# Uruguay - United States Department of State

- Uruguay HomeReportsBureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor2023 Country Reports on Human Rights Practices&#8230;Uruguay				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: Uruguay																																					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																																																																																	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																																																																											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																																																																																	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 Uruguay during the year.Significant human rights issues included credible reports of harsh and potentially life-threatening conditions in some prisons.The government took credible steps to identify and punish officials who might 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 reports the government or its agents committed arbitrary or unlawful killings, including extrajudicial killings, during the year.																																				b. Disappearance										There were no reports of disappearances by or on behalf of government authorities.																																				c. Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman, or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, and Other Related Abuses										The constitution and law prohibited such practices, and there were no credible reports government officials employed them.																Prison and Detention Center Conditions						Prison and detention center conditions were poor and inhuman in several facilities due to overcrowding, poor sanitary conditions, inadequate medical care, and high levels of violence among inmates.Abusive Physical Conditions:  As of December, the inmate population was 126 percent or more above design capacity.  Eleven prisons were above 100 percent capacity, six were above 150 percent capacity, and four above 200 percent capacity.  In the most overcrowded prisons, inmates slept on the floor.Authorities sometimes held men and women in mixed-gendered prisons and assigned women to the worst parts of prisons, with less access to food, private spaces, and visits from family members.Certain prisons lacked hygiene, sufficient access to potable water, sufficient or satisfactory food, and adequate educational and work opportunities.  The special rapporteur and the National Torture Preventive Mechanism (NPM) reported inadequate routine and emergency medical care.  Prisons lacked mental health and substance abuse rehabilitation services.According to a parliament-appointed special rapporteur, 34 percent of inmates in 2021 suffered from cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment, and 56 percent of inmates were improperly prepared for social integration upon release.Authorities sometimes kept prisoners confined in cells for long periods without the opportunity to exercise and without access to showers or sanitary facilities.The NPM and special rapporteur reported high levels of violence in prisons, both institutional and among inmates, particularly in larger prisons.  As of November, there were 11 homicides due to prisoner-on-prisoner violence.Administration:  Independent authorities conducted investigations of credible allegations of mistreatment.Independent Monitoring:  The government permitted monitoring by independent nongovernmental observers, local human rights groups, media, the International Committee of the Red Cross, and other international bodies.																										d. Arbitrary Arrest or Detention										The law 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 generally observed these requirements.																Arrest Procedures and Treatment of Detainees						Police apprehended suspects with warrants issued by a duly authorized official and brought them before an independent judiciary.  The law provided for arrests to be made without a judge’s order when persons were caught in the act of committing a crime.  It required a suspect be brought before a judge within 24 hours and charged with a crime.  Detainees were allowed prompt access to a lawyer of their choice, or one provided by the state.  These rights were respected; however, the 2021 National Torture Prevention Mechanism Report stated the government could not always provide a defense attorney to detainees unable to afford a private attorney.There was a bail system, but it was rarely used.  Most persons facing lesser charges were released on their own recognizance.  Officials allowed detainees prompt access to family members.																										e. Denial of Fair Public Trial										The constitution provided for an independent judiciary, and the government generally respected judicial independence and impartiality.																Trial Procedures						The constitution provided for the right to a fair and public trial, and the judiciary generally enforced this right.						Political Prisoners and Detainees						There were no reports of political prisoners or detainees.																										f. Transnational Repression										Not applicable.																																				g. Property Seizure and Restitution										Not applicable.																																				h. Arbitrary or Unlawful Interference with Privacy, Family, Home, or Correspondence										The constitution prohibited such actions, and there were no reports the government failed to respect these prohibitions.																																					Section 2.													 Respect for Civil Liberties												    																																																a. Freedom of Expression, Including for Members of the Press and Other Media										The law provided for freedom of expression, including for members of the press and other media, and the government generally respected this right.  An independent media, an effective judiciary, and a functioning democratic political system combined to promote freedom of expression, including for media members.Libel/Slander Laws:  Defamation was a criminal offense punishable if convicted by four months to three years in prison, a fine, or both.																Internet Freedom						The government did not restrict or disrupt access to the internet or censor online content.																										b. Freedoms of Peaceful Assembly and Association										The constitution provided for the freedoms of peaceful assembly and association, and the government generally respected these rights.																																				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 constitution provided for freedom of internal movement, foreign travel, emigration, and repatriation, and the government generally respected these rights.																																				e. Protection of Refugees										The government cooperated with the Office of the UN High Commissioner for Refugees and other humanitarian organizations in providing protection and assistance to refugees, returning refugees, or asylum seekers, as well as other persons of concern.Access to Asylum:  The law provided for the granting of asylum or refugee status, and the government had established a system for providing protection to refugees.																																					Section 3.													 Freedom to Participate in the Political Process												    																						The constitution and 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.																										Elections and Political Participation										Abuses or Irregularities in Recent Elections:  National elections were widely reported to be fair and free of abuses and irregularities.																																					Section 4.													 