on freedom of movement and residence within the territory of the state and on the right to leave the country; inability of citizens to change their government peacefully through free and fair elections; serious and unreasonable restrictions on political participation; serious government restrictions on domestic and international human rights organizations; extensive gender-based violence, including domestic or intimate partner violence, sexual violence, workplace violence, and other forms of such violence; trafficking in persons, including forced labor; laws criminalizing consensual same-sex sexual conduct between adults, which were enforced; prohibiting independent trade unions and systematic restrictions on workers’ freedom of association; and existence of the worst forms of child labor.The government did not take credible steps to identify and punish officials who may have committed human rights abuses.																														Section 1.													 Respect for the Integrity of the Person												    																																																a. Arbitrary Deprivation of Life and Other Unlawful or Politically Motivated Killings										There were no credible reports that the government or its agents committed arbitrary or unlawful killings, including extrajudicial killings, within the country during the year.In past years, there were reports of deaths of detainees at the hands of prison staff, although there were no specific reports of such deaths during the year.  There was no available information to determine whether the government acted against persons responsible for detainee deaths.																																				b. Disappearance										An unknown number of persons disappeared during the year and were believed to be in government detention or to have died while in detention.  There were reports from local sources and international advocacy organizations of enforced disappearances by or on behalf of government authorities.  The disappeared included persons presumably detained for political and religious beliefs, journalists, locally employed staff of foreign embassies, foreign or dual nationals, and individuals suspected of evading national service and militia duties.  Others were disappeared for unknown offenses.  The government did not make efforts to prevent disappearances or to investigate or punish those responsible.																																				c. Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman, or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, and Other Related Abuses										The law prohibited such practices, but there were credible reports that government officials employed them.  Reports of torture continued, especially against political and religious prisoners.  According to UN experts, torture was common at the Eiraeiro prison.Lack of transparency and access to information made it impossible to determine the numbers or circumstances of deaths due to torture or cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment or punishment.Impunity remained a serious problem among security forces.  The government did not release any information to indicate it conducted investigations of alleged abuses, making it difficult to assess the extent of the problem among the different branches of the security services.																Prison and Detention Center Conditions						Prison and detention conditions reportedly remained harsh and life threatening, leading to serious damage to health and, in some instances, death, but the lack of independent access made accurate reporting impossible.Abusive Physical Conditions:  Detainees reportedly died from harsh conditions, including lack of adequate basic or emergency medical care and use of excessive force by prison officials.  Observers believed authorities continued the practice of holding some detainees incommunicado in metal shipping containers and underground cells without toilets or beds.  Food, sanitation, heating, ventilation, and lighting were inadequate, and potable water was sometimes available only for purchase.  Former prisoners described prolonged food shortages, which sometimes led to anemia or the need for hospitalization.  In some military prisons, the families of detainees had to provide food.  Some military prisons were reported to be grossly overcrowded to the point that detainees had to sleep in turns due to lack of space.Former detainees and other sources reported harsh detention conditions in police stations and in prisons for persons held for evading national service and militia duties.Administration:  Prisoners and detainees could not submit complaints to judicial authorities, and authorities did not adequately investigate or monitor prison or detention center conditions.Independent Monitoring:  The government did not permit monitoring of prisoner conditions by independent government, nongovernmental organization (NGO) observers, or international bodies, including the International Committee of the Red Cross.  The government did not grant consular access to detained dual nationals, whom they considered Eritrean citizens only.																										d. Arbitrary Arrest or Detention										The unimplemented constitution prohibited arbitrary arrest and detention and provided for the right of any person to challenge the lawfulness of their arrest or detention in court.  The government did not observe these provisions.																Arrest Procedures and Treatment of Detainees						The law stipulated that, unless a crime was in progress, police were required to investigate and obtain a warrant prior to making an arrest, but this seldom occurred.  In cases involving national security, police could waive the process.  The law required detainees be brought before a judge within 48 hours of arrest and not be held for more than 28 days without being charged with a crime.  Authorities generally detained suspects for longer periods without bringing them before a judge, charging them with a crime, or informing them of the reason for their detention.  Authorities sometimes arbitrarily changed charges during detention.  The law provided for a bail system, but authorities often denied bail for no apparent reason, and bail amounts were excessive.Detainees held on national security grounds did not have access to counsel.  Other detainees, including indigent persons, also often did not have such access.  Incommunicado detention was widespread.  Detainees did not have routine access to visitors.Arbitrary Arrest:  Arbitrary arrests occurred frequently.  Security force personnel detained individuals for reasons that included suspicion of intent to evade national and militia service, criticizing the government, attempting to leave the country without an exit visa or passport, and for unspecified national security threats.  Authorities also continued to arrest members of unregistered Christian groups.  Authorities sometimes arrested persons whose papers were not in order and detained them until they were able to provide evidence of their militia status or demobilization from national service.  The government contacted places of employment to identify those unwilling to participate in the militia.The country’s partial withdrawal from the northern Ethiopia conflict in January allowed militia members to return home.  The government’s mobilization campaign then decreased in scope to entail security sweeps in which persons suspected of evading militia and national service were rounded up and detained.Pretrial Detention:  Authorities brought few, if any, persons detained on alleged national security grounds to trial.  Some persons arrested in previous years for refusing to bear arms on grounds of conscience and for participating in unregistered religious groups remained in detention.  Several political prisoners were reportedly held for more than 20 years without a trial.																										e. Denial of Fair Public Trial										The law provided for an independent judiciary, but the government generally did not respect judicial independence and impartiality.  The Office of the President served as a clearinghouse for citizens’ petitions to some courts and acted as an arbitrator or a facilitator in civil matters for some courts.																Trial Procedures						The unimplemented constitution provided for the right to a fair and public trial, although it allowed for limits on the public nature for cases involving national security.  These rights were not respected.The law provided for a presumption of innocence, but this was often ignored.  There was no right for defendants to be informed promptly and in detail of charges in a language they understood.  The right to a fair, timely, and public trial was often not respected, especially with political cases.  The law did not specifically address the provision of adequate time or facilities to prepare a defense, the right of defendants to confront witnesses, or the provision of free interpretation from the moment charged through all appeals, although courts generally accorded the rights to defendants in cases deemed unrelated to national security.  There was no right of defendants to refuse to testify.  In normal cases, defendants could choose their attorney or have one provided to them (but only in cases involving offenses that carried a 10 or more years’ prison sentence), but this right was not afforded to defendants in national security cases.  Each party to a case had the right to one appeal.Special courts had jurisdiction over both corruption and national security cases.  Judges served as prosecutors and could request that individuals involved in cases testify.  Special court judges were predominantly military officials, although an increasing number were trained lawyers from the Ministry of Justice.  The special courts reported to the Ministry of Defense and the Office of the President.  Trials in special courts were not open to the public, and the court’s decisions were final with no possibility of appeal.						Political Prisoners and Detainees						The government continued to hold an unknown number of detainees without charge or trial, including politicians, journalists, members of registered and unregistered religious groups, and persons suspected of not completing national service or evading militia duty.  In 2022, Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch estimated there were hundreds of prisoners of conscience including journalists, former politicians, and practitioners of unauthorized religions.  The local partner of international NGO Release International estimated more than 500 Christian prisoners remained in indefinite detention without trial.The government did not permit access to political detainees, most of whom were held in unofficial facilities.  Authorities placed political prisoners in solitary confinement more often than other detainees.  Observers believed political prisoners were more likely to be held in underground cells.There were numerous abuses similar to the following examples.  In March, police arrested 30 Christians who had gathered to worship in a home in Keren.  In April, Release International’s local partner reported 103 Christians, mainly students, were arrested in Asmara and taken to Mai Serwa prison.The government released some political prisoners during the year.  In March, nine Christian prisoners were released from detention; most had served sentences of more than nine years.  In July, 300 Muslim prisoners arrested after the 2018 Diya’e Islamic School protests were released, and in November the government released 16 additional persons, mainly members of the school’s board of directors.																										f. Transnational Repression										Amnesty International and other credible groups continued to accuse the government of engaging in transnational repression, including harassment of activists.Extraterritorial Killing, Kidnapping, Forced Returns, or Other Violence or Threats of Violence:  According to credible reports, the government killed or kidnapped persons or used violence or threats of violence against individuals in other countries, including to force their return to the country, for politically motivated reprisal.  While in Ethiopia, Eritrean soldiers reportedly forced hundreds of Eritrean refugees to return to Eritrea and, in some cases, detained them once they arrived.Threats, Harassment, Surveillance, and Coercion:  Government officials used social media to direct harassment and threats against antigovernment members of the diaspora.																																				g. Property Seizure and Restitution										The government seized properties, businesses, and livestock from the families of draft evaders without due process or, in some cases, adequate restitution.  The homes and businesses were returned to the families after evaders turned themselves in to authorities, but livestock generally were not returned.																																				h. Arbitrary or Unlawful Interference with Privacy, Family, Home, or Correspondence										The law prohibited such actions, but the government did not respect these rights.  Many citizens believed the government monitored cell phones.  Authorities required permits to use SIM cards.  The government used an extensive informant system to gather information, particularly on suspected national service evaders.Without notice, authorities reportedly entered homes and threatened individuals without explanation.  Security forces reportedly detained and interrogated the parents, spouses, or siblings of individuals who evaded national service, militia service, or had fled the country.Ruling party administration offices and their associated local militia units, composed of persons who had finished their national service but were still required to assist with security matters, reportedly checked homes or whole neighborhoods to confirm residents’ attendance at national service projects.																																				i. Conflict-related Abuses										Numerous reports of serious abuses by government forces along the border in Ethiopia persisted throughout the year despite a November 2022 agreement that ended active hostilities.  For a detailed accounting of these abuses, please refer to the Country Reports on Human Rights Practices for Ethiopia.Child Soldiers:  The Secretary of State determined Eritrean armed forces recruited or used child soldiers during the reporting period of April 2022 to March 2023.  See the Department of State’s annual Trafficking in Persons Report at  https://www.state.gov/trafficking-in-persons-report/.																																					Section 2.													 Respect for Civil Liberties												    																																																a. Freedom of Expression, Including for Members of the Press and Other Media										Although the law provided for freedom of speech, including for members of the press and other media, the government severely restricted this right.The law banned private broadcast media and foreign ownership of media.  The government controlled all domestic media, including one newspaper published in four languages, three radio stations, and two television stations.The law required journalists to be licensed.  The law restricted printing and publication of materials by anyone lacking a permit and the printing or dissemination of prohibited foreign publications were punishable under the law.Freedom of Expression:  The government severely restricted the ability of individuals to criticize the government in public or in private through intimidation by national security forces.Violence and Harassment:  The Committee to Protect Journalists reported 16 journalists remained in detention and incommunicado with no information on their location or health.  In July, the UN Human Rights Council Working Group on Arbitrary Detention published an opinion on the detention of these journalists and referred the case to the Working Group on Enforced and Involuntary Disappearances, the special rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment or punishment, the special rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression, and the special rapporteur on the rights to freedom of peaceful assembly and of association for appropriate action.Censorship or Content Restrictions for Members of the Press and Other Media, Including Online Media:  State influence over traditional media was absolute.  The law required submission of documents, including books, to the government for approval prior to publication.  No printing house would print materials without proof of that approval.  Most independent journalists were in detention or lived abroad, which limited domestic media criticism of the government.  Authorities required journalists to obtain government permission to take photographs.  Journalists practiced self-censorship due to fear of government reprisal.  Internet penetration was so low and unreliable that independent online media did not exist in the country.Libel/Slander Laws:  The law criminalized libel as a misdemeanor and prescribed a punishment of between one to six months’ imprisonment and a fine.  The law also criminalized “malicious injury to honor or reputation,” which covered true statements communicated solely to damage a person’s reputation and prescribed a punishment of less than one month in prison and a fine.  According to the international NGO End Blasphemy Laws, the law provided for a prison term of up to one year for “disparaging” or “profaning” religious feelings.  During the year there were no reports of blasphemy, libel, and defamation laws being enforced.National Security:  The government repeatedly asserted national security concerns were the basis of limitations on free speech and expression.																Internet Freedom						The government restricted and disrupted access to the internet.  The government reportedly monitored some internet communications, including email, without appropriate legal authority.  Government informants were reported to frequent internet cafes.  Some citizens expressed fear of arrest if caught viewing opposition sites.  Nonetheless, the sites were generally available.																										b. Freedoms of Peaceful Assembly and Association										The government restricted freedoms of peaceful assembly and association.																Freedom of Peaceful Assembly						The law provided for freedom of assembly, but the government restricted this right.  Authorities investigated and interfered with large gatherings lacking prior approval, except for government-affiliated organizations or of religious observances of the four officially registered religious groups.						Freedom of Association						The law provided citizens the right to form organizations for political, social, economic, and cultural ends.  It specified their conduct had to be open, transparent, and guided by principles of national unity and democracy.  The government did not respect freedom of association.  It prohibited the formation of NGOs except those with official sponsorship.  The government generally did not allow local organizations to receive funding and other resources from, or to associate with, foreign and international organizations (see sections 5 and 7.a.).																										c. Freedom of Religion										See the Department of State’s International Religious Freedom Report at  https://www.state.gov/religiousfreedomreport/.																																				d. Freedom of Movement and the Right to Leave the Country										The law did not provide for freedom of internal movement, foreign travel, emigration and repatriation, and the government restricted these rights.In-country Movement:  The government required citizens to notify local authorities when they changed residence, although many did not.  When traveling within the country, particularly in remote regions or near borders, citizens were required to provide justification for travel at checkpoints.Travel restrictions on noncitizens lawfully in the country remained in effect.  The government required all diplomats, international humanitarian workers, UN staff, and other foreigners to request permission from the government at least 10 days in advance for travel outside of Asmara.Foreign Travel:  The government restricted foreign travel.  The government required citizens, including dual nationals, to obtain exit visas.  Requirements for obtaining passports and exit visas were inconsistent and nontransparent.  The government often denied citizens passports and exit visas because they had not completed their military, national service, or militia duties; had unpaid income taxes; or for arbitrary or unstated reasons.  Authorities generally did not give exit visas to children older than age seven and only permitted one child to travel abroad with a parent.  Categories of persons commonly denied exit visas included men younger than 40, regardless of whether they had completed the military portion of national service, and women younger than 30.  Authorities were more likely to approve exit visas for married women, women with children, and persons who had been discharged from national service.  All land borders were closed, preventing legal overland travel for most citizens.  Members of some cross-border ethnic groups (such as the Afar in the east and the Beja in the west) were allowed to cross the borders.Exile:  In general, citizens had the right to return, but citizens residing abroad had to show proof they paid a 2 percent tax on foreign earned income to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs to be eligible for some government services and documents, including birth or marriage certificates, passport renewals, and real estate and vehicle transactions.  Those who had left the country illegally were required to sign a document called the “regret form,” in addition to agreeing to pay the 2 percent tax, to obtain a passport or any other services while abroad.																																				e. Protection of Refugees										The government did not cooperate with the Office of the UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) regarding treatment of refugees.  The government defined refugee status differently than the 1951 Convention and its 1967 protocol.Access to Asylum:  The law did not provide for granting asylum or refugee status, and the government had no established system for providing protection to refugees.  The government did not recognize Ethiopians, Sudanese, or South Sudanese as refugees, instead considering them economic migrants, including newly displaced Sudanese.  The government, however, allowed these refugees to enter and remain in the country or transit to a third country.Access to Basic Services:  UNHCR was not able to provide basic support to refugees or asylum seekers.Durable Solutions:  Although the government did not grant persons of Ethiopian or Sudanese origin asylum or refugee status, authorities permitted them to remain in the country and to live among the local population instead of in a refugee camp.  Those living among the population were required to provide a guarantor and pay a fee to extend their residency or face possible detention.																																					