National security is increasingly being used as a weapon against the press, according to a new RSF report

Over 60% of the world’s countries have seen a deterioration in the legal climate for the press, against a backdrop of the increasingly aggressive expansion of the concept of ‘national security’ to criminalise journalism. This finding is set out in a report by Reporters Without Borders (RSF), published on 8 July. According to the report, invoking national security has become one of the most widely used tools for restricting press freedom globally, and the phenomenon is no longer confined to authoritarian regimes but is also spreading to states considered democratic.

The analysis shows that the definition of a ‘threat to national security’ has broadened considerably over the last quarter of a century, allowing authorities to use charges of espionage, terrorism, propaganda, the dissemination of false information or breaches of cyber security to investigate, prosecute and imprison journalists. RSF maintains that these legal instruments are being used with increasing frequency to restrict journalistic investigations and the public’s access to information.

THE DETERIORATION OF THE LEGAL FRAMEWORK FOR THE PRESS

The report highlights that the legal indicator of RSF’s World Press Freedom Index recorded its sharpest decline to date in 2026. The score worsened in 110 of the 180 countries and territories assessed, reflecting the proliferation of restrictive legislation and the abusive use of national security laws against the press.

AUTHORITARIANISM IS NO LONGER THE ONLY THREAT TO THE PRESS

The authors of the report point out that this phenomenon is evident in both authoritarian states and democracies. In some countries, journalists are accused of espionage, treason or collusion with foreign powers, whilst in others the authorities use legislation on state security, counter-terrorism or cyber security to exert pressure on the press and journalistic sources. The report provides examples from the United States, the United Kingdom, France, Greece, India, China, Russia, the Philippines, Iran and other countries.

NEW AREAS TREATED AS SECURITY ISSUES

Another phenomenon noted by RSF is the extension of the concept of national security to areas not previously associated with it, such as public health, climate change or migration. Consequently, journalists investigating pandemics, pollution, the illegal exploitation of natural resources or other matters of public interest are increasingly subject to restrictions and legal proceedings justified on security grounds.

According to RSF, governments are increasingly resorting to the interception of communications, cyber-espionage programmes and other surveillance technologies. At the same time, political rhetoric that labels the press as the ‘enemy of the people’, ‘foreign agents’ or ‘traitors’ contributes to the intimidation of journalists and encourages self-censorship.

WHAT RSF RECOMMENDS

The organisation warns of the long-term effects of states of emergency and armed conflicts. Exceptional measures introduced in the context of war or the fight against terrorism tend to be maintained even after the initial threats have disappeared, becoming part of the ordinary legal framework and continuing to restrict the media’s activities.

RSF argues that national security is gradually being transformed from a legitimate mechanism for protecting the state into a tool for intimidation, censorship and the criminalisation of journalism.

The organisation calls on states to review their national security legislation, to strengthen the protection of journalistic sources and to ensure that the work of the press is not treated as a threat to the state, but as an essential element of a functioning democratic society.

“Journalism is not a crime against the state. It is one of the last defences against arbitrariness and the abuse of power. Protecting it is not merely a democratic choice — it is an urgent necessity,” emphasised Anne Bocandé, RSF’s editorial director, in the report.