Corruption in Government												    																						The law provided criminal penalties for corruption by officials, and the government generally implemented the law effectively.  There were isolated reports of government corruption.For additional information regarding 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												    																						A variety of domestic and international human rights groups generally operated without government restriction to monitor or investigate human rights cases and publish their findings.  Government officials were often cooperative and responsive to their views.Government Human Rights Bodies:  The National Human Rights Institution (INDDHH) was an autonomous agency with quasi-jurisdictional powers that reported to parliament.  It was composed of five board members nominated by civil society organizations and approved by a two-thirds vote in parliament for five-year terms that could be renewed once.  The INDDHH was tasked with the defense, promotion, and protection of human rights provided for by the constitution and international law.  The NPM functioned within the INDDHH, conducting regular monitoring of detention facilities and issuing reports and recommendations.  Observers considered the INDDHH independent and effective in achieving its human rights objectives.																											Section 6.													 Discrimination and Societal Abuses												    																																																Women										Rape and Domestic Violence:  The law criminalized rape (including of men), including spousal and domestic or intimate partner rape and other forms of domestic and sexual violence, as well as so-called corrective rape of lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, or intersex (LGBTQI+) persons.  The law provided for sentences of three to 16 years’ imprisonment for a person convicted of rape, and authorities effectively enforced the law.  The law criminalized domestic violence and provided for sentences of six months’ to two years’ imprisonment for conviction of committing an act of domestic violence or making continued threats of violence.  Civil courts decided most domestic cases, and judges in these cases often issued restraining orders, which were sometimes difficult to enforce.The law addressed abuse that was physical, psychological, emotional, sexual, based on sexual orientation and gender identity, economic, related to assets, symbolic, obstetric, labor-related, educational, political, or related to media presence.  It also included sexual harassment and femicide.  According to civil society representatives, the law was not being fully implemented.  In February 2022, the government inaugurated the first of the specialized courts provided for by the law, a delay in implementation of five years.Other Forms of Gender-based Violence or Harassment:  The law prohibited sexual harassment in the workplace, which was punishable by fines or dismissal.  The law established guidelines for the prevention of sexual harassment in the workplace, as well as in student-professor relations, and provided for damages to victims.  The Ministry of Labor received reports of sexual harassment, its inspectors investigated claims of sexual harassment, and the ministry issued fines as necessary.Discrimination:  The law provided the same legal status and rights for women as for men, and those laws were generally respected.  Women, however, faced discrimination in employment, pay, credit, education, housing, and business ownership.  According to the United Nations, women’s employment was concentrated in a relatively small number of specific occupations and sectors, including services, sales, social services, health services, education, and domestic and unskilled labor.  Women earned lower wages than their male counterparts, on average 25 percent less for similar work.  Only an estimated 20 percent of companies reported having women in leadership positions.  According to a 2020 study published by the Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean and UN Women, 10 years after having a first child, women’s monthly salaries averaged 42 percent lower than that of women in similar circumstances who did not have children.  A 2021 study conducted by consultancy company Acrux Partners reported women had less access to credit than men.Reproductive Rights:  There were no reports of coerced abortion or involuntary sterilization on the part of government authorities.The government recognized, protected, and promoted sexual and reproductive rights without discrimination.  Problems remained, however, in the full implementation of these policies, especially in the interior of the country and for marginalized populations.  Adolescents; LGBTQI+ persons; persons with disabilities; and Afro-Uruguayan and other lower-income groups lacked full access to contraception and reproductive medical care.The government provided for individuals to be informed and have access to safe, effective, and affordable methods of family planning and contraception of their choice.  Emergency contraception was available as part of the method mix.  The government provided access to sexual and reproductive health services for survivors of sexual violence, including emergency contraception as part of clinical management of rape.  Teenage girls who were pregnant or were already mothers had lower levels of education, poorer, and more socially vulnerable.																																				Systemic Racial or Ethnic Violence and Discrimination										The constitution and law prohibited discrimination based on race or ethnicity, and the government made efforts to enforce the law.  Nonetheless, the country’s Afro-Uruguayan minority continued to face societal discrimination, high levels of poverty, and lower levels of education.  Government efforts to mitigate the problem included a law allocating 8 percent of government jobs to Afro-Uruguayan candidates who comply with constitutional and legal requirements.  The quota had yet to be reached by year’s end.  The law also required all scholarship and student support programs include an 8 percent quota for Afro-Uruguayans, and it provided for financial benefits to companies that hired them.  Nonetheless, the United Nations reported difficulties in meeting quotas.According to a 2020 World Bank report on social exclusion, Afro-Uruguayans earned 20 percent less than the population as a whole for the same work.  Afro-Uruguayan women had an unemployment rate of 14 percent, compared with 8 percent for the general population.  The law required that 8 percent of government positions be filled with Afro-Uruguayans.  The National Office of the Civil Service oversaw compliance with the Afro-Uruguayan (and other) employment quota requirements and submitted reports to parliament.  The office reported that although 8 percent of vacancy announcements were designated for Afro-Uruguayan applicants, as of 2021 less than 1 percent of designated positions were filled with Afro-Uruguayans.																																				Children										Child Abuse:  There were laws against child abuse, and penalties if convicted varied according to type of abuse.  The prison sentence for conviction of sexual abuse of children varied from two to 16 years in prison, depending on the gravity of the case.  Sentences for conviction of assault ranged from three months to eight years in prison, and for domestic violence from six months to two years in prison.  The government enforced laws effectively.The National Institute for Children and Adolescent Affairs (INAU) provided a free, nationwide hotline.  INAU’s System for the Protection of Children and Adolescents against Violence, together with nongovernmental organizations (NGOs), implemented awareness campaigns, and the institute coordinated interagency efforts on the protection of children’s rights.Child, Early, and Forced Marriage:  The legal minimum age for marriage was 16, but the law required parental consent through age 18.  