Section 3.													 Freedom to Participate in the Political Process												    																						The law provided citizens the ability to choose their government in free and fair periodic elections, held by secret ballot and based on universal and equal suffrage, but they were not able to exercise this ability.																										Elections and Political Participation										Abuses or Irregularities in Recent Elections:  The government came to power in a 1993 popular referendum in which voters chose to have an independent country managed by a transitional government.  The transitional government did not permit the formation of a democratic system.  The government twice scheduled elections but canceled them without explanation.  An official declaration in 2003 asserted, “In accordance with the prevailing wish of the people, it is not the time to establish political parties, and discussion of the establishment has been postponed.”  In 2022, local communities across the country elected administrators, managing directors, and village coordinators.Political Parties and Political Participation:  The country was a one-party state.  Political power rested with the People’s Front for Democracy and Justice and its institutions; the government did not allow the formation of other political parties.  Membership in the People’s Front was not mandatory, but authorities pressured some categories of individuals, particularly those occupying government positions, to join the party.  Authorities reportedly visited citizens in their homes after they completed national service and compelled them to join the party and pay the required fees.  Authorities occasionally convoked nonmembers of the party to attend political indoctrination meetings as part of mandatory participation in the militia, and denied benefits such as ration coupons to those who did not attend.  Some citizens in the diaspora claimed such meetings also occurred at embassies abroad, with the names of those who did not attend reported to government officials, sometimes resulting in denial of benefits such as passport services.Participation of Women and Members of Marginalized or Vulnerable Groups:  Openly lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, or intersex (LGBTQI+) persons risked imprisonment and thus did not participate in the political process.																																					Section 4.													 Corruption in Government												    																						The law provided criminal penalties for corruption by officials, but the government did not implement the law effectively.  Officials sometimes engaged in corrupt practices with impunity.  There were numerous reports of government corruption.Corruption:  Persons seeking executive or judicial services sometimes reported they obtained services more easily after paying a “gift” or bribe.  Patronage, cronyism, and petty corruption within the executive branch were based largely on family connections and used to facilitate access to social benefits.  Judicial corruption was a problem, and authorities generally did not prosecute acts such as property seizure by military or security officials or those seen as being in favor with the government.  Local party officials, who drew no direct salary, were reported to engage in petty corruption to provide the paperwork proving compliance with “national obligations” such as national service, militia duty, and “voluntary” contributions to national development projects.  There were reports of police corruption.  Police occasionally used their influence to facilitate the release from prison of friends and family members.  Private citizens used influence with police to harass, assault, and even jail those with whom they had personal disputes.For additional information about corruption in the country, please see the Department of State’s Investment Climate Statement for the country, and the Department of State’s International Narcotics Control Strategy Report, which includes information on financial crimes.																											Section 5.													 Governmental Posture Towards International and Nongovernmental Monitoring and Investigation of Alleged Abuses of Human Rights												    																						International civil society organizations focused on human rights were generally not able to operate in the country.  The government did not cooperate with such groups or with investigations into human rights abuses.  No local human rights NGOs operated in the country.The United Nations or Other International Bodies:  The government did not permit visits by the UN special rapporteur on human rights in Eritrea and remained opposed to cooperating with his mandate.																											Section 6.													 Discrimination and Societal Abuses												    																																																Women										Rape and Domestic Violence:  Rape was a crime punishable by up to 10 years in prison, or up to 16 years in aggravated cases (such as those that inflicted serious bodily injury, involved a child or someone under the perpetrator’s care, or involved a group of perpetrators).  The law made no distinction based on the gender of the assailant or the survivor.  Rape between spouses was punishable only when the spouses had permanently separated.  The government reportedly enforced the law through arrest of alleged perpetrators in some reported rape cases, but information regarding any subsequent prosecutions was not available.While the law did not specifically criminalize domestic violence, assault carried a punishment that varied based on the seriousness of the crime, ranging from nine months to 19 years in prison.  Authorities rarely intervened in domestic violence cases.It was difficult to determine the extent of such abuses, as social stigma prevented survivors from coming forward, and the government did not publicize statistics.Female Genital Mutilation/Cutting (FGM/C):  The law prohibited FGM/C for both women and girls.  Government efforts to reduce FGM/C included public awareness campaigns at the local level targeting religious and community leaders.  Government reports stated certain regions and subzones were considered entirely free of FGM/C.  Local UN representatives confirmed the government took FGM/C seriously as a problem and acted credibly to combat the practice.  The UN Population Fund worked with the government and other organizations, including the National Union of Eritrean Women and the National Union of Eritrean Youth and Students, on a variety of education programs to discourage the practice.Other Forms of Gender-based Violence or Harassment:  Bride kidnapping and “virginity testing” were practiced in remote rural areas, but the practices were reportedly decreasing.  The government disseminated messages against these practices in urban areas but was unable to reach rural and nomadic communities.Discrimination:  Family, property, nationality, and inheritance laws provided men and women the same status and rights.  The law required equal pay for equal work, but the government did not enforce the law effectively.  Discrimination against women regarding pay was common in the workplace and occurred in an environment of impunity.  Women, particularly in rural areas, continued to face economic and social discrimination.Reproductive Rights:  There were no reports of coerced abortion or involuntary sterilization on the part of government authorities.Vulnerable populations could provide informed consent to medical treatment affecting reproductive health, including sterilization.  In more rural areas, however, women lacked access to or information concerning reproductive health care.Women in major population centers had access to prenatal and childbirth health-care services.  Rural areas lacked the same level of health care for pregnancy, and there was a lack of skilled health-care attendance at birth.  According to the World Health Organization, between 34 and 40 percent of births from 2010 to 2019 were attended.  Barriers included education and transportation.Women had access to emergency health care, including services for the management of complications arising from abortion; however, in doing so they risked arrest and prosecution for the illegal abortion.The government provided sexual and reproductive health services for survivors of sexual violence, including emergency contraception and postexposure prophylaxis as part of the clinical management of rape.According to the World Bank, the maternal death rate ranged from an estimated 322 to 486 deaths per 100,000 live births.  The high maternal death rate was likely due to such factors as limited health-care services, particularly in rural areas.  No information was available on the adolescent birth rate.  While adolescent births were traditionally a problem in the country and likely contributed to high maternal death rates, the government made a multiyear concerted effort through a National Steering Committee organized in 2017 and a national campaign launched in 2016 to convince individuals to delay marriage and childbirth.In rural areas, women and girls reportedly faced cultural and social barriers related to menstruation and pregnancy that limited their ability to participate equally in society.																																				Systemic Racial or Ethnic Violence and Discrimination										The law prohibited discrimination based on race or ethnicity.  There were reports that governmental discrimination continued against ethnic minorities, particularly against the Afar and the Rashaida, two of nine ethnic groups in the country.																																				Children										Birth Registration:  Registration of a birth within the first three months required only a hospital certificate.  If not registered, a child would not be allowed to attend school but could receive medical treatment at hospitals.Education:  In rural areas parents enrolled fewer daughters than sons in school due to cultural and religious values, but the percentage of girls in school continued to increase.Child Abuse:  The law stated that assault of a person incapable of self-defense or against a person to whom the assailant had an obligation to give special care was an aggravated offense.  The law also criminalized child neglect, with a punishment between one to six months’ imprisonment.  The government did not release information on its enforcement of the law.Child, Early, and Forced Marriage:  The legal minimum age for marriage was 18, unless the woman was pregnant or had already had a child, in which case the minimum was 16.  The minister of justice or someone appointed by the minister could also waive the age requirement.  Officials spoke on the dangers of early marriage and collaborated with UN agencies to educate the public regarding these dangers, and many neighborhood committees actively discouraged the practice.Sexual Exploitation of Children:  The law criminalized most commercial sexual exploitation and practices related to child pornography, but the use of a child for commercial sex was not specifically prohibited by law.  The government did not release crime-related statistics, so it was difficult to determine the extent of any such abuses and whether the government effectively enforced the law against child pornography.  The minimum age for consensual sex was 18.																																				Antisemitism										One Jewish person remained in the country, and he maintained the only synagogue without reported government interference.  There were no known reports of antisemitic incidents.																																				Trafficking in Persons										See the Department of State’s annual Trafficking in Persons Report at  https://www.state.gov/trafficking-in-persons-report/.																																				Acts of Violence, Criminalization, and Other Abuses Based on Sexual Orientation, Gender Identity or Expression, or Sex Characteristics										Criminalization:  The law criminalized consensual same-sex sexual activity “or any other indecent act,” which was punishable by five to seven years’ incarceration.  The government actively enforced the law.  There were no credible efforts to rescind laws that criminalized same-sex sexual activity.Violence and Harassment:  There were no reported cases of violence against LGBTQI+ persons; however, this was likely due to repression that prevented LGBTQI+ persons from speaking out against violence or discrimination, or even publicly acknowledging their identity for fear of the severe social repercussions and discrimination they would suffer if their LGBTQI+ identity was disclosed.Discrimination:  The law did not prohibit discrimination by state and nonstate actors based on sexual orientation, gender identity or expression, or sex characteristics.  There was a strong societal pattern of discrimination against LGBTQI+ persons, but no official cases were available for citation.Availability of Legal Gender Recognition:  Legal gender recognition was not available.Involuntary or Coercive Medical or Psychological Practices:  There were reports of individuals coerced into accepting attempted so-called conversion therapy practices in lieu of prison, but the scope of the practice was not clear.  The international LGBTQI+ human rights organization Outright International reported that widespread social, cultural, and religious intolerance in the region led to recurrent attempts to forcibly “change” LGBTQI+ individuals’ sexual orientation, gender identity, or gender expression through family, religious, medical, or other community pressures.  There were no reports of medically unnecessary surgery on children or nonconsenting intersex persons; the stigma on this topic, however, made it unlikely that any such cases would be discussed publicly.Restrictions of Freedom of Expression, Association, or Peaceful Assembly:  There were no known LGBTQI+ organizations in the country.  The government tightly restricted freedom of expression, including on subjects related to sexual orientation, gender identity or expression, or sex characteristics.  LGBTQI+ individuals were not able to freely assemble, associate, or express themselves publicly due to fear of identification, arrest, and discrimination or violence.																																				Persons with Disabilities										Persons with disabilities were able to access education, health services, and transportation on an equal basis with others.  No laws mandated access for persons with disabilities to public or private buildings, information, and communications.  There were separate schools for children with hearing, vision, mental, and intellectual disabilities.  Most of these schools were private; the government provided some support to them.  The government provided government information and communication on disability concerns in accessible formats.The law prohibited discrimination against persons with disabilities, but the government did not share enforcement information.  The government implemented programs to assist persons with disabilities, especially combat veterans, and dedicated substantial resources to support and train thousands of persons with physical disabilities.  Persons with disabilities in the private sector reportedly experienced discrimination in hiring and in access to the workplace.No information was available on the rate of school attendance for children with disabilities compared to those without disabilities.  There were no known impediments to the ability of persons with disabilities to participate in the restricted civic space.																																				Other Societal Violence or Discrimination										Jehovah’s Witnesses were largely unable to obtain official identification documents, which barred them from most forms of employment.																																					Section 7.													 Worker Rights												    																																																a. Freedom of Association and the Right to Collective Bargaining										The law provided for the right of certain workers to form and join unions, bargain collectively, and conduct strikes.  Labor laws did not fully cover or directly excluded large populations such as civil servants, domestic workers, police, national service conscripts, and those in the informal sector.  The law prohibited antiunion discrimination but provided no remedies in case of antiunion discrimination at recruitment or during employment.  The law did not require reinstatement of union workers other than leaders who had been dismissed for union membership or activities.  The law allowed for the establishment of unions in private-sector workplaces with at least 20 employees and required a minimum of 15 members to form a union but prohibited all nongovernmental gatherings of more than seven persons.  The law permitted workers from multiple smaller worksites to band together to create a “general association,” if there were at least 20 members.  The law required prior authorization from the Ministry of Labor and Human Welfare to establish a union, but it deemed registration granted if the ministry did not respond within one month.  Workers reported the government prevented new independent unions from being formed.The government did not respect or effectively enforce the law.  The Labor Relations Board decided penalties and legal protections against antiunion interference on a case-by-case basis.  Penalties were not necessarily commensurate with those for denials of civil rights.  Penalties were rarely applied against violators.The government did not respect freedom of association and the right to collective bargaining.  No independent unions existed.  For the few formal workers in the private sector, the only option for collective representation was the one umbrella trade union, the National Confederation of Eritrean Workers (NCEW).  The confederation was directly linked to the ruling party and took no action against party-owned enterprises.  The government kept all unions under close scrutiny, including the government-linked NCEW.  In general, no NGOs were permitted to play a role in promoting the rights of workers in the country.																																				b. Prohibition of Forced or Compulsory Labor										See the Department of State’s annual Trafficking in Persons Report at  https://www.state.gov/trafficking-in-persons-report/.																																				c. Prohibition of Child Labor and Minimum Age for Employment										See the Department of Labor’s Findings on the Worst Forms of Child Labor at  https://www.dol.gov/agencies/ilab/resources/reports/child-labor/findings/.&nbsp;																																				d. Discrimination (see section 6)																																														e. Acceptable Conditions of Work										Wage and Hour Laws:  The national minimum wage for employees of party-owned enterprises and government employees was below the poverty line.  There was no national minimum wage for private-sector workers.  The law provided for a standard workweek of 48 hours and no more than two hours per day of overtime, but it included exceptions for when an employee was absent or when there was “urgent work.”  The law entitled workers, except for those employed in national service, to overtime pay.  The legal rest period was one day per week, although most employees received one and one-half days.Occupational Safety and Health:  No published occupational safety and health (OSH) standards existed.  Workers had the right to remove themselves from situations that endangered health or safety without jeopardy to their employment, although workers in the national service generally could not remove themselves from situations that endangered health or safety without a medical exemption.  Each government enterprise had a separate agreement with the local union defining the work standards, including OSH regulations, for that enterprise.  There were 168 government enterprises in the country, accounting for most large-scale employers.Wage, Hour, and OSH Enforcement:  The Ministry of Labor and Human Welfare was responsible for enforcement of minimum wage, hour, and OSH laws.  The government did not effectively enforce the law or the negotiated standards.  The UN Human Rights Council reported the government perpetrated abusive working conditions in national service positions.  Penalties were not commensurate with those for similar crimes and there was no information available that penalties were applied against violators.  The ministry employed 28 inspectors, which was insufficient to enforce compliance.  The NCEW reported every enterprise had an inspection at least once per year, which was then reviewed by the enterprise, the union, and the ministry.  Inspectors had the authority to make unannounced inspections and demand changes, but they were not able to initiate sanctions.  The government did not report on violations of minimum wage, hour, or OSH laws.Approximately 80 percent of the population worked in the informal sector, and the government did not enforce labor laws in this sector.																																				    							