Bolivia

The Plurinational State of Bolivia is a landlocked country and a democratic republic located in South America.

In 2006, the assumption of power of the first indigenous president of Bolivia, Evo Morales, was followed by a review of the role of the Catholic church in the country and its influence on government. In 2009, this culminated in the adoption of a new Constitution following a national referendum, which declared the country a secular State. The Catholic Church nevertheless remains a prominent force in State politics.[ref]https://www.awid.org/sites/default/files/atoms/files/feminists_on_the_frontlines_-_bolivia_-_inclusion_of_sexual_and_reproductive_rights.pdf[/ref]

Around 76.8% of the population identifies as Roman Catholic, 16% as Protestant (including evangelical Protestant and Pentecostal groups). Approximately 5% identify as non-believers.[ref]https://minorityrights.org/country/bolivia/[/ref] Amongst the indigenous population, who constitute around 41% of the population, formal Catholicism is mixed with an attachment to traditional beliefs and rituals.[ref]https://www.thearda.com/internationalData/countries/Country_27_2.asp[/ref]

Constitution and government Education and children’s rights Family, community, society, religious courts and tribunals Freedom of expression advocacy of humanist values
The dominant influence of religion in public life undermines the right to equality and/or non-discrimination
Some concerns about political or media freedoms, not specific to the non-religious
The state is secular, with separation of religious and political authorities, not discriminating against any religion or belief
No formal discrimination in education
No religious tribunals of concern, secular groups operate freely, individuals are not persecuted by the state
Constitution and government
The state is secular, with separation of religious and political authorities, not discriminating against any religion or belief
Education and children’s rights
No formal discrimination in education
Family, community, society, religious courts and tribunals
The dominant influence of religion in public life undermines the right to equality and/or non-discrimination
No religious tribunals of concern, secular groups operate freely, individuals are not persecuted by the state
Freedom of expression advocacy of humanist values
Some concerns about political or media freedoms, not specific to the non-religious
Use of Conscientious Objection clauses resulting in the denial of lawful services to women and LGBTI+ people
Religious or ideological instruction is mandatory in all or most state-funded schools with no secular or humanist alternative
Insufficient information or detail not included in this report
Insufficient information or detail not included in this report

Countries: Kazakhstan

The state is secular, with separation of religious and political authorities, not discriminating against any religion or belief
Insufficient information or detail not included in this report
No fundamental restrictions on freedom of expression or advocacy of humanist values
Insufficient information or detail not included in this report

Countries: no countries relate to this boundary condition

No condition holds in this strand
No condition holds in this strand

Countries: Andorra

No condition holds in this strand
Religious courts or tribunals rule directly on some family or ‘moral’ matters; it is legally an opt-in system, but the possibility of social coercion is very clear
No condition holds in this strand

Countries: no countries relate to this boundary condition

Localised or infrequent but recurring and widespread social marginalisation or prejudice against the non-religious

This condition is unusual in that it is applied in cases where there is some social discrimination, but it is not pervasive or nationwide. This condition is applied when there is sufficient background evidence to warrant the assertion that discrimination is not anomalous but widespread, and this condition may be applied for example even where if there is no legislative discrimination or where the non-religious may have legal recourse against such discrimination. However, societal discrimination (i.e. discrimination by peers, as opposed to state or legal discrimination) is not easily measured, and for this reason the Report does not currently have similar more severe boundary conditions to capture higher levels of social discrimination per se. In principle these may be introduced in future. However, we consider that countries with actual higher levels of social discrimination against the non-religious will generally already meet other higher level (more severe) boundary conditions under this thematic strand.

Countries: Botswana, Greece, Serbia, United States of America

The dominant influence of religion in public life undermines the right to equality and/or non-discrimination

Applied when the influence of religion on public life undermines others’ rights, such as SRHR, women’s rights, LGBTI+ rights.