The law defined forced marriage as a form of exploitation.  The laws were effectively enforced.Sexual Exploitation of Children:  The law prohibited the commercial sexual exploitation, sale, grooming or using children for commercial exploitation, including child sex trafficking.  The law prohibited child pornography.  The legal minimum age for consensual sex was age 15.  Authorities enforced the law.																																				Antisemitism										The Jewish Studies department of ORT (the Organization for Educational Resources and Technological Training) at the University and the National Israel Council estimated the country’s Jewish population ranged from 12,000 to 30,000 persons.  Representatives of Jewish organizations reported increased antisemitism in social media during the year, including instances of Holocaust denial and trivialization.  They stated antisemitic social-media commentary was particularly common during public events that involved members of the Jewish community.  These included the final match of the Uruguayan basketball league between the Nacional and the Jewish-community-founded Hebraica teams and the national Uruguayan soccer team match against the Israeli national team in the semifinals of the U-20 World Cup.  In October antisemitic commentary increased substantially following the start of the Israel-Hamas conflict.																																				Trafficking in Persons										See the Department of State’s 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 did not criminalize same-sex sexual conduct between adults, cross-dressing, or other sexual or gender characteristic-related behaviors.  Laws concerning statutory rape, immorality, or loitering were not disproportionately applied to LGBTQI+ persons.Violence and Harassment:  Police or other government agents did not incite, perpetrate, condone, or tolerate violence or harassment against LGBTQI+ individuals or those reporting abuse.  Nevertheless, civil society organizations reported LGBTQI+ persons faced violence and discrimination; 45 percent of transgender persons reportedly suffered violence due to their gender identity.Discrimination:  The law prohibited discrimination by state and nonstate actors based on sexual orientation, gender identity or expression, or sex characteristics.  It recognized LGBTQI+ individuals, couples, and their families and granted them rights equal to rights of other persons.  Leaders of civil society organizations reported, however, that despite the legal advancement of LGBTQI+ rights, societal discrimination remained high.  Nonbinary persons reported lack of visibility of this gender identity in legislation and several institutional settings.  Authorities enforced the law and endeavored to protect the rights of LGBTQI+ persons.The Latin America and Caribbean Transgender Persons Network (REDLACTRANS) presented a study in 2018 that stated human rights abuses of transgender women included discrimination, violence and aggression, theft, violation of the right to access justice, harassment, and homicide.  Discrimination toward transgender women was typically worse in the interior of the country, which tended to be more conservative and had smaller populations.  REDLACTRANS reported most transgender persons did not finish high school and most transgender women worked in the informal sector, where social benefits were not always provided.  They tended to be more vulnerable to dangerous and uncomfortable situations in commercial sex and were less likely to report threats or attacks.  Civil society reported it was less frequent for transgender men to be expelled from their homes; however, they suffered from high rates of depression and suicide.  Observers also noted they generally did not complete their education and therefore usually had unskilled and low-paying jobs.A law set an employment quota for transgender persons in the public sector at 1 percent, but the National Office of the Civil Service reported only 0.036 percent of civil service hires in 2021 were transgender persons.  A 2020 World Bank Report stated transgender persons, especially transgender men, had the highest level of unemployment in the entire population.  Thirty-four percent of the transgender population was unemployed; the unemployment rate among transgender women was 30 percent and 43 percent among transgender men.  Among those employed, approximately one-third were commercial sex workers.Availability of Legal Gender Recognition:  NGOs reported that although the law established the right of transgender persons to hormone therapies and sex reassignment surgery, there were reports some health-care providers did not offer these options to patients, without any consequence for not complying with the law.  Furthermore, civil society reported sex reassignment surgery was available only for transgender women (male to female).  The Integral Law for Transgender Persons Act provided for gender recognition, but the only options available were man, woman, transgender man, and transgender woman identifiers.  The law did not provide for “nonbinary, intersex, or gender nonconforming” identifiers.Involuntary or Coercive Medical or Psychological Practices:  There were no reports of forced or involuntary so-called conversion therapy practiced on adults or children to change sexual orientation or gender identity or expression.  Medically unnecessary and irreversible “normalization” surgeries were not performed on children or on nonconsenting adult intersex persons.Restrictions of Freedom of Expression, Association, or Peaceful Assembly:  There were no restrictions on these freedoms.																																				Persons with Disabilities										Persons with disabilities did not have access to education, employment, health services, public buildings, and transportation on an equal basis with others.  The law required such access, as well as communication and information in accessible formats.  The law provided for the protection of the rights and prohibited abuse of persons with physical, sensory, intellectual, and mental disabilities, including access to education, employment, health services, information, communications, buildings, transportation, the judicial system, and other state services.  Nevertheless, the law was not effectively or consistently enforced.Civil society representatives stated there was a general lack of services for persons with disabilities in the country’s interior.  The Ministry of Social Development administered several programs that provided for temporary housing support, care-giving services, legal assistance, and access to transportation, education, vocational training, and employment services; however, the ministry lacked the capacity to reach all persons with disabilities.Private and government-run facilities were unprotected and vulnerable due to lack of effective mechanisms for supervision.  According to a 2020 World Bank report on social inclusion, persons with disabilities faced barriers to participation in numerous sectors, especially in the labor market, education, and access to public spaces.  For example, the mobility of persons with disabilities was limited in Montevideo because only 450 of 1,500 public transportation buses were accessible for persons with disabilities, and those that were accessible operated with limited frequency on routes that did not include all areas of the city.  Government buildings, commercial sites, movie theaters, and other cultural venues as well as many public sidewalks lacked access ramps.  NGO representatives reported hospitals and medical services were not always accessible to patients with disabilities.  Medical staff often lacked training to deliver primary care and attention to these patients.The law provided for the right of children with disabilities to attend school (primary, secondary, and higher education).  