View report by:																				Afghanistan											Albania											Algeria											Andorra											Angola											Antigua and Barbuda											Argentina											Armenia											Australia											Austria											Azerbaijan											Bahrain											Bangladesh											Barbados											Belarus											Belgium											Belize											Benin											Bhutan											Bolivia											Bosnia and Herzegovina											Botswana											Brazil											Brunei											Bulgaria											Burkina Faso											Burma											Burundi											Cabo Verde											Cambodia											Cameroon											Canada											Central African Republic											Chad											Chile											China (Includes Hong Kong, Macau, and Tibet)											Colombia											Comoros											Costa Rica											Côte d&#8217;Ivoire											Croatia											Cuba											Cyprus											Czech Republic											Democratic Republic of the Congo											Denmark											Djibouti											Dominica											Dominican Republic											Ecuador											Egypt											El Salvador											Equatorial Guinea											Eritrea											Estonia											Eswatini											Ethiopia											Fiji											Finland											France											Gabon											Georgia											Germany											Ghana											Greece											Grenada											Guatemala											Guinea											Guinea-Bissau											Guyana											Haiti											Honduras											Hungary											Iceland											India											Indonesia											Iran											Iraq											Ireland											Israel, West Bank and Gaza											Italy											Jamaica											Japan											Jordan											Kazakhstan											Kenya											Kiribati											Kosovo											Kuwait											Kyrgyz Republic											Laos											Latvia											Lebanon											Lesotho											Liberia											Libya											Liechtenstein											Lithuania											Luxembourg											Madagascar											Malawi											Malaysia											Maldives											Mali											Malta											Marshall Islands											Mauritania											Mauritius											Mexico											Micronesia											Moldova											Monaco											Mongolia											Montenegro											Morocco											Mozambique											Namibia											Nauru											Nepal											New Zealand											Nicaragua											Niger											Nigeria											North Korea											North Macedonia											Norway											Oman											Pakistan											Palau											Panama											Papua New Guinea											Paraguay											Peru											Philippines											Poland											Portugal											Qatar											Republic of the Congo											Romania											Russia											Rwanda											Saint Kitts and Nevis											Saint Lucia											Saint Vincent and the Grenadines											Samoa											San Marino											Sao Tome and Principe											Saudi Arabia											Senegal											Serbia											Seychelles											Sierra Leone											Singapore											Slovakia											Slovenia											Solomon Islands											Somalia											South Africa											South Korea											South Sudan											Spain											Sri Lanka											Sudan											Suriname											Sweden											Switzerland											Syria											Taiwan											Tajikistan											Tanzania											Thailand											The Gambia											The Netherlands											Timor-Leste											Togo											The Bahamas											Tonga											Trinidad and Tobago											Tunisia											Turkey (Türkiye)											Turkmenistan											Tuvalu											Uganda											Ukraine											United Arab Emirates											United Kingdom											Uruguay											Uzbekistan											Vanuatu											Venezuela											Vietnam											Yemen											Zambia											Zimbabwe															Build A Custom Report																						On This Page				search													>																										EXECUTIVE SUMMARY																Section 1. Respect for the Integrity of the Person																																							a. Arbitrary Deprivation of Life and Other Unlawful or Politically Motivated Killings																																																						b. Disappearance																																																						c. Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman, or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, and Other Related Abuses																																																				Prison and Detention Center Conditions																																																																																				d. Arbitrary Arrest or Detention																																																				Arrest Procedures and Treatment of Detainees																																																																																				e. Denial of Fair Public Trial																																																				Trial Procedures																																												Political Prisoners and Detainees																																																																																				f. Transnational Repression																																																						g. Property Seizure and Restitution																																																						h. Arbitrary or Unlawful Interference with Privacy, Family, Home, or Correspondence																																																						i. Conflict-related Abuses																																																			Section 2. Respect for Civil Liberties																																							a. Freedom of Expression, Including for Members of the Press and Other Media																																																				Internet Freedom																																																																																				b. Freedoms of Peaceful Assembly and Association																																																				Freedom of Peaceful Assembly																																												Freedom of Association																																																																																				c. Freedom of Religion																																																						d. Freedom of Movement and the Right to Leave the Country																																																						e. Protection of Refugees																																																			Section 3. Freedom to Participate in the Political Process																																							Elections and Political Participation																																																			Section 4. Corruption in Government																Section 5. Governmental Posture Towards International and Nongovernmental Monitoring and Investigation of Alleged Abuses of Human Rights																Section 6. Discrimination and Societal Abuses																																							Women																																																						Systemic Racial or Ethnic Violence and Discrimination																																																						Children																																																						Antisemitism																																																						Trafficking in Persons																																																						Acts of Violence, Criminalization, and Other Abuses Based on Sexual Orientation, Gender Identity or Expression, or Sex Characteristics																																																						Persons with Disabilities																																																						Other Societal Violence or Discrimination																																																			Section 7. Worker Rights																																							a. Freedom of Association and the Right to Collective Bargaining																																																						b. Prohibition of Forced or Compulsory Labor																																																						c. Prohibition of Child Labor and Minimum Age for Employment																																																						d. Discrimination (see section 6)																																																						e. Acceptable Conditions of Work																																																									Tags																					Bureau of African Affairs																								Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor																								Eritrea
- Religious Freedom Designations HomeOffice of the SpokespersonPress Releases&#8230;Religious Freedom Designations				hide		if(window.jQuery) {		jQuery( document ).ready(function() {			if (jQuery(".bc_middle").hasClass("collapse")) {				jQuery(".bc_ellipse").click(function(){					jQuery(".bc_hide").toggleClass("visible");					jQuery(".bc_middle").toggle();					jQuery(".bc_ellipse").toggle();					jQuery(".bc_content").toggleClass("noflex");					jQuery(".block_breadcrumbs_content").toggleClass("noflex");				});				jQuery(".bc_hide").click(function(){					jQuery(".bc_hide").toggleClass("visible");					jQuery(".bc_middle").toggle();					jQuery(".bc_ellipse").toggle();					jQuery(".bc_content").toggleClass("noflex");					jQuery(".block_breadcrumbs_content").toggleClass("noflex");				});			} else {				jQuery(".bc_ellipse").hide();			}		});	}																										Religious Freedom Designations																																		Press Statement																														January 4, 2024																																							Advancing the freedom of religion or belief has been a core objective of U.S. foreign policy ever since Congress passed and enacted the International Religious Freedom Act in 1998. &nbsp;As part of that enduring commitment,&nbsp;I have designated Burma, the People’s Republic of China, Cuba, the DPRK, Eritrea, Iran, Nicaragua, Pakistan, Russia, Saudi Arabia, Tajikistan, and Turkmenistan as Countries of Particular Concern for having engaged in or tolerated particularly severe violations of religious freedom.&nbsp; In addition, I have designated Algeria, Azerbaijan, the Central African Republic, Comoros, and Vietnam as Special Watch List countries for engaging in or tolerating severe violations of religious freedom.&nbsp; Finally, I have designated al-Shabab, Boko Haram,&nbsp;Hayat Tahrir al-Sham,&nbsp;the Houthis, ISIS-Sahel, ISIS-West Africa, al-Qa&#8217;ida affiliate Jamaat Nasr al-Islam wal-Muslimin, and the Taliban as Entities of Particular Concern.Significant violations of religious freedom also occur in countries that are not designated. &nbsp;Governments must end abuses such as attacks on members of religious minority communities and their places of worship, communal violence and lengthy imprisonment for peaceful expression, transnational repression, and calls to violence against religious communities, among other violations that occur in too many places around the world.&nbsp; The challenges to religious freedom across the globe are structural, systemic, and deeply entrenched. &nbsp;But with thoughtful, sustained commitment from those who are unwilling to accept hatred, intolerance, and persecution as the status quo we will one day see a world where all people live with dignity and equality.						Tags																					Algeria																								Azerbaijan																								Burma																								Central African Republic																								China																								Comoros																								Cuba																								Eritrea																																														Human Rights and Democracy																															Iran																								Nicaragua																								North Korea																								Office of International Religious Freedom																								Office of the Spokesperson																								Pakistan																																Religious Freedom																															Russia																								Saudi Arabia																								The Secretary of State																								Tajikistan																								Turkmenistan																								Vietnam
- 23rd Anniversary of the Algiers Agreement between the Governments of Ethiopia and Eritrea Matthew Miller, Department SpokespersonTwenty-three years ago today, Ethiopia and Eritrea, with the support of the international community, concluded the Algiers Agreement and committed to demarcate a common border.  In 2018, in a historic peace agreement, both countries recommitted to respect the borders as established.  On this anniversary, it is more important than ever that the sovereignty and territorial integrity of both countries be respected.  The United States reiterates our support for the Algiers Agreement and encourages Ethiopia and Eritrea to work together, in the spirit of the peace they forged, toward a more stable and prosperous region.
- 1st Anniversary of Ethiopia’s Cessation of Hostilities Agreement Antony J. Blinken, Secretary of StateA year ago in Pretoria, the African Union and the AU High-Level Panel working with observers from the Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD), the United Nations, and the United States facilitated the Cessation of Hostilities Agreement (COHA) between the Government of Ethiopia and the Tigray People&#8217;s Liberation Front (TPLF). The Agreement silenced the guns and ended a horrific two-year war that killed hundreds of thousands and forced millions to flee their homes. Today, on the first anniversary of the COHA, the United States remembers those who lost their lives and suffered atrocities. We also recommit to supporting peace and justice for all Ethiopians.The United States welcomes the significant progress made on COHA implementation, including the establishment of the Tigray Interim Regional Administration, resumption of essential services, provision of humanitarian assistance, facilitation of access for international human rights monitors in Tigray, and implementation of the AU Monitoring, Verification, and Compliance Mechanism. The government and Transitional Justice Working Group of Experts have taken important steps toward the establishment of a national transitional justice policy.It is important, however, to acknowledge the challenges that remain. While TPLF forces have disarmed their heavy weapons and begun to demobilize, more actions are needed to bring lasting peace and stability to Tigray. Eritrean forces must fully withdraw. Both Ethiopia and Eritrea must refrain from provocation and respect the independence, sovereignty, and territorial integrity of all countries in the region. We also remain concerned about ongoing conflicts – in Amhara, Oromia, and elsewhere – that threaten Ethiopia’s fragile peace. Continued human rights violations and abuses by multiple actors and the circulation of toxic rhetoric further erode a social fabric worn thin by war.Looking ahead, the United States stands ready to support concrete action to advance implementation of the COHA – including a comprehensive disarmament, demobilization, and reintegration program – and to promote peace, justice, prosperity, and accountability nationwide.  We encourage the publication and implementation of a credible, inclusive, and victim-centered national transitional justice policy. We urge continued investment in an inclusive and genuine national dialogue. We also urgently call for dialogue to address the conflicts in Amhara and Oromia.The United States remains steadfast in its commitment to working with the Ethiopian government and people toward our shared goal of a united, peaceful, and prosperous Ethiopia.
- Eritrea HomeReportsBureau of Economic and Business Affairs2023 Investment Climate Statements&#8230;Eritrea				hide	document.addEventListener("DOMContentLoaded", function(event) {	if(window.jQuery) {		jQuery( document ).ready(function() {			if (jQuery(".bc_middle").hasClass("collapse")) {				jQuery(".bc_ellipse").click(function(){					jQuery(".bc_hide").toggleClass("visible");					jQuery(".bc_middle").toggle();					jQuery(".bc_ellipse").toggle();					jQuery(".bc_content").toggleClass("noflex");					jQuery(".block_breadcrumbs_content").toggleClass("noflex");				});				jQuery(".bc_hide").click(function(){					jQuery(".bc_hide").toggleClass("visible");					jQuery(".bc_middle").toggle();					jQuery(".bc_ellipse").toggle();					jQuery(".bc_content").toggleClass("noflex");					jQuery(".block_breadcrumbs_content").toggleClass("noflex");				});			} else {				jQuery(".bc_ellipse").hide();			}		});	}});																							2023 Investment Climate Statements: Eritrea																																																																																												 In this section										/																							EXECUTIVE SUMMARY																																													EXECUTIVE SUMMARY																															1. Openness To, and Restrictions Upon, Foreign Investment																																																									Policies Towards Foreign Direct Investment																																																																											Limits on Foreign Control and Right to Private Ownership and Establishment																																																																											Other Investment Policy Reviews																																																																											Business Facilitation																																																																											Outward Investment																																																																																	2. Bilateral Investment and Taxation Treaties																															3. Legal Regime																																																									Transparency of the Regulatory System																																																																											International Regulatory Considerations																																																																											Legal System and Judicial Independence																																																																											Laws and Regulations on Foreign Direct Investment																																																																											Competition and Antitrust Laws																																																																											Expropriation and Compensation																																																																											Dispute Settlement																																																																			ICSID Convention and New York Convention																																																								Investor-State Dispute Settlement																																																								International Commercial Arbitration and Foreign Courts																																																																																																																		Bankruptcy Regulations																																																																																	4. Industrial Policies																																																									Investment Incentives																																																																											Foreign Trade Zones/Free Ports/Trade Facilitation																																																																											Performance and Data Localization Requirements																																																																																	5. Protection of Property Rights																																																									Real Property																																																																											Intellectual Property Rights																																																																																	6. Financial Sector																																																									Capital Markets and Portfolio Investment																																																																											Money and Banking System																																																																											Foreign Exchange and Remittances																																																																			Foreign Exchange																																																								Remittance Policies																																																																																																																		Sovereign Wealth Funds																																																																																	7. State-Owned Enterprises																																																									Privatization Program																																																																																	8. Responsible Business Conduct																																																									Additional Resources																																																																											Climate Issues																																																																																	9. Corruption																																																									Resources to Report Corruption																																																																																	10. Political and Security Environment																															11. Labor Policies and Practices																															12. U.S. International Development Finance Corporation (DFC), and Other Investment Insurance or Development Finance Programs																															13. Foreign Direct Investment Statistics																															14. Contact for More Information																																																					EXECUTIVE SUMMARY				Eritrea’s investment climate is not conducive to U.S. investment. U.S. economic sanctions, the lack of a commercial code, disconnection from international financial systems for all but government-to-government transactions, and strict government control of all imports and exports severely limit foreign investment.  Most private businesses are small, family-owned storefronts. With rare exception, businesses of size or scale are state controlled or run by the sole political party, the Peoples Front for Democracy and Justice (PFDJ).  The Government of the State of Eritrea (GSE) is the largest employer in the country, and most citizens are employed by the country’s national service program, which often results in indefinite terms of forced labor at very low wages in a wide range of public sector positions.  The national currency, the Eritrean Nakfa, is not convertible and there are restrictions on the repatriation of profits out of the country.  The national budget is not public.  The judiciary is not independent or transparent.  There is no freedom of the press, international journalists are often barred from entry, and the government maintains control of the media.  Most profitable investments in Eritrea come about through direct negotiation with the PFDJ rather than market-based private investment. Eritrea imports over 70% of its wheat from the Russian Federation and Ukraine region. Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine has not impacted inflation or food security supply chains.Table 1: Key Metrics and RankingsMeasureYearIndex/RankWebsite AddressTI Corruption Perceptions Index2022162 of 180http://www.transparency.org/research/cpi/overviewGlobal Innovation Index2022N/Ahttps://www.globalinnovationindex.org/analysis-indicatorU.S. FDI in partner country ($M USD, historical stock positions)2021$-2.0 millionhttps://apps.bea.gov/international/factsheetWorld Bank GNI per capita2011$610http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/NY.GNP.PCAP.CD																																					1. Openness To, and Restrictions Upon, Foreign Investment						    																																																Policies Towards Foreign Direct Investment										The Eritrean government professes a desire for more diversified FDI.  However, strict governmental control of the economy, circulation of currency, access to foreign currency, land, labor, and capital, and the lack of a robust business and investment legal code makes private investment difficult, time-consuming, and financially risky.The official 1994 Investment Proclamation No. 59/1994 states that all sectors (excluding domestic retail, domestic wholesale, import, and commission agency companies without a bilateral agreement of reciprocity) are open to any investors.  In practice, this law has been suspended and the ruling PFDJ determines the sectors and defines the terms under which private investment is accepted.The Investment Center, established in 1998, operates directly under the Office of the President; it does not publish any information related to its activities. In the past, the Center conducted public outreach to encourage members of the Eritrean diaspora to invest in Eritrea.  The Center has not conducted a large public event since 2012; senior Center officials have stated that the time for investments is not appropriate because investment developments must follow political developments.There is no business ombudsman in Eritrea or other mechanisms to prioritize retention or maintain dialogue with existing investors.																																				Limits on Foreign Control and Right to Private Ownership and Establishment										In practice, there is no fundamental “right” for either foreign or domestic private entities to establish or run business enterprises free from government interference.  All sectors of the economy are tightly controlled by the GSE, most large enterprises are either entirely or partially owned by the government or the PFDJ, and the government can order a business to close without explanation or legal recourse. There have been no significant changes since the 2022 Investment Climate Statement.There are both statutory and de facto limits on foreign ownership and control of enterprises.  