May be applied when the influence is overt (i.e. when religious laws are applied to undermine others’ rights) or covert (i.e. where religious pressure groups exert influence to affect policy)

Countries: Andorra, Antigua and Barbuda, Armenia, Bahamas, Belize, Bolivia, Brunei Darussalam, Congo, Democratic Republic of, Croatia, Cuba, Dominica, Dominican Republic, El Salvador, Eswatini, Fiji, Gambia, Ghana, Guatemala, Guinea, Hungary, Iran, Italy, Jamaica, Jordan, Liberia, Lithuania, Mexico, Moldova, Montenegro, Mozambique, Nicaragua, North Macedonia, Oman, Paraguay, Qatar, Romania, Russia, Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Slovakia, Solomon Islands, Sri Lanka, Suriname, Timor-Leste (East Timor), Trinidad and Tobago, Ukraine, Zambia

The non-religious are persecuted socially or there are prohibitive social taboos against atheism, humanism or secularism
Complete tyranny precludes all freedoms of expression and thought, religion or belief

Applied when overriding acts of oppression by the State are extreme, to the extent that the question of freedom of thought and expression is almost redundant, because all human rights and freedoms are quashed by authorities.

Countries: North Korea

Expression of core Humanist principles on democracy, freedom and human rights is brutally repressed
Expression of non-religious views is severely persecuted, or is rendered almost impossible by severe social stigma, or is highly likely to be met with hatred or violence
There is significant social marginalisation of the non-religious or stigma associated with expressing atheism, humanism or secularism
Religious or ideological indoctrination is utterly pervasive in schools
There is a nominal state church with few privileges or progress is being made toward disestablishment

Countries: Bulgaria, Norway, Peru, Rwanda

The non-religious are barred from some government offices (including posts reserved for particular religions or sects)
‘Apostasy’ is outlawed and punishable with a prison sentence

Countries: Bahrain, Comoros, Jordan, Kuwait

‘Apostasy’ or conversion from a specific religion is outlawed and punishable by death
Some religious courts rule in civil or family matters on a coercive or discriminatory basis
Religious authorities have supreme authority over the state

Countries: Iran

State legislation is partly derived from religious law or by religious authorities
Preferential treatment is given to a religion or religion in general

This condition is applied where there are miscellaneous indicators that organs of the state offer various forms of support for a religion, or to religion in general over non-religious worldviews, suggesting a preference for those beliefs, or that the organs of that religion are privileged.

Countries: Albania, Algeria, Andorra, Antigua and Barbuda, Argentina, Australia, Austria, Bahamas, Belize, Bhutan, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Brazil, Burundi, Canada, Cape Verde, Chile, Colombia, Croatia, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Dominican Republic, Equatorial Guinea, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Finland, Germany, Ghana, Guatemala, Guyana, Haiti, Iceland, India, Indonesia, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Jamaica, Japan, Kuwait, Kyrgyzstan, Liberia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Madagascar, Malawi, Malaysia, Mali, Malta, Mauritania, Mauritius, Montenegro, Mozambique, Nepal, New Zealand, Nigeria, North Macedonia, Oman, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Poland, Qatar, Romania, Rwanda, San Marino, Serbia, Seychelles, Sierra Leone, Singapore, Slovakia, Solomon Islands, Sri Lanka, Tajikistan, Tanzania, Timor-Leste (East Timor), Tunisia, Turkey, Tuvalu, United Kingdom, Vanuatu, Venezuela, Zimbabwe

There is a pattern of impunity or collusion in violence by non-state actors against the nonreligious
State-funded schools provide religious education which may be nominally comprehensive but is substantively biased or borderline confessional
Religious or ideological instruction in a significant number of schools is of a coercive fundamentalist or extremist variety

This condition highlights countries where schools subject children to fundamentalist religious instruction with no real opportunity to question fundamentalist tenets, or where lessons routinely encourage hatred (for example religious or ethnic hatred). The wording “significant number of schools” is not given a rigid quantification (sometimes the worst-offending schools are unregistered, illegal, or otherwise uncounted); however the condition is not applied in cases where only a small number of schools meet the description and may be anomalous, as opposed to being indicative of a widespread problem.