An international organization reported “special schools” existed for children with disabilities, resulting in a de facto segregation for these children.  Children with disabilities attended school at significantly lower rates than children without disabilities and their completion rates were significantly lower than those of children without disabilities or children with disabilities in segregated schools.  Very few adolescents with disabilities were enrolled in secondary education.  NGOs reported some public schools built after enactment of the law protecting persons with disabilities did not comply with accessibility requirements and usually did not have resources to meet the specific needs of students with disabilities.The NPM monitored abuse in centers for children with mental health disabilities, including physical and verbal mistreatment.  Some centers prioritized security, order, and control, and lacked proper channels to report abuse.  According to the NPM, some children were held long after being medically eligible for discharge due to the unavailability of adequate follow-up assistance.The NPM also reported problems in temporary processing centers where children or adolescents separated from their families were sent for diagnosis, evaluation, and initial care.  Abuses included prolonged stays, overcrowding, mistreatment, stressful conditions, and a lack of staff.  A 2020 World Bank report stated 59 percent of working-age persons with disabilities participated in the labor market, compared with 76 percent for persons who did not report disabilities.  The law required a hiring quota for persons with disabilities in the public and private sectors; however, the National Office of the Civil Service stated only 0.4 percent of civil service hires during 2021 were persons with a disability.Institutionalized Children:  The NPM reported on abuse in centers for children with mental health disabilities, including physical and verbal mistreatment.  Some centers prioritized security, order, and control, and some lacked proper channels to report abuse.  According to the NPM, some children were held long after being medically eligible for discharge due to the unavailability of adequate follow-up assistance.The NPM also reported problems in the temporary processing centers where children or adolescents separated from their families were sent for diagnosis, evaluation, and initial care.  Abuses included prolonged stays, overcrowding, mistreatment, stressful conditions, and a lack of staff.																																					Section 7.													 Worker Rights												    																																																a. Freedom of Association and the Right to Collective Bargaining										The constitution and the law, including related regulations and statutory instruments, protected the right of workers to form and join independent unions, bargain collectively, and conduct legal strikes.  The government and employers respected freedom of association and the right to collective bargaining.  Civil servants, employees of state-run enterprises, private-enterprise workers, and legal foreign workers could join unions.  The law prohibited antiunion discrimination and required employers to reinstate workers, including migrant workers, fired for union activities and to pay them an indemnity.  Workers in the informal sector were excluded from these protections.The government effectively enforced applicable labor laws, and penalties were commensurate with those for other laws involving denials of civil rights, such as discrimination.  Penalties were regularly applied to violators.Worker organizations operated free of government and political interference.  Labor union leaders were strong advocates for public policies and even foreign policy issues and remained very active in the political and economic life of the country.  In May, parliament approved changes to collective bargaining legislation.  The revised law partially complied with International Labor Organization (ILO) recommendations to ensure that collective bargaining was voluntary.  The ILO had previously noted the rule under which tripartite bodies were permitted to negotiate wages (terms and conditions of work were negotiated bilaterally between employers and workers organizations) might have constituted mandatory collective bargaining and was inconsistent with relevant ILO conventions.																																				b. Prohibition of Forced or Compulsory Labor										See the Department of State’s 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 law provided for a national minimum wage, and the monthly minimum wage for all workers was above the poverty line.  Formal-sector workers, including part-time workers, domestic and migrant workers, and workers in the agricultural sector, were covered by laws on minimum wage and hours of work.The law stipulated a workday of not more than eight hours a day and a standard workweek for those in the industrial and retail sectors not to exceed 44 or 48 hours, with daily breaks of 30 minutes to two and one-half hours.  The law required workers receive premium pay for work more than regular work schedule hours.  The law entitled all workers to 20 days of paid vacation after one year of employment and paid annual holidays, and it prohibited compulsory overtime beyond a maximum 50-hour workweek.  Employers in the industrial sector were required to give workers either Sunday off or one day off every six days of work (variable workweek).  Workers in the retail sector were entitled to a 36-hour block of free time each week.  Workers in the rural sector were restricted to not more than 48 hours of work in a period of six days.Occupational Safety and Health:  The law proscribed exposure of workers to situations that endangered their health or safety and provided for them to remove themselves from such situations without jeopardy to their employment.  The Ministry of Labor set occupational safety and health (OSH) standards, and the standards were current and appropriate for the main industries in the country.  OSH experts actively identified unsafe conditions and responded to workers’ OSH complaints.  Government authorities and unions protected employees who removed themselves from such activities.  In some cases, workers were not informed of specific hazards or employers did not adequately enforce labor safety measures.Wage, Hour, and OSH Enforcement:  The Ministry of Labor was responsible for enforcing the minimum monthly wage for both public- and private-sector employees and for enforcing legislation regulating OSH conditions.  The government monitored wages and other benefits, such as social security and health insurance, through the Social Security Fund and the Internal Revenue Service.  The Ministry of Public Health’s Bureau of Environment and Occupational Work was responsible for developing policies to detect, analyze, prevent, and control risk factors that could affect workers’ health.  The ministry had 120 labor inspectors throughout the country, which was sufficient to enforce compliance.  Penalties were commensurate with those for similar crimes and were regularly applied against violators.The Labor Ministry’s Social Security Fund monitored domestic work and with judicial authorization conducted home inspections, some unannounced, to investigate potential labor law violations and initiate sanctions when necessary.  Conditions for domestic workers included labor rights, social security benefits, wage increases, and insurance benefits.Minimum wage, hour, and OSH laws were not enforced in the informal sector, which accounted for 22 percent of the workforce.																																				    							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											Tonga											The Bahamas											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																																																			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																																																						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																																																			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 Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor																								Bureau of Western Hemisphere Affairs																								Uruguay