All foreign-owned mines must give a 10% stake to the Eritrean National Mining Corporation (ENAMCO), and ENAMCO has the option to buy another 30% equity in a project.  Regulations in other fields are not well established. There are no waivers or special conditions under which foreign ownership or control may proceed if met.With some exceptions, such as mining, investment is de facto prohibited in most sectors of the economy.  The government has encouraged investment in the mining sector, and mining-specific regulations were adopted in 2011.  There are not many other large foreign investments in the country.  The few foreign enterprises operating in Eritrea do so under non-public agreements negotiated directly between the companies or countries and a small group of officials from the GSE and the PFDJ.In many cases, the GSE assigns national service labor to foreign owned enterprises or ensures that a sub-contract is issued to government owned companies who will then also utilize labor from the national service.There is no transparent GSE screening mechanism for approving inbound foreign investment.																																				Other Investment Policy Reviews										The GSE has not undergone a recent third-party investment policy review. No civil society organizations have provided useful reviews of investment policy-related concerns.																																				Business Facilitation										The government has made no known efforts to facilitate business in Eritrea. Though Eritrea did sign an MoU related to the People’s Republic of China’s Belt and Road initiative in November 2021, the terms of their agreements are not public. The government does not have a business registration website.  Businesses are required to register with six government offices (the Business License Office, the Ministry of Information, the Inland Revenue Department, the Ministry of Trade and Industry, the Ministry of Labor and Social Welfare, and the local municipality), and the registration process usually takes 84 days, according to the World Bank’s Doing Business report. According to local experts, if an agreement is reached with the government and the PFDJ, this process can be expedited significantly for foreign businesses.																																				Outward Investment										Given the low level of capital accumulation in the economy, Eritrea is not a likely provider of foreign capital.  As part of its efforts to direct capital towards development, the GSE’s laws strictly control capital flows (including payment for the importation of goods), currency exchange, and restricts domestic investors from making large investments abroad.  For example, per person monthly bank withdrawals are limited to 5,000 Nakfa ($333), and Eritreans are generally unable to withdraw dollars.																																												2. Bilateral Investment and Taxation Treaties						    																						The GSE has signed Bilateral Investment Treaties (BITs) with Italy, Netherlands, Qatar, and Uganda.  Only the BIT with Italy has entered into force.  The GSE has no bilateral taxation treaty with the United States. Eritrea is not a member of the OECD Inclusive Framework on Base Erosion and Profit Shifting.																																		3. Legal Regime						    																																																Transparency of the Regulatory System										The GSE is not transparent.  Legal and regulatory systems are not transparent.  Ministries are empowered to (and do) issue new regulations, subject to PFDJ approval, with no public debate.  There are no informal regulatory processes managed by nongovernment organizations or private sector associations. New regulations are released without any public announcement; people only learn of them through word-of-mouth. There is no publicly accessible location (online or otherwise) to find key proclamations, laws, or regulatory actions.  One can sometimes find the regulations for sale at bookshops. There is no public oversight of government actions nor legal recourse against government actions taken.The government does not promote any form of transparency, including promoting or requiring companies’ environmental, social, and governance disclosures.The seeming arbitrariness of government regulation and action hinder the economy.  Officials occasionally shutter businesses without explanation, leaving other businesses to wonder (and often spread rumors) as to what happened.Public finances and debt obligations are not made public.																																				International Regulatory Considerations										Eritrea is a founding member of the Common Market for Eastern and Southern Africa (COMESA).  It also belongs to the Community of Sahel-Saharan States and is in the process of resuming its membership with the Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) after suspending its IGAD membership in 2007.  COMESA decisions are binding on all member states, but as they are made by consensus this does not cause conflict.Eritrea is one of only 10 United Nations member states that has no affiliation with the World Trade Organization.																																				Legal System and Judicial Independence										The Eritrean legal system is based on the Ethiopian system that was in place at the time of independence in 1993.  It is primarily a civil law system, though these laws are deeply influenced by traditional law.Eritrea has a written commercial code, derived from the Ethiopian commercial code in effect at the time of independence along with several proclamations to update the code.  A full rewrite was done as part of a 2015 overhaul of the major legal codes, but these were never implemented.  Any international company doing business in Eritrea will need the assistance of a local attorney versed in the complexities of the Eritrean legal system.The judicial system is not fully independent of the executive.  Judges are National Service employees, and thus work for the executive branch.  Many enforcement decisions, and especially those that relate to the commercial or labor codes, are adjudicated solely through the national court system and are appealable.																																				Laws and Regulations on Foreign Direct Investment										Eritrea’s legal system plays only a minor role in foreign direct investment. All large-scale foreign direct investment is part of an opaque political process and is managed by non-public agreements negotiated directly with a small group of officials in the government and the ruling party.Eritrea does not have a website for foreign investors to learn about relevant laws, rules, procedures, and reporting requirements.There have been no new major laws, regulations, or judicial decisions announced in the past year.																																				Competition and Antitrust Laws										There are no indications that the GSE makes any effort to promote market competition. All large-scale economic activity is either fully controlled by the PFDJ or jointly controlled by it in partnership with international companies operating under agreements negotiated directly with the GSE/PFDJ. The GSE is not transparent in its norms and procedures and there are no appeals process via the courts/judicial system.																																				Expropriation and Compensation										There is no transparent process that would allow an individual or company to appeal any GSE expropriation of property.The government expropriated 22 health clinics from the Catholic Church in 2019, citing a law prohibiting religious organizations from providing social services, and the Italian School of Asmara in 2020.  In September 2022, the last two remaining Catholic schools were closed or converted into public schools. The Catholic Church said there was no due process or ability to appeal the decision. Non-state-run community and religious owned schools have been previously expropriated by the government. Private property and businesses are also routinely expropriated but do not make the news.																																				Dispute Settlement																										ICSID Convention and New York Convention						Eritrea is not a member of the International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID) Convention or the New York Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards.						Investor-State Dispute Settlement						Eritrea is not a signatory to a treaty or investment agreement in which binding international arbitration is recognized. Eritrea has no investment agreement with the United States.Due to a lack of government transparency, it is impossible to determine the number of investment disputes involving U.S. persons or foreign investors. Because of the minimal level of foreign investment, the number of disputes is presumably also very small.Local Eritrean courts do not recognize or enforce foreign arbitral awards issued against the GSE.  There is no known history of extrajudicial action against foreign investors.						International Commercial Arbitration and Foreign Courts						Some disputes between private parties are settled in traditional village courts. There is no independent, domestic arbitration body in Eritrea.The local courts do not recognize or enforce foreign arbitral awards, nor do they recognize or enforce judgements of foreign courts.There are no known investment disputes involving SOEs.																										Bankruptcy Regulations										Bankruptcy is addressed in the Eritrean Civil Law and the proclamations amending it; however due to lack of transparency in the court system, it is impossible to determine what rights, if any, creditors, shareholders, and holders of other financial contracts have in practice.  No information is available on how bankruptcy is handled in practice.																																												4. Industrial Policies						    																																																Investment Incentives										Any investment incentives offered to foreign investors, if they exist, are negotiated directly between a small group of GSE and PFDJ officials and foreign governments or companies. There is no published investment incentive framework available for review by all potential foreign investors.For mining projects, the government requires the ability to buy up to 30% of the equity in the project, in addition to the 10% equity they retain by law.																																				Foreign Trade Zones/Free Ports/Trade Facilitation										There are two designated Free Trade Zones in Eritrea: 1) The Free Trade Zone in the port city of Massawa, and 2) the Free Trade Zone along the common border between Eritrea and Sudan. However, neither FTZ is operational.																																				Performance and Data Localization Requirements										The few large foreign enterprises allowed to operate in Eritrea are believed to employ large amounts of non-domestically produced or acquired goods and technology. However, due to a lack of transparency, it is impossible to determine if their agreements encourage or require them to use some minimal amounts of local goods or technology.There are no public or transparent procedures for establishing performance requirements for domestic or foreign enterprises.In Eritrea, there are no requirements for foreign IT providers to turn over source code and/or provide access to encryption. The lack of internet and cellphone data infrastructure (internet penetration in the country is estimated at 1.3%) impede data transfer from Eritrea, but there are no publicly stated policies that impede data transmission.  There are no publicly stated rules on local data storage.																																												5. Protection of Property Rights						    																																																Real Property										All land in Eritrea is owned by the GSE, and the right to use that land is granted to citizens based on a variety of factors. In practice, there are often disputes over ownership of buildings, though it is unclear what percentage of titles are disputed, and no effort has been made in the last five years to clean up the registries.Foreigners are forbidden by law from owning real property; however, there are a number of exceptions to that law. If a foreign business is able to invest in Eritrea, the government will often provide unused land for the business’ use. People and businesses can be summarily ejected from their property at any time. If legally purchased property stays unoccupied for years, the government can force the owner to rent it out or, in rare cases, the government can seize the property.																																				Intellectual Property Rights										Eritrea is not included in the United States Trade Representative (USTR) Special 301 Report or the Notorious Markets List.Under Eritrean law, the Copyright section of the Civil Code addresses intellectual property (IP) rights. Due to a lack of transparency, it is difficult to determine if and how IP rights are protected in practice.  Legal structures are weak, and IPR protection and enforcement are rare to non-existent.  The government does not maintain publicly available statistics on law enforcement or judicial actions.For additional information about national laws and points of contact at local IP offices, please see WIPO’s country profiles at  http://www.wipo.int/directory/en/. 																																												6. Financial Sector						    																																																Capital Markets and Portfolio Investment										There is no functioning public market for capital in Eritrea, nor is there an established stock market.The GSE fully controls the banking and financial sectors; there are no transparent mechanisms to facilitate the free flow of financial resources into portfolio investments.  There is no transparency in decisions regarding credit allocation.  Foreign investors are not able to get credit on the local market. The private sector has the option of borrowing from the two banking institutions, the Commercial Bank of Eritrea and the Housing and Commercial Bank of Eritrea, with collateral and at high interest rates. Transfers of foreign currency are heavily restricted due, in part, to government concerns about foreign terrorist financing and maintaining adequate foreign currency reserves.The GSE does not respect the International Monetary Fund’s (IMP) Article VIII, regarding restrictions on payments and transfers for international transactions.																																				Money and Banking System										Due to restrictions on the use and hoarding of cash, most Eritreans now have bank accounts and use banking services.  However, there is excessive regulation on banking accounts (including low monthly limits on withdrawals and restrictions on sending foreign currency abroad) and obsolete technology at the banks, which are frequently subjected to extended power cuts, forcing them to cease or limit services.  There are no automated teller machines in Eritrea and there is no infrastructure to enable the use of credit or debit cards.The estimated total assets of the country’s largest banks are unclear.  The Bank of Eritrea is the country’s central bank.  Foreign banks are not allowed to open branches or establish operations in Eritrea.  Foreigners, who are legal residents, are able to establish bank accounts, but are subject to the same monthly Nakfa withdrawal limits as Eritreans.Eritrea does not currently have any correspondent banking relationships.  Per a 1994 regulation, locally based entities are forbidden from maintaining foreign bank accounts.																																				Foreign Exchange and Remittances																										Foreign Exchange						Organizations in Eritrea have often found it difficult to move foreign currency into or out of Eritrea, even to pay essential bills abroad.  National Bank of Eritrea must approve and manage all fund transfers into and out of Eritrea and can arbitrarily decide to disapprove a transfer.  Some international organizations have resorted to bringing money by courier.  Local funds are not freely convertible to any world currency.  The exchange rate is determined by the government, and the rate does not fluctuate.						Remittance Policies						As the major large investments in Eritrea are non-transparent collaborations with the GSE or PFDJ, the companies running them may be able to remit investment income in ways not available to the general public.  Small- and medium-sized enterprises often have difficulties moving investment income abroad due to strict withdrawal limitations (for cash) and the requirement that all electronic fund transfers be executed through the National Bank of Eritrea, as explained above.																										Sovereign Wealth Funds										Eritrea has no sovereign wealth fund.																																												7. State-Owned Enterprises						    																						The few large enterprises that operate in the economy are owned and operated by the GSE, the PFDJ, or are jointly operated with the GSE or PFDJ under an agreement with a foreign country or company.  There is no official list of state-owned enterprises (SOEs), but they dominate all sectors, especially agribusiness, construction, import/export, and financing.  The mining sector is dominated by joint ventures between foreign companies and the state-owned ENAMCO.SOEs operating in the domestic market receive non-market-based advantages from the GSE, such as the right to import and export through the PFDJ-controlled import/export entity, and preferential access to goods imported by other SOEs and government offices. As mentioned above, SOEs dominate in all sectors and must operate in accordance with commercial considerations.																										Privatization Program										The government has often expressed its interest in privatizing the economy but has made no efforts yet to do so and is generally believed to be suspicious of private enterprise.																																												8. Responsible Business Conduct						    																						Most large enterprises in Eritrea are operated directly or jointly by the GSE or PJDF, and there is no general awareness of the concept of “responsible business conduct” (RBC).  However, on some issues, especially environmental protection, many businesses take great care to act responsibly.  Due to a lack of transparency, it is unknown if the GSE has taken any measures to encourage RBC; if it has, these efforts are not well publicized.The GSE does not have requirements for businesses to conduct due diligence or reporting on human rights conduct. According to numerous reports from international NGOs (operating outside of Eritrea), the United Nations, and the U.S. government, the GSE does not fairly and effectively enforce its domestic laws in relation to human rights, including labor rights. Any products created by state-owned, or parastatal organizations is likely to involve forced labor through the government’s national service system. However, Eritrea has rather stringent safeguards for environmental protections.There are no public capital markets inside of Eritrea and only a small number of publicly traded companies operate inside of Eritrea. Due to lack of transparency, it is impossible to determine if the GSE has established any standard of corporate governance, accounting, and executive compensation to protect shareholders.There are no independent NGOs, investment funds, worker organizations, unions, or business associations in Eritrea.Due to lack of transparency, it is impossible to determine if the GSE encourages adherence to OECD Due Diligence Guidance for Responsible Supply Chains of Minerals from Conflict-Afflicted and High-Risk Areas. Individual mining companies participate in programs such as the Voluntary Principles on Security and Human Rights, but this participation is not mandated by the GSE.																										Additional Resources										Department of StateCountry Reports on Human Rights Practices ( https://www.state.gov/reports-bureau-of-democracy-human-rights-and-labor/country-reports-on-human-rights-practices/)Trafficking in Persons Report ( https://www.state.gov/trafficking-in-persons-report/)Guidance on Implementing the &#8220;UN Guiding Principles&#8221; for Transactions Linked to Foreign Government End-Users for Products or Services with Surveillance Capabilities ( https://www.state.gov/key-topics-bureau-of-democracy-human-rights-and-labor/due-diligence-guidance/)U.S. National Contact Point for the OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises ( https://www.state.gov/u-s-national-contact-point-for-the-oecd-guidelines-for-multinational-enterprises/)Xinjiang Supply Chain Business Advisory ( https://www.state.gov/xinjiang-supply-chain-business-advisory/)Department of the TreasuryOFAC Recent Actions ( https://home.treasury.gov/policy-issues/financial-sanctions/recent-actions )Department of LaborFindings on the Worst Forms of Child Labor Report ( https://www.dol.gov/agencies/ilab/resources/reports/child-labor/findings  )List of Goods Produced by Child Labor or Forced Labor ( https://www.dol.gov/agencies/ilab/reports/child-labor/list-of-goods )Sweat &amp; Toil: Child Labor, Forced Labor, and Human Trafficking Around the World ( https://www.dol.gov/general/apps/ilab )Comply Chain ( https://www.dol.gov/ilab/complychain/ )																																				Climate Issues										The government is developing a “National Adaptation Plan,” which includes improving water management, planting trees, and improving degraded land. There are no expectations on private business at this point; this is a government-led effort. However, it has no plan to reach net-zero carbon emissions.The GSE has made coal production illegal for almost 20 years to prevent deforestation. However, there are legal coal and firewood businesses operating throughout the country, which buy coal and wood illegally.The GSE does not share or publicize its public procurement policies.																																												9. Corruption						    																						Eritrean laws criminalize corruption by public officials and by any who claim influence over public officials, which would include family members and political parties.  Due to limited transparency within the government, it is unclear the extent to which the GSE applies these laws, though evidence suggests little corruption among high-level government officials but significant petty corruption at the local level.There are no specific provisions concerning conflicts of interest.There is no available information to suggest that the GSE requires private companies to establish internal codes that prohibit bribery of public officials, and it is unlikely that the government does so.  It is likely that some, but not all, of the large foreign private companies use internal controls, ethics, or compliance programs to detect and prevent bribery.Eritrea is not a signatory to the United Nations Convention Against Corruption or any other international anti-corruption initiatives.  