Countries: Bangladesh, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia

State legislation is largely or entirely derived from religious law or by religious authorities
Anomalous discrimination by local or provincial authorities, or overseas territories
Religious or ideological instruction is mandatory in at least some public schools (without secular or humanist alternatives)
‘Blasphemy’ or criticism of religion is outlawed and punishable by death
Government figures or state agencies openly marginalize, harass, or incite hatred or violence against the non-religious
Government authorities push a socially conservative, religiously or ideologically inspired agenda, without regard to the rights of those with progressive views
It is illegal to advocate secularism or church-state separation, or such advocacy is suppressed
Prohibitive interreligious social control (including interreligious marriage bans)
Quasi-divine veneration of a ruling elite is enforced, or a single-party regime holds uncontested power, subject to severe punishment
Legal or constitutional provisions exclude non-religious views from freedom of belief
It is illegal to register an explicitly Humanist, atheist, secularist or other non-religious NGO or other human rights organization, or such groups are persecuted by authorities
There is a religious tax or tithing which is compulsory, or which is state-administered and discriminates by precluding non-religious groups
The non-religious are barred from holding government office
Some concerns about children's right to specifically religious freedom

This condition may apply if specifically religious education, religious materials, or specific religious denominations are so tightly controlled that children are in fact over-protected from exposure to religion and are likely unable to explore or construct their own worldview in accordance with their evolving capacities. This condition helps us to classify states (perhaps with secular constitutions) which have criminalized specifically religious beliefs or practices. This condition is not applied if the restricted beliefs or practices are found to be outlawed due to their being of an extremist variety. While this condition does not directly reflect discrimination against non-religious persons or non-religious ideas, it does represent an overall threat to freedom of thought, conscience, religion or belief; such restrictions could spill over to affect non-religious beliefs later; and they pose a risk of backlash against over-zealous secular authorities or even against non-religious individuals by association.

Countries: China, Congo, Democratic Republic of, Cuba, Equatorial Guinea, Ethiopia, Guinea, Guyana, Italy, Kazakhstan, Laos, Madagascar, Mexico, North Macedonia, Romania, Serbia, Tajikistan, Togo, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, Zimbabwe

It is illegal or unrecognised to identify as an atheist or as non-religious
It is made difficult to register or operate an explicitly Humanist, atheist, secularist or other non-religious NGO or other human rights organization
Legend
 
Severe Discrimination
Mostly Satisfactory
Free and Equal
More information about rating table

Constitution and government

Secular reforms under the Morales government

The Constitution and other laws and policies protect freedom of thought, conscience and religion, as well as freedom of opinion and expression.

In 2009, Bolivia voted in a referendum to approve a new secular Constitution that removed Catholicism as the official state religion. The 2009 Constitution provides a number of guarantees with respect to the right to freedom of religion or belief.

Article 4 states that: “the State respects and guarantees freedom of religion and spiritual beliefs according to their view of the world. The State is independent of religion.” Article 21 states that all Bolivians have the right “To freedom of belief, spirituality, religion and cult, expressed individually or collectively, in public and in private, for legal purposes.”[ref]https://www.constituteproject.org/constitution/Bolivia_2009.pdf; in Spanish: https://www.oas.org/dil/esp/constitucion_bolivia.pdf[/ref]

Despite the separation between religion and State guaranteed by Article 4, the Catholic Church is granted a number of prerogatives and privileges by the State, including exemptions from income, real estate and property taxes This is due to a number of formal agreements between the Holy See and the state of Bolivia (the first of which was signed in 1957).[ref]https://www.iuscangreg.it/accordi_santa_sede.php?lang=EN[/ref]

Alongside seeing in the new secular Constitution in 2009, the governemnt also signed an agreement, the Convenio Marco de Cooperación Interinstitucional (Agreement on Inter-Institutional Cooperation) with the Catholic Church in Bolivia.[ref]https://mensajeronuflodechavez.blogspot.com/2009/10/convenio-marco-de-cooperacion.html[/ref] According to the civil society organization, Católicas por el Derecho a Decidir-Bolivia (Catholics for the Right to Decide-Bolivia), the agreement strengthened the status of the church in the country, “which continues to act with a low profile in all aspects of social and political life in the country.” The Church’s ties to business sectors with large economic capacity also have been strengthened by the agreement, according to Católicas por el Derecho a Decidir-Bolivia, “especially in the eastern region, which is the centre of the opposition to the current social and political process.”[ref] https://www.awid.org/sites/default/files/atoms/files/feminists_on_the_frontlines_-_bolivia_-_inclusion_of_sexual_and_reproductive_rights.pdf[/ref]