- Economic and Health Dialogue of the Americas Advances Through a Second Annual High-level Meeting in the Dominican Republic Office of the SpokespersonOn March 10, 2024, Under Secretary of State for Economic Growth, Energy, and the Environment, Jose W. Fernandez, kicked off the Second Annual High-Level Meetings of the Economic and Health Dialogue of the Americas (EHA) alongside PAHO Deputy Director Mary Lou Valdez, Department of Commerce Deputy Under Secretary Diane Farrell, Executive Vice President of the Inter-American Development Bank, Mr. Jordan Schwartz, and Minister of Health for the Dominican Republic Víctor Atallah at the welcoming reception. Official government meetings were held the next day on March 11, where ministers and vice ministers from 17 countries across ministries of finance, economy, health, foreign affairs and social development were in attendance.Several countries were represented by ministries of health, as well as ministries of finance, economy, foreign affairs, and commerce given the whole-of-government approach the EHA takes through multisectoral workstreams. EHA co-chairs, the United States and Panama, made remarks at the event along with the country host of the meeting, the Dominican Republic. EHA members focused discussions on smart spending, prioritization of health-sector transformation, responsive social protections, technology and health, workforce development, and foundations of resilient supply chains.EHA co-lead countries Brazil, Paraguay, Bahamas, Costa Rica, Argentina, Peru, Uruguay, Chile and the United States affirmed leadership roles for 2024, and members approved the workplan for the coming year. Several USG agencies were in attendance, including USAID, CDC, USTDA and Commerce. USAID and the Department of State made several announcements along with several EHA members. For more information on those announcements please see the fact sheet: https://www.state.gov/economic-and-health-dialogue-of-the-americas-high-level-meeting-outcomes-for-2024/.Learn more about the EHA on the main webpage: https://www.iadb.org/en/home/economic-and-health-dialogue-americas .To stay up to date, follow Under Secretary Fernandez on X: @State_E, LinkedIn: @State-E, and Facebook: @StateDeptE.For further media information, please contact E_Communications@state.gov.
- Economic and Health Dialogue of the Americas High-level Meeting Outcomes for 2024 Office of the SpokespersonThe Economic and Health Dialogue of the Americas (EHA) was launched on the margins of the 9th Summit of the Americas in June 2022 by the U.S. Department of State. In 2023, the EHA held its first high-level meeting to establish the governance structure and approve scope of work. Since then, countries have organized 11 technical meetings and a first in person encounter in Uruguay at the end of 2023.On the 11th of March of 2024, the 2nd annual high-level meeting of the EHA was held in the Dominican Republic with representation from 17 countries. Ministers and Vice Ministers from health, finance, economy, foreign affairs, and commerce agencies participated to include Ministerial-level participation from of the United States, Dominican Republic, Uruguay, Mexico, Bahamas, Costa Rica, Guyana, Guatemala, Suriname, Panama, Colombia, and Paraguay, in addition to high-level representatives from Brazil, Chile, Argentina, and Ecuador. In addition to government representatives, leadership from regional technical organizations participated, including IDB Executive Vice President Jordan Schwartz and PAHO Deputy Director Mary Lou Valdez. Representatives from ECLAC, USAID, USTDA, U.S. Department of Commerce, and CDC were also in attendance.What were the main agreements and outcomes of the 2nd Annual EHA High-Level Meeting in the Dominican Republic?Countries reaffirmed EHA’s commitment to strengthen health systems and economic resilience to emergencies in the region. Paraguay, Uruguay, Bahamas, Argentina, Peru, Brazil, and Chile affirmed their commitment to co-lead EHA technical working groups. Panama was praised for their leadership as co-chair of EHA along with United States.PAHO announced the launch of their Public Finance Management tool. The tool will enable countries to conduct analysis of fiscal space for the health sector to support responsible spending as well as sustainable and equitable public health financing. PAHO has committed to the goal of two countries applying the tool in 2024-2025. Several countries expressed interest at the meeting. The work supports the “Smart Spending” workstream.PAHO committed to use the Essential Public Health Functions (EPHF) assessments from 14 countries to produce a policy document that would establish shared priorities and identify institutional capacity gaps across the region that will require future investment to fill, with a sub-regional focus on Caribbean countries. This work will support the workstream on Prioritization of Health Sector Transformation, which is led by the Bahamas. The Bahamas announced the completion of their EPHF assessment at the meeting.Brazil, Dominican Republic, and Chile committed to apply the IDB’s Maturity Assessment Tool (MAT) to measure the capacity of social protection systems to respond to emergencies. Countries like Colombia, Dominican Republic, and Paraguay outlined some of the best practices around social protection during COVID-19, as well as lessons learned from other sectors and emergency response scenarios. The goal for 2024 will be to explore potential regional agreements to coordinate increased preparedness and responsiveness to future crises in the region. This work supports workstream on Responsive Social Protection.EHA countries announced commitment to conduct a pharmaceutical mapping exercise and prepare a regional strategy for nearshoring of critical inputs and consumables. EHA members short-listed mRNA vaccines, monoclonal antibodies, and antimicrobials, including for malaria and tuberculosis, as priority products for the 2024-2025 analysis. The United States committed to support this analysis in coordination with co-leads Argentina and Peru. Argentina affirmed their commitment to conduct a regional Private-Public Partnership analysis. This work supports the Resilient Supply Chain workstream.USAID shared progress on the Americas Health Corps initiative, announcing the training of 120,000 healthcare workers in the region thus far.USAID also announced funding for a market analysis of the current capacity within the Latin America and Caribbean (LAC) region to produce or manufacture vaccine countermeasures for emerging threats, endemic diseases, and local priorities relevant to the regional market. The EHA platform committed to supporting the implementation of recommendations from the analysis.EHA members approved the work plan for 2024-2025 and committed to a mid-year high-level meeting to review progress.EHA members recognized the importance of digital health and utilization of technology in the public health system and proposed establishing a new EHA workstream on technology and health. The EHA Executive Technical Working Group will develop a scope of work for this proposed workstream with the goal of launching it in 2024.For further information, please contact E_Commmunications@state.gov, or visit the EHA website: https://www.iadb.org/en/home/economic-and-health-dialogue-americas .