There are no independent NGOs in Eritrea, including those that investigate corruption.  There are no U.S. firms in Eritrea to provide an opinion on corruption as an impediment to FDI, but it is unlikely to be a serious impediment.																										Resources to Report Corruption										There are no government agencies that operate independently of the Office of the President and the PFDJ to whom one can report corruption. There are also no independent “watchdog” organizations working within Eritrea.																																												10. Political and Security Environment						    																						There is no history of politically motivated violence or civil disturbance.In 2015, there were public reports that a Canadian-operated mine in Eritrea was damaged by explosions caused by either bombs or mortars. The mine continued to operate and there were conflicting accounts of who was responsible for the explosion(s).  This one incident does not seem to have had a continuing impact on the investment environment.Due to Eritrea’s single-party political system, it is difficult to know how politicized or secure the situation in the country is, as information on public opinion and security matters does not flow freely. In November 2020 the GSE intervened in the northern Ethiopia conflict. In November 2020, the Tigray People’s Liberation Front fired missiles at Asmara. As of January 2023, Eritrea has largely withdrawn military forces from northern Ethiopia.																																		11. Labor Policies and Practices						    																						The most important factor influencing the labor market in Eritrea is the GSE’s National Service program, which, in practice, due to the GSE’s claim of a long-standing state of emergency, subjects a large portion of the labor force to indefinite government service, very low wages across a large swath of the employment spectrum, and the inability to pursue alternative employment on penalty of imprisonment. All university graduates require a release from National Service before they can legally pursue other employment opportunities.There is no reliable data on unemployment. Foreign labor is mostly unknown, aside from the small number of multinational companies. Migrant labor, in the sense of Eritreans moving from place to place for work, is mostly restricted to the agricultural sector, and even there it is a small part of the labor force given the dominance of subsistence farming in the agricultural sector. Female participation in the economy is high.While there are shortages of specialized labor in many sectors of the economy, particularly in the areas of administration, the international mining facilities are largely able to find enough sufficiently skilled workers; in many cases these are National Service employees seconded from a relevant ministry.  Many small Eritrean companies blame National Service for the paucity of skilled employees available in the market.  Leaving a National Service position without authorized release can result in imprisonment.   Eritrea is a Tier 3 country for Trafficking in Persons, which carries with it restrictions on eligibility for U.S. government assistance. The informal economy plays a significant role in the Eritrean economy, though there is no data to show how significant. Those who evade National Service are only able to work in the informal economy. Domestic work is completely unregulated.According to the GSE’s stated policy, the large international mining facilities currently operating in Eritrea are required to hire Eritrean workers wherever possible and to offer training programs for Eritrean workers.All workers have the right under Eritrean law to severance if removed from a job, regardless of the reason for removal (termination for cause, layoff, or resignation).  The amount of severance depends on the salary and the length of accrued service.  Moreover, notice must be given any time an employment agreement ends, with some exception for malfeasance on either side, again determined by how long the employee has worked.  There are no known official safety nets for those laid off for economic reasons.  Officially, no labor laws have been waived to attract or retain investment, but as most large investments are completed through private negotiations between the government and/or PFDJ and the outside entity, it is impossible to know the exact nature of provisions of these agreements.There is one legal labor union in Eritrea, the National Confederation of Eritrean Workers (NCEW).  The NCEW engages in collective bargaining for those workers who qualify, but as most workers are in National Service, very few benefit.  The NCEW also represents workers in labor dispute management.  Eritrea has a Labor Relations Board which hears disputes, consisting of seven members of the NCEW, seven members of the employers’ association, and one government official.There have been no labor protests or strikes during the past year.The use of those serving in National Service for civilian jobs, and the indefinite nature of that service, continues to pose reputational risks for organizations doing work in Eritrea.  A Canadian company, which previously operated a mine in Eritrea, was sued in Canadian court over accusations that it employed National Service workers; the case was settled confidentially out of court in 2020.  An EU development project has come under fire after accusations of forced labor.  There are a number of other areas (informal sector, child labor, minimum wage) where Eritrean law does not meet international standards.  No new laws have been introduced in the last year, nor are any new laws expected.																																		12. U.S. International Development Finance Corporation (DFC), and Other Investment Insurance or Development Finance Programs						    																						As a least-developed country, DFC is authorized to operate programs in Eritrea, but does not do so at this time.  There is an existing 1994 Overseas Private Investment Corporation agreement between Eritrea and the United States.																																		13. Foreign Direct Investment Statistics						    																						Table 2: Key Macroeconomic Data, U.S. FDI in Host Country/EconomyHost Country Statistical source*USG or international statistical sourceUSG or International Source of Data:  BEA; IMF; Eurostat; UNCTAD, OtherEconomic DataYearAmountYearAmountHost Country Gross Domestic Product (GDP) ($M USD)N/AN/AN/AN/Awww.worldbank.org/en/countryForeign Direct InvestmentHost Country Statistical source*USG or international statistical sourceUSG or international Source of data:  BEA; IMF; Eurostat; UNCTAD, OtherU.S. FDI in partner country ($M USD, stock positions)N/AN/A2021$-2MBEA data available at https://apps.bea.gov/international/factsheet/Host country’s FDI in the United States ($M USD, stock positions)N/AN/A2021$0BEA data available at https://apps.bea.gov/international/factsheet/Total inbound stock of FDI as % host GDPN/AN/A202155.8%UNCTAD data available athttps://unctad.org/topic/investment/world-investment-report* Source for Host Country Data: N/ATable 3: Sources and Destination of FDIData not available.																																		14. Contact for More Information						    																						U.S. Embassy Asmara179 Alaa St.Asmara, Eritrea+291 120004AsmaraWebmaster@state.gov																										    							View report by:																				Albania											Algeria											Andorra											Angola											Antigua and Barbuda											Argentina											Armenia											Australia											Austria											Azerbaijan											The Bahamas											Bahrain											Bangladesh											Barbados											Belarus											Belgium											Belize											Benin											Bolivia											Bosnia and Herzegovina											Botswana											Brazil											Brunei											Bulgaria											Burkina Faso											Burma											Burundi											Cabo Verde											Cambodia											Cameroon											Canada											Chile											China											Colombia											Costa Rica											Côte d’Ivoire											Croatia											Cyprus											Czechia											Democratic Republic of the Congo											Denmark											Djibouti											Dominica											Dominican Republic											Ecuador											Egypt											El Salvador											Equatorial Guinea											Eritrea											Estonia											Eswatini											Ethiopia											Fiji											Finland											France and Monaco											The Gambia											Gabon											Georgia											Germany											Ghana											Greece											Grenada											Guatemala											Guinea											Guyana											Honduras											Haiti											Hong Kong											Hungary											Iceland											India											Indonesia											Iraq											Ireland											Israel											Italy											Jamaica											Japan											Jordan											Kazakhstan											Kenya											Kosovo											Kyrgyz Republic											Laos											Latvia											Lebanon											Lesotho											Liberia											Libya											Lithuania											Luxembourg											Macau											Madagascar											Malawi											Malaysia											Maldives											Mali											Malta											Marshall Islands											Mauritania											Mauritius											Mexico											Micronesia											Moldova											Mongolia											Montenegro											Morocco											Mozambique											Namibia											Netherlands											Nepal											New Zealand											Nicaragua											Niger											Nigeria											North Macedonia											Norway											Oman											Pakistan											Palau											Panama											Papua New Guinea											Paraguay											Peru											Philippines											Poland											Portugal											Qatar											Republic of the Congo											Romania											Rwanda											Saint Kitts and Nevis											Saint Lucia											Saint Vincent and the Grenadines											Samoa											Sao Tome and Principe											Saudi Arabia											Senegal											Serbia											Seychelles											Sierra Leone											Singapore											Slovakia											Slovenia											Somalia											South Africa											South Korea											South Sudan											Spain											Sri Lanka											Suriname											Sweden											Switzerland											Taiwan											Tajikistan											Tanzania											Thailand											Timor-Leste											Togo											Trinidad and Tobago											Tunisia											Türkiye											United Arab Emirates											Uganda											Ukraine											United Kingdom											Uruguay											Uzbekistan											Vietnam											West Bank and Gaza											Zambia											Zimbabwe															Build A Custom Report																						On This Page				search													>																										EXECUTIVE SUMMARY																1. Openness To, and Restrictions Upon, Foreign Investment																																							Policies Towards Foreign Direct Investment																																																						Limits on Foreign Control and Right to Private Ownership and Establishment																																																						Other Investment Policy Reviews																																																						Business Facilitation																																																						Outward Investment																																																			2. Bilateral Investment and Taxation Treaties																3. Legal Regime																																							Transparency of the Regulatory System																																																						International Regulatory Considerations																																																						Legal System and Judicial Independence																																																						Laws and Regulations on Foreign Direct Investment																																																						Competition and Antitrust Laws																																																						Expropriation and Compensation																																																						Dispute Settlement																																																				ICSID Convention and New York Convention																																												Investor-State Dispute Settlement																																												International Commercial Arbitration and Foreign Courts																																																																																				Bankruptcy Regulations																																																			4. Industrial Policies																																							Investment Incentives																																																						Foreign Trade Zones/Free Ports/Trade Facilitation																																																						Performance and Data Localization Requirements																																																			5. Protection of Property Rights																																							Real Property																																																						Intellectual Property Rights																																																			6. Financial Sector																																							Capital Markets and Portfolio Investment																																																						Money and Banking System																																																						Foreign Exchange and Remittances																																																				Foreign Exchange																																												Remittance Policies																																																																																				Sovereign Wealth Funds																																																			7. State-Owned Enterprises																																							Privatization Program																																																			8. Responsible Business Conduct																																							Additional Resources																																																						Climate Issues																																																			9. Corruption																																							Resources to Report Corruption																																																			10. Political and Security Environment																11. Labor Policies and Practices																12. U.S. International Development Finance Corporation (DFC), and Other Investment Insurance or Development Finance Programs																13. Foreign Direct Investment Statistics																14. Contact for More Information																						Tags																					Bureau of African Affairs																								Bureau of Economic and Business Affairs																								Eritrea
- Outcomes of the 53rd Session of the UN Human Rights Council Office of the SpokespersonDuring the 53rd session of the UN Human Rights Council, the United States worked with partner States and civil society, including human rights defenders, to ensure the Council’s work reflects and reinforces the universal values, aspirations, and norms that have underpinned the UN system since its founding over 75 years ago.In a first since rejoining the Council, the United States spearheaded a thematic resolution tackling statelessness and nationality rights.  This marks a significant step forward in our global effort to end statelessness.The United States supported the Council’s important role of shining a spotlight on countries of concern, promoting accountability for governments and actors that violate and abuse human rights, and addressing key thematic human rights challenges.  Our statements and positions underscored the U.S. commitment to promoting the universality of human rights by addressing discrimination, inequity, and inequality in all its forms, including based on sexual orientation and gender identity.Across resolutions, joint statements, and interactive dialogues, the United States advanced equity and inclusion, with an emphasis on protecting the rights of all, particularly marginalized and underserved groups.Our priorities included:Leading on Statelessness and Nationality Rights:Together with our partners, the United States led a resolution championing nationality rights, which is enshrined in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.  Together, we encouraged governments and the broader international community to prevent and reduce statelessness and protect stateless persons’ rights.  This resolution took a firm stance against discrimination against women in nationality laws, elevated key gender inclusivity principles, and underscored the importance of the right to nationality.  The resolution garnered a broad, cross-regional group of co-sponsors and was adopted by consensus.Advancing Gender Equality: The United States reaffirmed its support for eliminating discriminatory laws and practices against women and girls in all their diversity.  The U.S. co-sponsored, joined consensus on, and helped defend resolutions focused on advancing gender equality through prevention and response to gender-based violence, including accelerating efforts to eliminate all forms of violence against women and girls and child, early, and forced marriage.  The United States voted against all amendments seeking to weaken or remove inclusive gender language from these and other resolutions and encouraged other member states to do the same.   Additionally, as a member of the Group of Friends on the Responsibility to Protect, we promoted a joint statement promoting accountability for conflict-related sexual and other forms of gender-based violence, which may enable the commission of atrocity crimes.  We also signed joint statements decrying the gender-related killing of women and girls and heralding the critical role women play in diplomacy.Promoting Civil Society Space:The United States proudly co-sponsored the resolution on Civil Society Space.  It underscores the importance of creating and maintaining a safe and enabling environment, online and offline, in which civil society can operate freely and carry out its work promoting respect for human rights.  This work is all the more critical in the present age, as governments increasingly use digital technologies, surveillance, online censorship, and other mechanisms to restrict civil society and human rights defenders.Renewing the Mandate of the Special Rapporteur on Belarus:The United States co-sponsored the resolution that renewed the Special Rapporteur on the human rights situation in Belarus.  This mandate is more important than ever as the Lukashenka regime continues to find new tools to repress the Belarusian people.  The regime holds more than 1,500 political prisoners; violently intimidates and harasses all elements of civil society, including NGOs, trade unions and journalists; and passes draconian laws to punish critics both inside and outside of Belarus.Renewing the Mandate of the Special Rapporteur on Eritrea:The United States co-sponsored the resolution renewing the Special Rapporteur on Eritrea.  The resolution maintains attention on Eritrea’s indefinite national service system and its unlawful recruitment and use of child soldiers.  It also continues to highlight the atrocity crimes committed by members of the Eritrean Defense Forces during the conflict in northern Ethiopia, which include crimes against humanity.Drawing attention to the Human Rights Situation in Syria:As a member of the Core Group on Syria, the United States continued to draw attention to the dire situation in the country.  We welcomed the Commission of Inquiry’s reporting calling attention to continued abuses against refugees, as well as the ongoing torture and abuse in regime detention facilities.Other Resolution Priorities:The United States also co-sponsored country-specific resolutions to keep reporting on Ukraine on the Council’s agenda and supporting the successful implementation of Colombia’s peace process.  We joined consensus on a resolution on Burma, making clear the need for conditions to improve before Rohingya can return safely.The United States also co-sponsored key thematic resolutions, including:  the incompatibility between democracy and racism, human rights and extreme poverty, the right to education, the negative impact of corruption, human rights of migrants in transit, and texts renewing the mandates of the Special Rapporteurs on rights of persons with disabilities, trafficking in persons, and judges and lawyers as well as the Business and Human Rights (BHR) Working Group which is critical to the implementation of the UN Guiding Principles on BHR.United States Counters Anti-Israel Bias:  The United States led a joint statement, signed by a cross-regional group of 27 countries, expressing deep concern about the open-ended Commission of Inquiry on Israel created in May 2021.  We also voted against a new resolution under Agenda Item 2 to fully fund and implement an annual update of the database of companies operating in Gaza and the West Bank.Joint Statements:Overall, the United States signed on to 23 thematic or country-specific joint statements.We led joint statements on cultural preservation, conflict-related sexual violence and other forms of gender-based violence, and on the Commission of Inquiry targeting Israel, and signed statements on diverse topics, including democracy, femicide and human Rights, Climate Conference of the Parties, engaging with special procedures, International Day of Women in Diplomacy, affirming the importance of the mandate of the Independent Expert on Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity, diverse families, poverty and clean affordable energy, the 75th anniversary of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, supporting the UN Office on Genocide Prevention and R2P, AI and disabilities, the rights to freedom of peaceful assembly and of association, and the harm caused by internet shutdowns.The United States also joined 52 other countries in signing a statement on the alarming use of the death penalty in Iran, as well as other joint statements highlighting the Moura report on Mali, calling for accountability for Russia’s human rights abuses and atrocities in Ukraine, noting the human rights situation in Sri Lanka, and raising awareness about ongoing atrocities against civilians in Sudan.Side Events: As the Chair of the Freedom Online Coalition this year, the United States led a side event focused on the UN Guiding Principles on BHR and the prevention of the misuse of technology and an event encouraging member state contributions to the UN Voluntary Fund for Victims of Torture, to which the United States remains the world’s largest donor.  We also co-sponsored side events on technology and human rights with a focus on Artificial Intelligence, advancing accountability for repression of activists and protesters, the critical role of women in shaping the future of Afghanistan, Ukrainian prisoners of war, education in Ukraine, and the human rights situation in Crimea, as well as two side events on the human rights situation in Belarus and events addressing the Anti-Homosexuality Act in Uganda.