President Morales identifies as a Catholic, but has not shied away from criticizing the Catholic Church, associating it with the Spanish colonization of Latin America in the 16th century. He is a defender of indigenous rights and beliefs, describing his presidency as the “decolonization” of Bolivia. Morales’ secular reforms have angered and spurred a counter-reaction from religious right-wing groups. Bolivia’s interim president Jeanine Áñez, who took over from Morales after he fled following accusations of election tampering in 2019, notably chose to invoke the Bible in her first public appearance, declaring God as the source of political power.[ref]https://theconversation.com/old-religious-tensions-resurge-in-bolivia-after-ouster-of-longtime-indigenous-president-127000[/ref]

In November 2020, Morales returned to power after his party won a re-run of the disputed 2019 election.[ref]https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-latin-america-54917343[/ref]

Registration and tax requirements

The registration of religious and belief groups is highly regulated. Religious organizations must fulfill a number of requirements in order to register with the government, including the submission of notarised legal documents, information on members and details on the organizations finances and other activities. Pursuant to a concordat with the Holy See, the Catholic Church is exempt from these registration requirements.

The government is capable of revoking a spiritual or religious organizations operating license “if the organization fails to produce an annual report of activities for more than two consecutive years; does not comply with its stated objectives; carries out activities different from those established in its statute; or carries out activities contrary to the country’s constitution, laws, morality, or ‘good customs.’”[ref]https://www.state.gov/reports/2019-report-on-international-religious-freedom/bolivia/[/ref] Religious and spiritual organizations are required to pay taxes.[ref]http://www.fides.org/en/news/65837-AMERICA_BOLIVIA_The_law_on_religious_freedom_pending_the_signature_of_the_President[/ref]

Education and children’s rights

Part of the Morales government’s secular reform process involved changes to the education curriculum, including the requirement that schools be secular.[ref]https://educationanddevelopment.files.wordpress.com/2008/04/decolonizing-bolivian-education-a-critical-look-at-the-plurinational-states-vision.pdf[/ref]

Article 86 of the Constitution states that:

“Freedom of thought, faith and religious education, as well as the spirituality of the nations and the rural native indigenous peoples, shall be recognized and guaranteed in the educational centers. Mutual respect and coexistence among persons of diverse religions shall be promoted, without dogmatic imposition. There shall be no discrimination on the basis of religious choice with respect to the acceptance and permanence of students in these centers.”

By law, religion classes are optional and the school curriculum should teach ethics courses that promote religious tolerance. All teachers, including those in private religious schools, must receive their training in government-run academies.[ref]https://www.state.gov/reports/2019-report-on-international-religious-freedom/bolivia/[/ref]

Family, community and society

Gender equality and reproductive rights

Abortion is criminalized in Bolivia except when the life or health of the woman or girl is at risk or when the pregnancy is the result of rape or incest, and very few women have access to contraception. Indigenous and poorer women are disproportionately affected by poor maternal and reproductive health outcomes.[ref]https://www.msichoices.org/media/2198/bolivia-unsafe-abortion-realities.pdf[/ref]

At the end of 2017, Bolivia issued a newly revised Criminal Code expanding the grounds for abortion before the eighth week of pregnancy to a broader range of circumstances. However, the reform was subject to large protests from anti-choice groups throughout the country. One of the key driving forces behind the protests was the Platform for Life and Family (Plataforma por la Vida y Familia),[ref]https://urgente.bo/noticia/plataforma-por-la-vida-y-la-familia-recauda-al-momento-30-mil-firmas-en-cinco-departamentos[/ref] whose president described its work as “necessary to defend the four principles postulated by Benedict XVI, since they are completely threatened in the country.[ref]https://urgente.bo/noticia/plataforma-por-la-vida-y-la-familia-recauda-al-momento-30-mil-firmas-en-cinco-departamentos[/ref]. Also backing the call to repeal the new law was the Catholic Church[ref]https://www.thetablet.co.uk/news/6857/church-in-bolivia-condemns-draft-law-to-allow-abortion-in-cases-of-extreme-poverty-[/ref] and Internatioanal lobbying groups such as the Catholic anti-abortion group, Human Life International and the USA based Christian advocacy group Alliance Defending Freedom International.[ref]Deborah M. Piroch, Human Life International, “Battling Abortion in Bolivia,” 10th October 2017, https://www.hli.org/2017/10/abortion-battle-waged-bolivia/; Submission to the 34 th Session of the Human Rights Council’s Universal Periodic Review Working Group, ADF International (2019), https://www.upr-info.org/sites/default/files/document/bolivia_plurinational_state_of/session_34_-_november_2019/ai_upr34_bol_e_main.pdf[/ref] As a consequence of the backash, in January 2018, the Code was repealed in its entirety.