- Joint Statement on the Second U.S.-Uruguay Annual Bilateral Inter-Ministerial Dialogue Office of the SpokespersonThe text of the following statement was released by the Governments of the United States of America and the Republic of Uruguay on the occasion of the Second U.S.-Uruguay Annual Bilateral Inter-Ministerial Dialogue.Begin Text.The United States and Uruguay held their second Annual Bilateral Inter-Ministerial Dialogue in Washington on February 15, 2024.  Assistant Secretary of State for Western Hemisphere Affairs Brian A. Nichols and a U.S. delegation of six federal departments and agencies, welcomed Foreign Minister Omar Paganini and the Uruguayan delegation to Washington, D.C.  Together, they agreed innovation and common purpose characterized the U.S.-Uruguay relationship and the opportunities that lie ahead.Building on the June 2023 meeting between President Biden and President Lacalle Pou, the delegations affirmed their common commitment to democratic governance, regional integration, inclusive economic growth, and expanding opportunity through sustainable trade and investment.With a focus on innovation, the two sides highlighted how their economies work together to create jobs, raise the standard of living, and grow next generation industries.  The U.S delegation praised Uruguay’s impressive leadership within the Americas Partnership for Economic Prosperity, particularly its active role through the Uruguay Innovation Hub program, the start-up accelerator, and green hydrogen.  The Uruguayan delegation thanked the United States for hosting the Americas Partnership Leaders’ Summit at the White House and underscored its efforts to lead an angel investor network.  The Uruguayan delegation announced Uruguay’s signing of the Artemis Accords, and the United States agreed to support Uruguay exploring civilian and commercial space industries.  The United States and Uruguay also reaffirmed their shared commitment to the Partnership for Atlantic Cooperation as an engine of Atlantic regional integration with an emphasis on economic development, environmental protection, and scientific exchange.The two sides also discussed bilateral trade and investment and agreed to further improve bilateral trade and investment conditions, including an expedited resolution for the ongoing review of agricultural sanitary processes.  Both delegations recognized progress towards a Trilateral Cooperation agreement between USAID and the International Cooperation Agency of Uruguay (AUCI) to collaborate on development projects in third countries in the region, with the commitment to finalize a Memorandum of Understanding in the near future.  The United States acknowledged Uruguay’s request for assistance with a supply of sterile flies and committed to reevaluating the request in the future and analyzing other options to implement the program as soon as possible.The two sides explored innovative solutions to improve security conditions in the region.  They agreed to strengthen collaboration in fighting transnational crime and drug trafficking through drug interdiction, law enforcement training, drug treatment and demand reduction programs. Finally, they discussed the importance of securing regional support for the Multinational Security Support Mission to Haiti.The U.S. and Uruguayan delegations also signed a modernized Memorandum of Understanding for the U.S.-Uruguay Fulbright Program, establishing a stable annual allocation from both countries.  The United States noted Uruguay’s progress toward eligibility for the Visa Waiver Program and reaffirmed its continued support of Uruguay’s efforts.  Moreover, both delegations celebrated the signing of the U.S.- Uruguay Global Entry Joint Statement that expressed their commitment for a prompt accession of Uruguay to the Global Entry Program.The United States recognized Uruguay’s leadership on the international stage, including its votes on resolutions at the United Nations, its clear and consistent criticism of Russia’s unjust war against Ukraine, and its support for the Barbados electoral roadmap agreement to achieve a return to democracy in Venezuela.  The Uruguayan delegation thanked the United States for its warm hospitality and commended the successful organization of the Annual Bilateral Inter-Ministerial Dialogue.  Both sides reaffirmed their desire to continue working closely together at the bilateral, regional, and international levels.The Uruguayan delegation invited the United States to Uruguay for the next annual meeting in 2025.End Text.
- United States Welcomes Uruguay’s Signing of the Artemis Accords    Office of the SpokespersonOn February 15, 2024, Uruguay became the 36th signatory to the Artemis Accords, underscoring its commitment to the peaceful, safe, and transparent exploration and use of outer space.  Uruguayan Foreign Minister Omar Paganini signed for Uruguay during a ceremony at NASA Headquarters in Washington in the presence of Uruguayan Ambassador to the United States Andrés Durán, NASA Administrator Bill Nelson, U.S. Ambassador to Uruguay Heide Fulton, and Deputy Assistant Secretary Kevin Sullivan.The United States welcomes Uruguay as an esteemed partner in advancing our shared goals for peace, prosperity, and scientific discovery in space.  Today, our countries held our second Annual Bilateral Inter-Ministerial Dialogue where we strengthened our partnership on innovation, democracy, and educational exchanges.  Our growing high-tech commercial ties and commitment to democracy are the foundation of our strong relationship. Together, we will continue to uphold the principles of the Artemis Accords and work towards a future of cooperation and exploration beyond Earth&#8217;s bounds.The Artemis Accords were established in 2020 by the United States and seven other countries.  They set out a practical set of principles to guide space exploration.  Uruguay joins 35 other nations – Angola, Argentina, Australia, Bahrain, Belgium, Brazil, Bulgaria, Canada, Colombia, Czech Republic, Ecuador, France, Germany, Greece, Iceland, India, Israel, Italy, Japan, Luxembourg, Mexico, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Nigeria, Poland, the Republic of Korea, Romania, Rwanda, Saudi Arabia, Singapore, Spain, Ukraine, the United Arab Emirates, the United Kingdom, and the United States – in affirming the Accords’ principles for sustainable civil space activity.  The Department of State and NASA lead the United States’ outreach and implementation of the Accords.For more information, please visit https://www.state.gov/artemis-accords/.  For media inquiries, please contact OES-Press@state.gov.