- Eritrea HomeReportsOffice to Monitor and Combat Trafficking in Persons2023 Trafficking in Persons Report&#8230;Eritrea				hide	document.addEventListener("DOMContentLoaded", function(event) {	if(window.jQuery) {		jQuery( document ).ready(function() {			if (jQuery(".bc_middle").hasClass("collapse")) {				jQuery(".bc_ellipse").click(function(){					jQuery(".bc_hide").toggleClass("visible");					jQuery(".bc_middle").toggle();					jQuery(".bc_ellipse").toggle();					jQuery(".bc_content").toggleClass("noflex");					jQuery(".block_breadcrumbs_content").toggleClass("noflex");				});				jQuery(".bc_hide").click(function(){					jQuery(".bc_hide").toggleClass("visible");					jQuery(".bc_middle").toggle();					jQuery(".bc_ellipse").toggle();					jQuery(".bc_content").toggleClass("noflex");					jQuery(".block_breadcrumbs_content").toggleClass("noflex");				});			} else {				jQuery(".bc_ellipse").hide();			}		});	}});																							2023 Trafficking in Persons Report: Eritrea 																																					Office to Monitor and Combat Trafficking in Persons																																																																																																				 In this section										/																							ERITREA (Tier 3)																																													ERITREA (Tier 3)																															PRIORITIZED RECOMMENDATIONS:																																																																																		PROSECUTION																																																																																		PROTECTION																																																																																		PREVENTION																																																																																		TRAFFICKING PROFILE:																																																																																																								ERITREA (Tier 3)				The Government of Eritrea does not fully meet the minimum standards for the elimination of trafficking and, even considering the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic, if any, on its anti-trafficking capacity, is not making significant efforts to do so; therefore Eritrea remained on Tier 3. During the reporting period, there was a government policy or pattern of forced labor in its compulsory National Service, local citizen militia, and in public works projects. The government continued to exploit its nationals in forced labor, via its compulsory National Service and local citizen militia, by forcing them to serve for indefinite or otherwise arbitrary periods. Officials did not demobilize most individuals from government work units after their mandatory period of service, but rather the government forced citizens to serve indefinitely under threats of detention, torture, or familial reprisal. Additionally, the government directed policies that perpetuated the mobilization of children for forced labor in public works projects, usually within the agricultural sector, during the student summer work program, locally known as Maetot. The government did not demonstrate any efforts to address human trafficking.																																					PRIORITIZED RECOMMENDATIONS:						    																																															Enforce existing limits on the length of active National Service to 18 months (as set forth in the Proclamation of National Service 11/199) and demobilize individuals who have exceeded the service limit.End government policies or actions that compel the mobilization of forced labor within the summer student work program.Cease the unlawful recruitment or use of children by armed forces and provide appropriate protection services to demobilized child soldiers.Enact and implement an anti-trafficking law that criminalizes all forms of trafficking and prescribes penalties that are sufficiently stringent and, with respect to sex trafficking, commensurate with those prescribed for other grave crimes.Develop and implement procedures to identify trafficking victims and refer all victims to services.Extend existing labor protections to persons performing National Service and other mandatory citizen duties.Allow Eritreans to choose their form of work and leave their employment at will.Train government officials at all levels to identify, investigate, and prosecute trafficking crimes.Partner with international organizations and NGOs to combat human trafficking.																																												PROSECUTION						    																																															The government did not report any anti-trafficking law enforcement efforts. The Eritrean Penal Code of 2015 criminalized some forms of trafficking in persons. Article 315 criminalized trafficking in women and young persons for sexual exploitation, which was punishable by up to seven years’ imprisonment; these penalties were sufficiently stringent and, with respect to sex trafficking, commensurate with punishments prescribed for other serious crimes, such as kidnapping. The law did not criminalize sex trafficking of adult men. Article 297 criminalized enslavement and prescribed penalties of seven to 16 years’ imprisonment, which were sufficiently stringent. Article 299 criminalized forced labor and prescribed penalties from six to 12 months’ imprisonment or a fine of 20,000 to 50,000 nakfa ($1,330 to $3,330). These penalties were not sufficiently stringent. The government did not report efforts to amend its law.The government has not reported investigating, prosecuting, or convicting any traffickers for the last 15 years. The government did not report any investigations, prosecutions, or convictions of government officials complicit in human trafficking crimes; however, official complicity in trafficking crimes remained a significant concern, inhibiting law enforcement action during the year. The government continued to enforce arbitrary limits to the compulsory National Service. Reports alleged some partially or wholly government-funded enterprises employed National Service workers. An international organization reported the Eritrean Defense Force (EDF) forcibly recruited and used children in military combat in Ethiopia. Reports alleged officials potentially detained, forced into military training, or in some instances conscripted children who attempted to leave Eritrea or who failed or refused to attend school, including unaccompanied children and children as young as 14 years old. For the third consecutive reporting period, the government did not report providing anti-trafficking training to law enforcement.																																												PROTECTION						    																																															The government did not report any victim protection efforts. The government has not reported any efforts to identify trafficking victims or provide services for the past eight years. The government did not report having formal procedures to proactively identify and refer trafficking victims to care. The government did not report information on services provided to trafficking victims. Individuals in rural communities generally lacked access to protection services of any kind. Observers reported that due to a lack of formal identification procedures, authorities likely detained and arrested some unidentified trafficking victims. In some cases, the government purposefully arrested and prosecuted Eritreans fleeing the National Service. The government did not report providing foreign victims with legal alternatives to their removal to countries where they faced retribution or hardship; however, Eritrea maintained a policy against forced deportations. Eritrean law required offenders in all crimes to pay restitution, although victims had the option of suing in civil court rather than have the criminal court impose it. There were no reports courts imposed this penalty for trafficking crimes.																																												PREVENTION						    																																															The government did not report any efforts to prevent trafficking. The government reportedly maintained an interagency steering committee on human trafficking and migration issues; however, the government did not report any action taken by the steering committee for the third consecutive year. The government did not report efforts to raise awareness of trafficking. The Ministry of Labor and Social Welfare’s Labor Inspection Division was responsible for inspecting work sites for indicators of forced labor, including forced child labor; however, labor inspectors did not receive training on trafficking laws or report identifying any potential trafficking crimes. The government did not report efforts to reduce the demand for commercial sex acts or provide anti-trafficking training to its diplomatic personnel.																																												TRAFFICKING PROFILE:						    																																															As reported over the past five years, human traffickers exploit domestic victims and potentially exploit foreign victims in Eritrea, and traffickers exploit victims from Eritrea abroad.  Proclamation 82 of 1995 requires all persons ages 18 to 40 years to perform compulsory active National Service ostensibly for a period of 18 months – six months of military training followed by 12 months of duty in a variety of military, security, or public service positions.  However, since the 1998-2000 Eritrean-Ethiopian border conflict, the 18-month limit has been suspended; the government does not demobilize most individuals from government work units after their mandatory period of service but rather forces citizens to serve indefinitely under threats of detention, torture, or familial reprisal.  National Service takes a wide variety of forms, including office work in government agencies and enterprises (functions ranging from lawyers, diplomats, and mid-level managers to skilled technicians and mechanics, to clerical, maintenance, and janitorial work); medical professionals; elementary and secondary school teachers; construction or other types of physical labor; and active military duty, which constitutes a small and diminishing percentage.  Reports also allege officials force National Service workers to work in mining enterprises partially owned by the government; specific instances alleged have involved white collar occupations in mine management, technical analysis, and/or government oversight responsibilities.  Conditions are often harsh for those in military service or physical labor, although some National Service members experience normal civilian workplace conditions, albeit with low pay and, in many cases, lack of freedom to pursue alternative employment opportunities.  International organizations report the government often subjects conscripts in the National Service to inhuman and degrading punishment, including torture, without recourse and punishes individuals that conscientiously object to service; the government continues to force conscripts to serve for indefinite or otherwise arbitrary periods.  Additionally, the government broadly restricts recruitment of Eritreans to work abroad, denying travel to most Eritreans, including those enrolled in National Service and those who have not yet performed National Service.  The government may release some Eritreans from National Service after an indefinite number of years; however, the government requires individuals to submit a petition to the government based on criteria that shift periodically, are not transparent, and often involve corrupt practices.  Policies and practices for obtaining release from National Service are inconsistent across organizations and job fields, but officials generally release expectant mothers and individuals who can show they have become the sole or primary source of familial support.  Certain professions, including medical and education roles, exist almost exclusively within the ranks of the National Service.  National Service workers without educational or vocational qualifications continue to be paid extremely low wages, and the government often substitutes food or non-food rations for wages.  In addition to National Service, the government instituted a compulsory citizen militia in 2012, requiring medically fit adults, up to age 70 and not currently in the military, to join their local militia.  This requirement compels individuals to carry firearms and attend military training.  Local militia leaders assign individuals to additional unpaid forced labor in agriculture work, guard duties, or national development programs, such as soil and water conservation projects on a part-time basis.  EDF officials and local militias forcibly mobilized Eritreans of military age (18 to 60 years old) and deployed individuals to northern Ethiopia during the conflict from November 2020 to November 2022.  All 12th-grade students are required to complete their final year of high school education at the Warsay-Yikealo Secondary School, which is embedded within the Sawa military and training academy; those who refuse to attend cannot receive high school graduation certificates, attain higher education, or obtain certain types of jobs.  The program comprises seven months of academic instruction, followed by four to five months of basic military training.  It remains likely some students are age 17 at the time of their participation in the military training component of the Warsay-Yikealo/Sawa academy.  Upon graduation from Sawa, the government requires the vast majority of students to participate in National Service in either civilian or military roles.  Government policy bans persons younger than 18 from military conscription; however, there are no reports of an age verification procedure applied prior to sending new Sawa graduates to active military service.  New reports during the reporting period indicated officials potentially detained, forced into military training, or conscripted children who attempted to leave Eritrea or who failed or refused to attend school, including unaccompanied children and children as young as 14 years old; some of these children were also reportedly mobilized.  Authorities generally did not inform parents of their children’s underage forced conscription.  An international NGO reports officials exploit some Sawa students in forced labor on either privately-owned commercial farms or Sawa-owned farms.  NGOs also report military commanders regularly exploit girls in military training or service in domestic servitude and sex trafficking, often promising the girls food or easier treatment during trainings in exchange for sex.  In 2021, the Ministry of Education and the Ministry of Agriculture reinstated its national, mandatory summer work program, locally known as Maetot, after discontinuing the program in 2018 due to reported budgetary constraints.  In 2022, the government mobilized children, primarily in grades nine and 10, for compulsory labor in public works projects, usually within the agricultural sector, during the summer.  The government may have imposed fines on children who did not participate in the program and potentially refused school enrollment in the next academic year to students who did not pay fines.  Eritrea’s strict exit control procedures and limited issuance of passports compel those who cannot obtain exit visas or passports to travel clandestinely, increasing their vulnerability to trafficking abroad.  Perennially, thousands of Eritreans flee the country to reunite with family members already overseas; escape human rights abuses, including arbitrary arrest and detention, lack of due process, and religious persecution; search for better economic opportunities; or avoid indefinite periods of service in the government’s National Service program.  Most Eritreans consensually commence their outbound journeys by paying migrant smugglers, with the ultimate goal of seeking asylum in Europe or, at a minimum, obtaining refugee status in Ethiopia, Kenya, Egypt, Israel, or Uganda; some also strive to reach the United States.  An international organization assesses that many Eritrean asylum seekers, particularly those who flee the National Service, express well-founded fears of persecution in Eritrea.  Eritreans fleeing the country and Eritrean refugees in neighboring countries remain particularly vulnerable to the government indiscriminately arresting, detaining, harassing, or forcibly recalling them into the National Service.  In 2019, an international organization assessed traffickers exploited Eritreans in forced labor and sex trafficking in Sudan, Ethiopia, and Libya.  Previous reports allege international criminal groups kidnap vulnerable Eritreans living inside or in proximity to refugee camps, particularly in Sudan, and transport them to Libya, where traffickers subject them to human trafficking and other abuses, including extortion for ransom.  Some Eritreans report traffickers forcing them to work as cleaners or on construction sites during their captivity.  Reports indicate the EDF, alongside Ethiopian federal and regional forces, committed widespread human rights abuses and gender-based violence against women and girls in Tigray, including potential trafficking crimes, between the beginning of the conflict in northern Ethiopia in November 2020 and the signing of the Cessation of Hostilities Agreement between the Ethiopian government and the Tigrayan People’s Liberation Front in November 2022.  Observers report unspecified military personnel, which may have included the EDF, and other officials forced women to have sex in exchange for basic commodities and humanitarian assistance.  International organizations report the EDF forcibly recruited and used children in military combat in Ethiopia.  The People’s Republic of China (PRC) nationals employed in Eritrea at worksites affiliated with the PRC’s Belt and Road Initiative are vulnerable to forced labor, including in construction and mining. 																																				    							View report by:																				Afghanistan											Albania											Algeria											Angola											Antigua and Barbuda											Argentina											Armenia											Aruba											Australia											Austria											Azerbaijan											The Bahamas											Bahrain											Bangladesh											Barbados											Belarus											Belgium											Belize											Benin											Bhutan											Bolivia											Bosnia and Herzegovina											Botswana											Brazil											Brunei											Bulgaria											Burkina Faso											Burma											Burundi											Cabo Verde											Cambodia											Cameroon											Canada											Central African Republic											Chad											Chile											China											Colombia											Comoros											Costa Rica											Cote d&#8217;Ivoire											Croatia											Cuba											Curaçao											Cyprus											Czech Republic											Democratic Republic of the Congo											Denmark											Djibouti											Dominican Republic											Ecuador											Egypt											El Salvador											Equatorial Guinea											Eritrea											Estonia											Eswatini											Ethiopia											Fiji											Finland											France											Gabon											The Gambia											Georgia											Germany											Ghana											Greece											Guatemala											Guinea											Guinea-Bissau											Guyana											Haiti											Honduras											Hong Kong											Hungary											Iceland											India											Indonesia											Iran											Iraq											Ireland											Israel, West Bank and Gaza											Italy											Jamaica											Japan											Jordan											Kazakhstan											Kenya											Kosovo											Kuwait											Kyrgyzstan											Laos											Latvia											Lebanon											Lesotho											Liberia											Libya											Lithuania											Luxembourg											Macau											Madagascar											Malawi											Malaysia											Maldives											Mali											Malta											Marshall Islands											Mauritania											Mauritius											Mexico											Micronesia, Federated States of											Moldova											Mongolia											Montenegro											Morocco											Mozambique											Namibia											Nepal											Netherlands											New Zealand											Nicaragua											Niger											Nigeria											North Korea											North Macedonia											Norway											Oman											Pakistan											Palau											Panama											Papua New Guinea											Paraguay											Peru											Philippines											Poland											Portugal											Qatar											Republic of the Congo											Romania											Russia											Rwanda											Saint Lucia											Saint Vincent and the Grenadines											Saudi Arabia											Senegal											Serbia											Seychelles											Sierra Leone											Singapore											Sint Maarten											Slovakia											Slovenia											Solomon Islands											Somalia											South Africa											South Korea											South Sudan											Spain											Sri Lanka											Sudan											Suriname											Sweden											Switzerland											Syria											Taiwan											Tajikistan											Tanzania											Thailand											Timor-Leste											Togo											Tonga											Trinidad and Tobago											Tunisia											Turkey											Turkmenistan											Uganda											Ukraine											United Arab Emirates											United Kingdom											United States											Uruguay											Uzbekistan											Vanuatu											Venezuela											Vietnam											Yemen											Zambia											Zimbabwe																										On This Page				search													>																										ERITREA (Tier 3)																PRIORITIZED RECOMMENDATIONS:																																																	PROSECUTION																																																	PROTECTION																																																	PREVENTION																																																	TRAFFICKING PROFILE:																																																							Tags																					Bureau of African Affairs																								Eritrea																																Human Trafficking																															Office to Monitor and Combat Trafficking in Persons
- Eritrean National Day Antony J. Blinken, Secretary of StateOn behalf of the United States of America, I congratulate the people of Eritrea on the 32nd anniversary of their nation’s independence.  The United States hopes that a shared desire for peace and freedom will bring our peoples closer together.