LGBTI+ rights

Bolivia’s Constitution and laws are progressive on the subject of LGBTI+ rights. Article 14 bans discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity. Article 58 recognizes the right of children to express themselves in a gender identity of their choice as a right “inherent to their development”.[ref]https://www.constituteproject.org/constitution/Bolivia_2009.pdf[/ref]

In 2016, a Gender Identity Law[ref]In Spanish: https://sistemas.mre.gov.br/kitweb/datafiles/SantaCruz/pt-br/file/bolivia%20-%20ley%20807%20-%20ley%20de%20identidad%20de%20g%C3%A9nero%20-%2022%20mai%2016.pdf; https://www.defensoria.gob.bo/noticias/a-tres-anyos-de-la-promulgacion-de-la-ley-807-de-identidad-de-genero[/ref] was approved allowing transgender individuals to change their gender on official documents, and in 2019 Bolivia’s legislature made further progress by passing a law that criminalized hate crimes on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity.

Despite these legal gains, Bolivia remains a relatively conservative country and the public has been resistant to the idea of full marriage equality.[ref]https://www.worldpoliticsreview.com/articles/29536/in-bolivia-lgbt-activists-look-to-build-on-a-historic-court-decision[/ref] The Constitution limits marriage to between a man and a woman. In December 2020, after a two year legal battle, a court in La Paz granted two men the right to register a civil union, which activists hope will set a precedent for other LGBTI+ couples to access recognition.[ref]https://www.nbcnews.com/feature/nbc-out/bolivia-approves-first-same-sex-union-following-legal-battle-n1251099[/ref]

Freedom of expression, advocacy of humanist values

The constitution guarantees freedom of expression and freedom of the press. However, in a highly polarized political environment, some journalists report intimidation by opponents, criminals, and the ruling party.

Under Morales’ government, Front Line Defenders reported that activists “who engage on environmental issues have been subjected to intimidation, threats, surveillance, and criminalisation”, that “the defence of indigenous peoples’ rights in the face of development projects is especially stigmatised by the Bolivian government” and that judicial harassment against lawyers who work on environmental and indigenous issues is common.[ref]https://www.upr-info.org/sites/default/files/document/bolivia_plurinational_state_of/session_34_-_november_2019/fld_upr34_bol_e_main.pdf[/ref]

During the interim presidency of Jeanine Áñez, the government initiated a violent military crackdown against government protesters, journalists and those guilty of a broadly defined offence of “sedition”, resulting in at least 30 deaths.[ref]https://www.hrw.org/news/2019/11/19/bolivia-interim-government-adopts-abusive-measures[/ref]

Senator Áñez, whose interim presidency was associated with a resurgence of Christian nationalism, also expressed anti-indigenous views publicly and on Twitter, writing “I dream of a Bolivia without satanic indigenous rituals, the city isn’t made for Indians, they need to go back to the countryside!”[ref]https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/democraciaabierta/qui%C3%A9n-es-jeanine-a%C3%B1ez-y-por-qu%C3%A9-desprecia-los-pueblos-ind%C3%ADgenas-de-bolivia-en/[/ref] During her tenure, there was a wave of anti-indigenous sentiment and violence, some involving members of the church. For instance, a hardline pastor reportedly attacked traditional indigenous beliefs as evidence of “witchcraft” and claimed that “[Under Morales] we were turning into a backwards nation – people wanted to legalize abortion, to legalize gay marriage, they wanted to legalize the satanistas [satanists]!”[ref]https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/jan/27/bolivian-christians-evo-morales-indigenous-catholic-protestant[/ref]