- United States – Uruguay Bilateral Inter-Ministerial Dialogue Office of the SpokespersonThe United States will host the second annual U.S.-Uruguay Annual Bilateral Inter-Ministerial Dialogue on February 15 in Washington, D.C.&nbsp; Assistant Secretary of State for Western Hemisphere Affairs Brian A. Nichols and Uruguayan Minister of Foreign Affairs&nbsp;Omar Ignacio Paganini Herrera&nbsp;will co-chair the dialogue.&nbsp; The U.S. delegation will include senior government officials from the Department of State, the Department of Homeland Security, the Department of Commerce, the United States Agency for International Development, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration, and the Federal Aviation Administration.The United States and Uruguay will discuss issues of shared interest including economic advancement through the Americas Partnership for Economic Prosperity, the Partnership for Atlantic Cooperation, countering regional transnational crime, and increasing drug prevention and treatment services.&nbsp; The dialogue will focus on innovative solutions to bolster bilateral and regional commerce, improve people-to-people exchanges, promote space cooperation, and partner on regional development projects.On global issues, the delegations will discuss mutual support for the Multinational Security Support mission to Haiti, implementation of the Barbados electoral roadmap agreement to support competitive presidential elections and restore democracy in Venezuela, and Russia’s unjust war against Ukraine.						Tags																					Bureau of Western Hemisphere Affairs																								Office of the Spokesperson																								Uruguay
- Economic Health Dialogue of the Americas Advances Through a Strategic Summit in Uruguay HomeOffice of the SpokespersonPress Releases&#8230;Economic Health Dialogue of the Americas Advances Through a Strategic Summit in Uruguay				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();			}		});	}																										Economic Health Dialogue of the Americas Advances Through a Strategic Summit in Uruguay																																		Media Note																														December 7, 2023																																							On December 6, 2023, Under Secretary of State for Economic Growth, Energy, and the Environment Jose W. Fernandez hosted the Economic Health Dialogue of the Americas (EHA) Strategic Summit alongside Dr. Jarbas Barbosa, Director of the Pan American Health Organization (PAHO), Minister of Health for Uruguay, Karina Rando, and the Inter-American Development Bank (IDB) with country representatives from 18 countries.Presentations were made from EHA co-lead countries of Uruguay, Paraguay, Brazil, and the United States on the advancement of our work in four key workstreams – smart spending for health and health resource analysis; prioritization of health sector transformation; social protection in emergencies; and foundations for strengthening supply chains.&nbsp; The meeting served as an opportunity for countries to learn more about the progress of the EHA and begin strategic planning for the&nbsp;next EHA Ministerial Meeting in March 2024.The EHA comprises a series of official sector-only meetings aimed at fostering the political will and commitments necessary to strengthen public health systems and protect economies in the region.&nbsp;Launched by Secretary Blinken at the Ninth Summit of the Americas in June 2022,&nbsp;the EHA actively supports countries in the region in coordinating efforts for health system resilience, as well as in identifying and leveraging best practices in the public sector, with a focus on the intersections of health and the economy. This initiative receives joint support from the U.S. Department of State, PAHO, the IDB, and the Organization of American States.To learn more about the EHA, visit: Economic and Health Dialogue of the Americas, and read Under Secretary Fernandez’s full remarks from the summit.To stay up to date, follow Under Secretary Fernandez on Twitter/X:  @State_E, LinkedIn: @State-E, and Facebook: @StateDeptE.For press inquiries, please contact: E_Communications@state.gov.						Tags																					Brazil																								Bureau of Western Hemisphere Affairs																																														Economic Prosperity and Trade Policy																																																					Global Health																															Office of the Spokesperson																								Paraguay																								Under Secretary for Economic Growth, Energy, and the Environment																								Uruguay
- Under Secretary Fernandez’s Travel to Chile, Uruguay and Paraguay Office of the SpokespersonUnder Secretary of State for Economic Growth, Energy and the Environment Jose W. Fernandez will travel to Chile, Uruguay and Paraguay November 5-11, 2023, to deepen economic cooperation and strengthen strategic partnerships.  During his visit, he will meet foreign government counterparts and private sector leaders on priority topics including critical minerals, clean energy, trade and investment, technology, health, and the environment. In Chile and Uruguay, Under Secretary Fernandez will follow up on the inaugural Leaders’ Summit  of the Americas Partnership for Economic Prosperity (Americas Partnership), which President Biden hosted at the White House on November 3.In Santiago, Chile, November 5-7, Under Secretary Fernandez will meet with business leaders and government officials to discuss the new financing tools the President announced at the Americas Partnership Summit, bolster trade and investment, support Chile’s ICT infrastructure, advance cooperation in APEC ahead of the November 15-17 APEC Economic Leaders’ Meeting in San Francisco, and strengthen critical mineral supply chains to accelerate the clean energy transition.  Under Secretary Fernandez will also provide keynote remarks and participate in a panel on critical minerals at the Wilson Center Conference on US-Chile Climate Action and the Energy Transition.Under Secretary Fernandez will visit Montevideo, Uruguay, on November 8 to follow up on the Americas Partnership Summit, particularly President Biden’s announcement of a new regional accelerator for entrepreneurs.  He will also meet member countries at the Latin American Energy Organization (OLADE) Energy Week Ministerial, where he will explore areas of partnership to strengthen green energy cooperation, tackle environmental challenges, and expand investment in Latin America’s energy transition.  He will also provide remarks at the International Renewable Energy Agency (IRENA) Latin America Energy Transition Investment Forum and meet with key partners in the Uruguayan government.In Asuncion, Paraguay, November 9-10, Under Secretary Fernandez will meet with government officials to discuss deepening trade and investment, supporting communication technology infrastructure, and addressing shared environmental concerns.  He will also meet with farmers and producers to discuss sustainable agriculture and new techniques to increase food-system resilience.To stay up to date, follow Under Secretary Fernandez on Twitter: @State_E, Facebook: @StateDeptE, and LinkedIn: @State-E.For press inquiries, please contact: E_Communications@state.gov.