- Training Together to Save Lives: The State Department and Department of Defense Prepare for U.S. Citizen Evacuations Ildiko HrubosThe U.S. Department of State has no higher priority than protecting the safety and security of U.S. citizens.  During an overseas crisis, the Department may provide information on conditions in the country and where to seek help.  In more severe situations, it may recommend U.S. citizens leave the immediate area, or the country.  In the most unstable crises, when conditions permit, the Department may assist in the evacuation of U.S. personnel and U.S. citizens from the crisis location, sometimes in close coordination with the Department of Defense. Over the past 35 years, the State Department conducted more than 300 evacuations of U.S. personnel and U.S. citizens from overseas crises, including most recently from Sudan.  The Department of Defense (DoD), in coordination with the State Department’s Diplomatic Security Service, facilitated more than 20 of these operations, including in Lebanon, Grenada, Liberia, Somalia, Rwanda, Zaire, Sierra Leone, Eritrea, Haiti, and Afghanistan.  Mock protestors amass outside the fictional  “U.S. Consulate Agategrad” training facility in Sneads Ferry, NC. &nbsp;To prepare for State Department’s evacuations with DoD support, the two agencies conduct joint exercises multiple times a year around the world.  In April, State Department representatives from Consular Affairs, Diplomatic Security, Political-Military Affairs, Global Public Affairs, and the Foreign Service Institute’s Crisis Management Training division teamed up with over 2,200 members of the 26th Marine Expeditionary Unit (MEU) to conduct a six-day training exercise in Sneads Ferry, North Carolina. The exercise centered around a fabricated scenario at a fictional outpost, the “U.S. Consulate Agategrad.”  In the scenario, Consulate Agategrad staff faced a variety of threats to the Consulate and to the U.S. citizen community in the country, including political instability, calls to violence by extremist groups, and protestors outside the Consulate gates.  At each step in the exercise, as the threats escalated, the State Department and DoD worked together to determine appropriate responses and next steps.  Representatives from “U.S. Consulate Agategrad” and the 26th Marine Expeditionary Unit discuss the possibility of conducting an amphibious evacuation of U.S. citizens. &nbsp;The scenario reached its apex when U.S. Consulate staff—based on a discussion of pre-established State Department criteria—determined the situation warranted the evacuation of not only U.S. personnel, but all interested U.S. citizens from the country.  On the final day of the exercise, Consulate Agategrad staff and the 26th MEU successfully evacuated more than 200 U.S. citizens, who were transported by air to offshore ships equipped to deliver them to safety.  State Department and DoD representatives discuss their talking points before conducting a joint media interview.   During the mock interview, Lt. Col Wiese and &#8220;Consul General&#8221; Berger call for a de-escalation of violence in the country and provide important security information to U.S. citizens. &nbsp;Throughout the scenario, State Department staff worked with their U.S. military counterparts to work through various aspects of a real-world evacuation, including messaging about the crisis via traditional and social media, the identification of suitable evacuation sites, and the appropriate response to potentially violent protestors.  The relationships built, and the knowledge shared, will undoubtedly extend beyond the training exercise. These kinds of exercises are absolutely critical to improving communication and strengthening the relationship between the Department of State and the U.S. Marine Corps.Jonathan Berger, a Foreign Service Officer currently serving as a Foreign Policy Advisor (POLAD) to the commander of Marine Forces Special Operations Command, played the role of the Consul General during the scenario.  “Truthfully—and thankfully—a large Military Assisted Departure/Non-Combatant Evacuation Operation is rare.  However, each time we engage in an exercise of this magnitude it is only going to serve our institutions and our people better — and in the end will help save lives.”  This training was facilitated by the State Department’s Foreign Service Institute in support of the Crisis Management Training division’s mandate to help prepare U.S. Government employees in the foreign affairs community to effectively respond before, during, and after crises of all types.  About the Author:  Ildiko Hrubos is a Foreign Service Officer currently serving in the Bureau of Global Public Affairs.  She participated in the training exercise with the 26th MEU.   
- Eritrea HomeReportsOffice of International Religious Freedom2022 Report on International Religious Freedom&#8230;Eritrea				hide	document.addEventListener("DOMContentLoaded", function(event) {	if(window.jQuery) {		jQuery( document ).ready(function() {			if (jQuery(".bc_middle").hasClass("collapse")) {				jQuery(".bc_ellipse").click(function(){					jQuery(".bc_hide").toggleClass("visible");					jQuery(".bc_middle").toggle();					jQuery(".bc_ellipse").toggle();					jQuery(".bc_content").toggleClass("noflex");					jQuery(".block_breadcrumbs_content").toggleClass("noflex");				});				jQuery(".bc_hide").click(function(){					jQuery(".bc_hide").toggleClass("visible");					jQuery(".bc_middle").toggle();					jQuery(".bc_ellipse").toggle();					jQuery(".bc_content").toggleClass("noflex");					jQuery(".block_breadcrumbs_content").toggleClass("noflex");				});			} else {				jQuery(".bc_ellipse").hide();			}		});	}});																							2022 Report on International Religious Freedom: Eritrea																																					Office of International Religious Freedom																																																																																							Download Report																																																																																	 In this section										/																							Executive Summary																																													Executive Summary																															Section I. Religious Demography																																																																																		Section II. Status of Government Respect for Religious Freedom																																																									Legal Framework																																																																											Government Practices																																																																																	Section III. Status of Societal Respect for Religious Freedom																																																																																		Section IV. U.S. Government Policy and Engagement																																																																																																								Executive Summary				The law and unimplemented constitution prohibit religiously motivated discrimination and provide for freedom of thought, conscience, and belief, as well as the freedom to practice any religion. The government recognizes four officially registered religious groups: the Eritrean Orthodox Tewahedo Church, Sunni Islam, the Catholic Church, and the Evangelical Lutheran Church of Eritrea.During the year, the government arrested individuals on the basis of religion. Christian nongovernmental organization (NGO) Release International reported the arrest of 17 women and 12 men after police raided a prayer meeting in Asmara on March 29. According to this NGO, the government continued to imprison more than 300 Christians, as of November 17. Other NGOs estimated authorities continued to detain from 130 to more than 1,000 persons due to their faith, including 20 Jehovah’s Witnesses for refusing to participate in military service or renounce their faith. In October, according to Catholic and other media sources, government security forces arrested an Eritrean Orthodox bishop, an Eritrean Orthodox priest, and a Franciscan priest, reportedly for highlighting government human rights violations in their homilies. They were released on December 29, according to international media. On February 9, former Eritrean Orthodox Church Patriarch Abune Antonios, confined to house arrest since 2006, died while still in detention. On May 20, officials from several NGOs and from the Eritrean Orthodox Church in the United Kingdom wrote to the Eritrean ambassador to the United Kingdom and Ireland to express concern about the government’s continuing “unjust, arbitrary, and indefinite detention” of many citizens, including Christians imprisoned “solely on account of their faith.” Unregistered religious groups lack the privileges of registered groups and their members risked arrest, mistreatment, and renunciation of their faith as a condition of their release. The government allowed some unregistered groups to operate and tolerated their worship activities. International NGOs and international media continued to report that members of all religious groups were, to varying degrees, subjected to government abuses and restrictions. The government continued to deny citizenship to Jehovah’s Witnesses after stripping them of citizenship in 1994 for refusing to participate in the referendum that created the independent state of Eritrea. In September, the beginning of the 2022 school year, the last two remaining Catholic schools were closed or converted to public schools.The government’s lack of transparency and intimidation of civil society and religious communities continued to create difficulties for individuals who wanted to obtain information on the status of societal respect for religious freedom. International observers, however, continued to state that religious tolerance appeared to be widespread between different groups within society. Churches and mosques are in close proximity to each other, and most citizens congratulated members of other religious groups on the occasions of religious holidays and other events. There were no reports of sectarian violence, and most towns and ethnic groups included members from all the major religious groups.U.S. officials in Asmara and Washington raised religious freedom concerns with government officials throughout the year, including the imprisonment of Jehovah’s Witnesses, lack of alternative service for conscientious objectors, and the death of Patriarch Antonios while in detention. U.S. embassy officials further discussed religious freedom on a regular basis with a wide range of individuals, including members of the diplomatic corps based in Asmara and UN officials. Embassy officials used social media and outreach programs to engage the public, highlight the commitment of the United States to religious freedom, and rebut the government’s argument that it does not persecute people based on their religious beliefs.Since 2004, Eritrea has been designated a Country of Particular Concern (CPC) under the International Religious Freedom Act of 1998 for having engaged in or tolerated particularly severe violations of religious freedom. On November 30, 2022, the Secretary of State redesignated Eritrea as a CPC and identified the following sanction that accompanied the designation: the ongoing denial of licenses or other approvals for exports or imports of defense articles and services as referenced in 22 CFR 126.1(n) pursuant to section 402(c)(5) of the act.																														Section I.													 Religious Demography												    																																															The U.S. government estimates the total population at 6.2 million (midyear 2022). The UN estimates a population of approximately 3.75 million. Reliable population data in the country are difficult to gather. There are no reliable figures on religious affiliation. The Pew Foundation reported the population to be 63 percent Christian and 37 percent Muslim in 2010 (most recent reliable information), but many local sources estimate the population to be more evenly divided between Christians and Muslims. The Christian population is predominantly Eritrean Orthodox. Catholics, Protestants, and other Christian denominations, including Jehovah’s Witnesses and Pentecostals, constitute less than 5 percent of the Christian population. Some estimates suggest 2 percent of the population is traditionally animist. The Baha’i community reports approximately 500 members, half of whom reside in the capital, Asmara. Only one Jew is known to remain in the country and resides in the country on a part-time basis.A majority of the population in the southern and central regions is Christian, while the northern areas are majority Sunni Muslim. A majority of the Tigrinya, the largest ethnic group, is Christian. Seven of the other eight principal ethnic groups, the Tigre, Saho, Afar, Bilen, Hedareb, Nara, and the Rashaida, are predominantly Sunni Muslim and reside mainly in the northern regions of the country. The Kunama are diverse, with Christians, Muslims, and animists.																																					Section II.													 Status of Government Respect for Religious Freedom												    																																																Legal Framework										The law and unimplemented constitution prohibit religious discrimination and provide for freedom of thought, conscience, and belief and the freedom to practice any religion.Proclamation 73/1995, which serves as the guiding law on religious issues, calls for separation of religion and state; outlines the parameters to which religious organizations must adhere, including concerning foreign relations and social activities; establishes an Office of Religious Affairs; and requires religious groups to register with the government or cease activities. Some members of religious groups that are unregistered or otherwise not in compliance with the law reportedly continue to be subject to the former provisional penal code, which sets penalties for failure to register and noncompliance. A revised penal code, pending implementation since 2015, does not directly address penalties for religious groups that fail to register or otherwise comply with the law, but includes a punishment of between one- and six- months’ imprisonment and a fine of 5,001 to 20,000 nakfa ($330 to $1,300) for “unlawful assembly.”The Office of Religious Affairs has authority to regulate religious activities and institutions, including approval of the applications of religious groups seeking official registration. Each application must include a description of the group’s history in the country; an explanation of the uniqueness or benefit the group offers compared with other registered religious groups; names and personal information of the group’s leaders; detailed information on assets; a description of the group’s conformity to local culture; and a declaration of all foreign sources of funding.The Office of Religious Affairs has registered four religious groups: the Eritrean Orthodox Tewahedo Church, Sunni Islam, the Catholic Church, and the Evangelical Lutheran Church of Eritrea (affiliated with the Lutheran World Federation). While the Baha’i faith is not one of the four officially recognized religious groups, the group has registered every year since its establishment in the country in 1959 and has “de facto” recognition from the government. A synagogue exists in Asmara, but there are not enough adherents for regular services. A decree requires all other religious groups to submit registration applications and to cease religious activities and services prior to approval.Religious groups must obtain government approval to build facilities for worship.While the law does not specifically address religious education in public schools, Proclamation 73/1995 outlines other permitted activities by religious organizations, such as undertaking “spiritual teachings and preaching” and assisting the poor and needy. The proclamation does not include education in general as an approved activity, therefore religious groups are barred from operating private schools.By law, all citizens between ages 18 and 50 must perform 18 months of national service, with limited exceptions, including for health reasons such as physical disability or pregnancy. In times of emergency, the government may extend the length of national service indefinitely, and the country officially has been in a state of emergency since the beginning of the 1998 war with Ethiopia. There is also a compulsory militia for all men not in the military, including many who had been demobilized from National Service, otherwise exempted from military service in the past, or are elderly. The government may detain those who fail to participate in the militia or national service Militia training primarily involves occasional marches and listening to patriotic lectures. The law does not provide for conscientious objector status for religious reasons, nor are there alternative activities for persons willing to perform national service but unwilling to engage in military or militia activities.The law prohibits any involvement in politics by religious groups.The government requires all citizens to obtain an exit visa prior to departing the country. The application requests the applicant’s religious affiliation, but the law does not require that information.The law limits foreign financing for religious groups, including registered groups. The only contributions legally allowed are from local followers, the government, or government-approved foreign sources.The country is a party to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.																																				Government Practices										During the year, the government again arrested individuals on the basis of religion. The NGO Release International reported new arrests of 17 women and 12 men after police raided a prayer meeting in a home in Asmara on March 29. According to the NGO, as of November 17 (latest information available), the government continued to imprison more than 300 Christians, including those arrested in March and another 98 arrested in another raid in Asmara in September. There was no information on the whereabouts of the detainees, the conditions under which they were being held, or the charges against them, if any. In its most recent World Watch List report, Christian NGO Open Doors stated that Christians in the country who were not members of the four recognized religious groups are “at risk of severe persecution” including government raids of their gatherings and detention under conditions that “can be inhumane.”According to Catholic online daily La Croix International and other Catholic news agencies, government security forces arrested Eritrean Catholic Bishop Fikremariam Hagos on October 15 at Asmara International Airport as he returned from a visit to Europe. The media outlets also reported that authorities arrested Father Mihretab Stefanos, an Eritrean Catholic priest, and Franciscan Father Abba Abraham three days earlier. La Croix said that all three were held in the Adi Abeto Prison. Media in Kenya reported that the government told the church it was “holding” Hagos but did not explain why. On October 19, The National Catholic Register said the three had been accused of highlighting government human rights violations in their homilies. The government provided no reason for, or details about, their detention. On December 29, Hagos and Stefanos were released from prison, according to BBC News. The government did not provide a reason for their release.NGOs estimated authorities continued to detain from 130 to more than 1,000 persons due to their faith. Determining more precisely the number of persons imprisoned for their religious beliefs was difficult due to lack of government transparency and what multiple sources stated was intimidation of those who might come forward with such information.On February 9, former Eritrean Orthodox Church Patriarch Abune Antonios, confined to house arrest since 2006 for protesting government interference in church affairs, died; he was 94 years old and in poor health. The church and public, via social media, expressed support for the Patriarch and condemned the government for detaining him for years.According to the Jehovah’s Witnesses Religious Freedom Report for Eritrea, authorities reportedly continued to detain 20 Jehovah’s Witnesses, more than half of whom had been in prison for more than 20 years, for refusing to participate in military service or renounce their faith.On October 14, a spokesman for Jehovah’s Witnesses said the organization was concerned about the health of 80-year-old Tesfazion Gebremichael, one of those in prison. The spokesman said that due to Gebremichael’s age and “poor prison conditions,” he “may not live long enough to ever be reunited with his family and friends.” The spokesman added that four imprisoned Jehovah’s Witnesses aged 62 to 77 had died in government custody since 2011.The government continued to single out Jehovah’s Witnesses for particularly harsh treatment because of their blanket refusal to vote in the 1993 referendum on the country’s independence and subsequent refusal to participate in mandatory national service, for which the government stripped them of their citizenship in 1994. Jehovah’s Witnesses reported that the government continued to detain their members and other religious prisoners for failure to follow the law or for alleged national security reasons and continued to deny them citizenship.Authorities’ treatment of persons imprisoned because of religion continued to appear inconsistent. In some prisons, religious prisoners continued to report they were not allowed to have visitors, but in other prisons, visitors were allowed. Some former prisoners held for their religious beliefs continued to report harsh detention conditions, including solitary confinement, physical abuse, and inadequate food, water, and shelter. Other former religious prisoners reported acceptable conditions, adequate food, and no physical abuse.Many arrests and releases were unreported. Information was extremely limited. Independent observers stated many persons remained imprisoned without charge.The government continued to detain without due process persons associated with unregistered religious groups, occasionally for long periods, and sometimes on the grounds of threatening national security, according to minority religious group members and international NGOs. Their eventual release from detention was sometimes conditioned on a formal renunciation of their faith.On May 20, officials from NGOs Christian Solidarity Worldwide, Church in Chains – Ireland, Release Eritrea, and Human Rights Concern – Eritrea and from the Eritrean Orthodox Church in the United Kingdom wrote to the Eritrean ambassador to the United Kingdom and Ireland to express their concern “at the continuing unjust, arbitrary, and indefinite detention of tens of thousands of Eritrean citizens in harsh conditions, including hundreds of Christians imprisoned solely on account of their faith.”In September, the government called for mass mobilization of the militia. Deployment locations and length of deployment were not specified.The government reportedly raided a church service to round up worshippers to serve their mandated military duty, as part of its nationwide roundup of those who had failed to appear for duty. Catholic priest Mussie Zerai told Catholic News Service that such a raid took place on September 4 in the village of Akrur in the parish of Medhanie Alem. Zerai said soldiers arrived during Mass and surrounded the church, then took away any young people present, including all the boys of the choir in their uniforms. Zerai said the incident was widely circulated on social media.Government authorization remained necessary for any organization to print and distribute documents; for religious groups, that authorization needed to come from the Office of Religious Affairs, which continued to approve requests only from the four officially registered religious groups.Government restrictions on registered and unregistered religious groups remained in place regarding proselytizing, accepting external funding from international NGOs and international organizations, and groups selecting their own religious leaders. Unregistered religious groups also faced restrictions in gathering for worship, constructing places of worship, and teaching their religious beliefs to others, although they reported that in many cases the government unofficially allowed them to worship in private homes as long as it was done discreetly.Official attitudes differed toward members of unregistered religious groups worshipping in homes or rented facilities. Some local authorities reportedly tolerated the presence and activities of unregistered groups, while others attempted to prevent them from meeting. Local authorities sometimes denied government ration coupons to Jehovah’s Witnesses and members of Pentecostal groups. Some persons imprisoned because of religion reported they were allowed to worship together in prison as long as they did so quietly.The government, which has not approved the registration of additional religious groups since 2002, again approved no new religious groups during the year. Unrecognized religious groups expressed fear that applying would open them to further repression.Jehovah’s Witnesses remained largely unable to obtain official identification documents, which left many of them unable to study in government institutions and barred them from most forms of employment, government benefits, access to bank accounts, and travel.According to a 2019 report by the European Asylum Support Office (most recent data available), the issuance of exit visas was inconsistent and did not adhere to any policy; members of unrecognized religious communities could be denied exit visas solely on the basis of their religious affiliation.The government continued to ban all non-Sunni practices of Islam.Diaspora groups reported authorities controlled directly or indirectly virtually all activities of the four formally recognized groups. Local observers continued to say officially registered members of the four religious groups generally did not face impediments to religious practice. Individuals also reported restrictions on clergy meeting with foreign diplomats.The government continued its confiscation and nationalization of nearly all private schools, including Catholic, Orthodox, and Muslim-owned schools, citing Proclamation 73/1995’s prohibition on religious institutions providing social services, which includes education. In September, the beginning of the 2022 school year, the last two remaining Catholic schools were closed or converted to public schools. In October, the government allowed one private school to reopen, limited to international non-Eritrean students only.Most places of worship unaffiliated with the four officially registered religious groups remained closed to worship, but many of those buildings remained physically intact and undamaged. The government continued to permit the last Jew known to remain in the country to maintain the synagogue in Asmara as an historic site. The Greek Orthodox Church remained open as a cultural building, and members of the Eritrean Orthodox Tewahedo Church sometimes held religious services on the site. Other structures belonging to unregistered groups, such as the Church of Christ, remained shuttered. The government allowed the Baha’i center in Asmara to remain open, and the members of the center had unrestricted access to the building. A Baha’i temple outside of Asmara was allowed to operate. There were indications other unregistered groups, including Seventh-day Adventists and the Faith Mission Church, operated to some degree. The Anglican church building held services, but only under the auspices of the registered Evangelical Lutheran Church.Some church leaders continued to state that the government’s restriction on foreign financing reduced church income and religious participation by preventing churches from training clergy or building or maintaining facilities.Government control of all mass media, as well as a fear of imprisonment or other government actions, continued to restrict the ability of unregistered religious group members to bring attention to government actions against them, according to observers. Restrictions on public assembly and freedom of speech severely limited the ability of unregistered religious groups to assemble and conduct worship in a designated place of worship, according to group members.Although none were appointed during the year, observers continued to state that the government exerted significant direct and indirect influence over the appointment of heads of recognized religious communities, including the Eritrean Orthodox Tewahedo Church and the Sunni Islamic community; some international NGOs said that authorities directly controlled the appointments. The government denied this, stating these decisions were made entirely by religious communities. However, the sole political party in the country, the People’s Front for Democracy and Justice, led by President Isaias Afwerki, appointed both the head of the Sunni Islamic community and the head of the Eritrean Orthodox Tewahedo Church, as well as some lower-level officials for both communities, in 2021.While the overwhelming majority of high-level officials, both military and civilian, were Christian, four Ministers in the 17-member cabinet and at least one senior military leader, were Muslim.The government continued to say its official party doctrine promoted national citizenship above religious sectarianism and that it did not officially prefer any religion. As evidence of its doctrine, the National Service program continued to require all 12th graders to attend Warsay Yikealo Secondary School at the Sawa military camp (colocated with a defense training center) where all 12th grade students from across the country studied and received military training.																																					Section III.													 Status of Societal Respect for Religious Freedom												    																																															Continued government control of all media and public discourse limited information available concerning societal actions affecting religious freedom. International observers continued to note, however, that religious tolerance appeared to be widespread within society. Churches and mosques are in close proximity to each other, and most citizens reportedly congratulated members of other religious groups on the occasions of religious holidays and other events. There were no reports of sectarian violence, and most towns and ethnic groups included members from all major religious groups.Some Christian leaders continued to report Muslim leaders and communities were willing to collaborate on community projects. Formal ecumenical and interreligious committees did not exist, although local leaders met informally. Some shrines were venerated by both Orthodox and Muslim believers. Some Muslims continued to express privately their feelings of stress and scrutiny in professional and educational settings because of their religion.																																					Section IV.													 U.S. Government Policy and Engagement												    																																															Embassy representatives met with government officials to raise religious freedom concerns, including seeking ways to accommodate unregistered groups. They also advocated the release of Jehovah’s Witnesses, including the remaining 20 known to remain in prison, and for an alternative service option for conscientious objectors refusing to bear arms for religious reasons. Embassy representatives also expressed concern over the death of Patriarch Abune Antonios, whom the government had held under house arrest for 16 years for protesting government interference into church affairs. Officials in Washington shared similar concerns with the Eritrean embassy.Embassy officials raised issues of religious freedom with a wide range of partners, including Asmara based and regionally based diplomats accredited to the government, UN officials, and other international organization representatives. Embassy officials used social media to highlight the importance of religious tolerance and employed public diplomacy programs to engage the public and highlight the commitment of the United States to religious freedom and rebut government statements denying persecution. For example, on June 6, the embassy posted a message on Facebook criticizing the lack of freedom to worship for all religions, calling for the government to allow all religious groups to register so that all Eritreans could worship freely, and seeking the release of those imprisoned for exercising their religion.Since 2004, Eritrea has been designated as a CPC under the International Religious Freedom Act of 1998, section 402(b), for having engaged in or tolerated particularly severe violations of religious freedom. On November 30, 2022, the Secretary of State redesignated Eritrea as a CPC and identified the following sanction that accompanied the designation: the ongoing denial of licenses or other approvals for exports or imports of defense articles and services as referenced in 22 CFR 126.1(n) pursuant to section 402(c)(5) of the act.																																				    							View report by:																				Afghanistan											Albania											Algeria											Andorra											Angola											Antigua and Barbuda											Argentina											Armenia											Australia											Austria											Azerbaijan											Bahamas, The											Bahrain											Bangladesh											Barbados											Belarus											Belgium											Belize											Benin											Bhutan											Bolivia											Bosnia and Herzegovina											Botswana											Brazil											Brunei											Bulgaria											Burkina Faso											Burma											Burundi											Cabo Verde											Cambodia											Cameroon											Canada											Central African Republic											Chad											Chile											China (Includes Hong Kong, Macau, Tibet, and Xinjiang)											Colombia											Comoros											Costa Rica											Cote d’Ivoire											Croatia											Cuba											Cyprus											Czech Republic											Democratic Republic of the Congo											Denmark											Djibouti											Dominica											Dominican Republic											Ecuador											Egypt											El Salvador											Equatorial Guinea											Eritrea											Estonia											Eswatini											Ethiopia											Fiji											Finland											France											Gabon											Gambia, The											Georgia											Germany											Ghana											Greece											Grenada											Guatemala											Guinea											Guyana											Guinea-Bissau											Haiti											Honduras											Hungary											Iceland											India											Indonesia											Iran											Iraq											Ireland											Israel, West Bank and Gaza											Italy											Jamaica											Japan											Jordan											Kazakhstan											Kenya											Kiribati											Kosovo											Kuwait											Kyrgyzstan											Laos											Latvia											Lebanon											Lesotho											Liberia											Libya											Liechtenstein											Lithuania											Luxembourg											Madagascar											Malawi											Malaysia											Maldives											Mali											Malta											Marshall Islands											Mauritania											Mauritius											Mexico											Micronesia											Moldova											Monaco											Mongolia											Montenegro											Morocco											Mozambique											Namibia											Nauru											Nepal											Netherlands											New Zealand											Nicaragua											Niger											Nigeria											North Korea											North Macedonia											Norway											Oman											Pakistan											Palau											Panama											Papua New Guinea											Paraguay											Peru											Philippines											Poland											Portugal											Qatar											Republic of the Congo											Romania											Russia											Rwanda											Saint Kitts and Nevis											Saint Lucia											Saint Vincent and the Grenadines											Samoa											San Marino											Sao Tome and Principe											Saudi Arabia											Senegal											Serbia											Seychelles											Sierra Leone											Singapore											Slovakia											Slovenia											Solomon Islands											Somalia											South Africa											South Sudan											South Korea											Spain											Sri Lanka											Sudan											Suriname											Sweden											Switzerland											Syria											Taiwan											Tajikistan											Tanzania											Thailand											Timor-Leste											Togo											Tonga											Trinidad and Tobago											Tunisia											Turkey (Türkiye)											Turkmenistan											Tuvalu											Uganda											Ukraine											United Arab Emirates											United Kingdom											Uruguay											Uzbekistan											Vanuatu											Venezuela											Vietnam											Vietnam											Yemen											Zambia											Zimbabwe															Build A Custom Report																						On This Page				search													>																										Executive Summary																Section I. Religious Demography																																																	Section II. Status of Government Respect for Religious Freedom																																							Legal Framework																																																						Government Practices																																																			Section III. Status of Societal Respect for Religious Freedom																																																	Section IV. U.S. Government Policy and Engagement																																																							Tags																					Bureau of African Affairs																								Eritrea																								Office of International Religious Freedom																																Religious Freedom