- Uruguay National Day Antony J. Blinken, Secretary of StateOn behalf of the people of the United States, I congratulate the people of Uruguay on the 198th anniversary of your independence.The strong partnership between Uruguay and the United States is built on our shared values and vision for the world—one grounded in liberty, democracy, and individual rights.  We are working side by side to make that vision a reality—including by protecting human rights and promoting inclusive economic growth across the Americas.  We are also working together to tackle important challenges, like the climate crisis and regional security.  We welcome Uruguay’s leadership in the hemisphere, multilateral fora, and across the world, and are proud to stand with Uruguay to promote peace and defend our common democratic values.In the year ahead, I look forward to further strengthening our partnership—and friendship—as we continue to forge a more free, secure, and prosperous future for our citizens and for people around the world.
- Expanding the Global Equality Fund and Protecting Human Rights with New International Partners Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and LaborArshelle CarterJust this last week, the United States welcomed New Zealand as the 19th government to the Global Equality Fund. Together with the private sector, the Global Equality Fund has dedicated over $100 million to more than 100 countries – providing advocates training, giving them tools to prevent violence, to prevent discrimination.In late June, Secretary Blinken announced New Zealand as the latest donor partner to join the Global Equality Fund (GEF), during a Pride Month event at the U.S. Department of State.  The GEF is a  public-private partnership comprised of like-minded governments and private-sector entities dedicated to advancing and defending the human rights and fundamental freedoms of lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, and intersex (LGBTQI+) persons around the world.  Through the GEF, governments, companies, foundations, and NGOs work collaboratively to advance local initiatives spearheaded by human rights defenders and civil society organizations working to protect LGBTQI+ persons from violence and abuse, criminalization, discrimination, and stigma, and to empower local LGBTQI+ movements and people.The New Zealand announcement follows the joining of another key ally to the GEF.  In May, the Secretary held a signing ceremony alongside Spanish Foreign Minister José Manuel Albares, announcing Spain’s commitment to join the Global Equality Fund (GEF) as a donor partner.  Spain and New Zealand’s partnership strengthens the GEF’s ability to support human rights and representative democracies.  Secretary Blinken and Spanish Foreign Minister Albares participate in a signing ceremony announcing Spain’s commitment to join the Global Equality Fund as a donor partner on May 10, 2023. &nbsp;GEF programs expand citizen access to full civic and political participation.  Promoting and protecting the human rights of LGBTQI+ persons is a year-round commitment of the Department and critical for strengthening democracy.  GEF programs have made significant impacts globally.  In just the past two years, GEF programs have:trained and supported more than 6,600 human rights defenders globally;provided emergency assistance to more than 470 human rights defenders and more than 90 civil society organizations, helping to provide safety and security so they can continue their critical work; andimproved legal assistance for more than 2,300 individuals from low-income or marginalized communities through legal and victim’s aid.A telling example of the GEF’s impact is apparent in Botswana, where the sustained, flexible support of the GEF over 10 years contributed not only to the registration of the first LGBTQI+ organization in the country, but also to a historic decriminalization judgment.  Through a holistic approach, GEF support – coupled with efforts by other donors – enabled activists and partners to determine local priorities and to chart the best path forward.  The GEF supported projects to reduce stigma, discrimination, and violence by implementing an incremental strategy to decriminalize consensual same-sex sexual acts.  However, LGBTQI+ community needs do not end with major court decisions; the GEF will continue to fund community-driven movement building in Botswana and globally in pursuit of a safer, more equal world for all. Members of civil society in Botswana held public dialogues on the implications of decriminalizing same-sex relations. In November 2021, the Court of Appeal unanimously upheld the High Court’s decision to decriminalize. As it enters its second decade, the GEF remains a leading global force to:   Mobilize funding and resources that strengthen local LGBTQI+ movements and leadership that reflect the diversity of the community; Empower locally led and diverse movements leading efforts to mitigate violence and discrimination against LGBTQI+ persons; and    Connect donors, international and regional institutions, and LGBTQI+ civil society groups to ensure that voices of local communities are heard, authentically represented, and affirmed. The critical work of the GEF is not possible without the support and leadership of its partners: Argentina, Australia, Canada, Chile, Croatia, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Iceland, Italy, Montenegro, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Spain, Sweden, Uruguay, the Arcus Foundation, the John D. Evans Foundation, the MAC AIDS Fund, Deloitte LLP, Royal Bank of Canada, Hilton, Bloomberg L.P., Marriott International, the Thomson Reuters Foundation, and Out Leadership. About the Author:  Arshelle Carter is a 2022 Thomas R. Pickering Foreign Affairs Fellow and Summer 2023 intern in the Office of Global Programs in the Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor.