reforms

Grace Adama puts on her earrings in her two-room flat in Abuja before grabbing her handbag and heading to work.

The health NGO worker earns 135,000 naira ($99) a month, nearly twice Nigeria’s minimum wage. Yet she says her income now disappears within days as the cost of housing, electricity and food continues to rise.

“If I’m paid today, my salary stays with me just for one week,” she told Reuters. “If you see the cost of living, house, electricity, everything has gone up.”

Adama’s experience reflects a wider cost-of-living crisis confronting millions of Nigerians as the country approaches elections. Living standards have deteriorated sharply since President Bola Tinubu introduced a series of sweeping economic reforms, including the removal of fuel subsidies, the devaluation of the naira and reductions in electricity subsidies.

The government and investors argue that the reforms were necessary to prevent a deeper fiscal crisis and put Africa’s largest oil producer on a more sustainable economic path.

But for many ordinary Nigerians, the promised benefits have yet to materialise.

The cost of preparing the country’s staple jollof rice has more than doubled since Tinubu took office, according to Lagos-based SBM Intelligence. Petrol prices, meanwhile, have risen roughly sixfold following the removal of subsidies, the weakening of the naira and higher global oil prices.

With elections approaching in January, Tinubu faces the difficult task of convincing voters that the economic pain they have endured will eventually translate into better living standards.

NIGERIANS FEEL THE PAIN AS INVESTORS CHEER

The contrast between economic indicators and everyday life has become increasingly striking.

The World Bank estimates that just over half of Nigeria’s population lived in poverty last year, compared with roughly 42% in 2022.

Some Nigerians have responded to the rising costs by cutting household spending, moving to cheaper accommodation and relying on loans to cover basic expenses.

Adama said she had stopped buying meat regularly, moved to a smaller apartment and was still forced to take short-term loans to pay her bills. She also said she could no longer send money to her elderly mother in Benue state as she had done previously.

“I can’t even send money to my aged mother at home,” she said. “I can’t do a lot of things that I used to do before.”

Yet investors have taken a markedly more positive view of Nigeria’s economic direction.

“This is the most positive investors have been about Nigeria probably in the last two decades,” said Thys Louw, a portfolio manager at Ninety One. “They’re taking the tough medicine now.”

That divergence creates a major political challenge for Tinubu. Financial markets can respond positively to reforms long before their benefits reach households, while voters tend to judge governments according to the immediate cost of food, transport, housing and electricity.

Tinubu has been nicknamed “T-Pain” by some Nigerians frustrated by the rising cost of living.

REFORMS AIM TO END YEARS OF ECONOMIC DISTORTIONS

Tinubu inherited an economy burdened by years of policies that had created significant distortions.

Under former President Muhammadu Buhari, the government maintained petrol subsidies, imposed import restrictions and operated tight currency controls. While those measures were intended to protect consumers and encourage domestic production, they also contributed to shortages, foreign-exchange difficulties and growing pressure on government finances.

Fuel subsidies alone cost the government around $10 billion in 2022.

“We were living in fiscal illusions,” Finance Minister Taiwo Oyedele said at a recent event in Abuja. “We needed to stop deceiving ourselves so the country can move forward.”

Tinubu’s government therefore moved quickly after taking office to dismantle several of those policies.

The removal of fuel subsidies immediately pushed up transportation and living costs. Currency reforms also caused the naira to lose significant value, increasing the cost of imported goods.

The government argues that these measures were unavoidable and that rebuilding the economy requires accepting short-term pain.

There are signs of progress.

Nigeria’s stock market has risen close to 60% this year. Capital inflows reached a six-year high of $23 billion last year, while the opening of the 650,000-barrel-per-day Dangote refinery has created hopes that domestic refining will eventually reduce the country’s dependence on imported petroleum products.

The government has also pointed to increased investment in domestic oil assets as evidence that its reforms are attracting capital.

But those improvements have not necessarily translated into better household finances.

A BOOMING STOCK MARKET, BUT FEW CAN INVEST

Nigeria’s financial markets have benefited significantly from renewed investor confidence.

However, fewer than 5% of Nigerian adults invest in capital markets, according to the Nigerian stock exchange.

Much of the recent capital inflow has also been concentrated in short-term financial instruments such as Treasury bills, allowing foreign investors to quickly withdraw their money if economic conditions deteriorate.

For ordinary Nigerians, borrowing remains extremely expensive.

The central bank’s key interest rate stands at 26.5% as policymakers attempt to control inflation, which remains close to 16%.

That makes it difficult for businesses to expand and for households to access affordable credit.

At the same time, petrol prices average roughly 1,600 naira ($1.18) per litre nationally. Although that is lower than prices in neighbouring Ghana and Ivory Coast, it remains prohibitively expensive for many Nigerians who had become accustomed to subsidised fuel.

“The solution for me is for government to bring the fuel price down,” said Lagos food seller Eji Uchenna.

She said customers who once purchased food in bulk can no longer afford to do so.

POLITICAL PRESSURE BUILDS

The economic pressure is increasingly becoming a political issue.

In June, federal workers rejected a proposed 100,000-naira minimum wage and threatened an indefinite nationwide strike.

A June voter sentiment tracker by SBM Intelligence found that 80% of Nigerians believed the country was moving in the wrong direction.

Economic hardship is not the only concern. Security, particularly widespread kidnapping, remains a major issue for voters.

Yet widespread dissatisfaction does not necessarily mean Tinubu is vulnerable at the ballot box.

Nigeria’s opposition remains fragmented, reducing the likelihood that dissatisfaction will automatically translate into a coordinated electoral challenge.

“The opposition is disunited, and… the only way the opposition beats Tinubu is if they are united,” said Cheta Nwanze, chief executive of SBM Intelligence.

That gives Tinubu some political space to continue pursuing his economic programme despite the public backlash.

THE TEST IS WHETHER GROWTH REACHES HOUSEHOLDS

Investors remain optimistic that the reforms will eventually produce stronger economic growth, lower inflation and greater investment.

Louw said that if the government maintains its policies, workers could begin to benefit as inflation falls and interest rates decline.

But the transition remains painful, and the government faces growing pressure to ensure that economic gains are not concentrated among investors and businesses while ordinary households continue to struggle.

The central challenge is therefore no longer simply whether Nigeria’s reforms are economically necessary. It is whether the government can make those reforms politically and socially sustainable.

Tinubu must demonstrate that the sacrifices demanded from Nigerians are producing tangible improvements in their daily lives before voters head to the polls.

Finance Minister Oyedele acknowledged that the government must do more to ensure that economic recovery translates into broader prosperity.

“When inequality persists, it becomes dangerous,” he said. “It’s like sitting on gunpowder; it explodes.”

For Nigeria, the coming election will therefore offer a test not only of Tinubu’s political standing but of whether a painful programme of economic reform can deliver benefits quickly enough for ordinary citizens to believe in it.

With information from Reuters.

Media freedom organisations and opposition lawmakers have criticised sweeping media reforms pushed through by Israel’s right-wing coalition as part of a legislative blitz before the parliament’s dissolution in advance of elections later this year.

The parliament, or Knesset, last week approved the bill that could give the government a far greater say in Israel’s news and broadcast sectors. The controversial measure strips away traditional oversight safeguards, eliminates requirements for minimum journalism standards and lifts longstanding limits on cross-ownership, among others.

Following the July 17 vote, watchdog groups, including the Union of Journalists in Israel, along with opposition parties, successfully petitioned the High Court of Justice to freeze parts of the legislation. They warned that some provisions that were set to take effect immediately, including the removal of limits on ownership of multiple media outlets and the stripping away of newsroom standards, could permanently distort the media landscape before the October 27 election, potentially influencing its outcome.

The government has until Sunday to respond, after which the court will decide whether to keep the freeze, widen it, or allow the provisions to take effect. Other, less contentious and immediate sections of the law were left to stand.

Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu did not vote on the measure. He is currently bound by a 2020 conflict-of-interest agreement that bars him from participating in government decisions that could affect his ongoing corruption trial, where, among other charges, he stands accused of using his position to unduly influence media coverage of his administration.

Nevertheless, Communications Minister Shlomo Karhi thanked Netanyahu directly, saying: “Mr prime minister, I want to thank you and tell you that the mission you gave me four years ago – to deliver right-wing reform of the media – was today successfully completed.”

Israeli media reported that such a directive by Netanyahu could be a violation of his agreement. Neither the Prime Minister’s Office nor the Communications Ministry responded to Al Jazeera’s queries over whether Netanyahu’s role in the legislation’s passage represented a conflict of interest. However, Karhi subsequently claimed that he had secured a legal opinion determining that the prime minister was not in breach of the conflict-of-interest agreement.

“Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Communications Minister Shlomo Karhi have proven repeatedly that they are enemies of independent journalism in Israel,” Martin Roux, of the Reporters Without Borders media monitor, told Al Jazeera.

“This means they’re attacking every Israeli citizen’s right to reliable information from diverse sources. This has been true for years, and it is becoming more obvious every day as the legislative elections, set for the end of October, approach. It’s all about controlling the narrative,” he said.

In a social media post, Karhi claimed the new legislation would bring “more right-wing coverage and less regulation”.

“After a determined struggle against every possible element from the deep state, tycoons, attorneys, officials and fearmongering networks – we managed to pass the right-wing media reform.”

‘Boosting propaganda channels’

However, for many observers, there was little new in overhauling media that had grown used to toeing the government line, with critical coverage of the multiple wars that Israel has engaged in and the international outrage that many have caused typically relegated to the sidelines of the national conversation.

“The reforms are part of Netanyahu’s ongoing media overhaul – undermining the remains of critical reporting and journalistic independence in the country, while boosting Netanyahu’s propaganda channels,” London-based Israeli academic and media analyst Ayala Panievsky told Al Jazeera.

She cited the far-right Channel 14, which she said emboldened Israel’s war crimes and offered unflagging support to what she described as the most right-wing government in Israel’s history.

“In 2020, they amplified ‘the Big Lie’ in the US elections, claiming Trump won the election – they might therefore act similarly following the Israeli general elections in October, if Netanyahu’s coalition indeed loses,” said Panievsky, echoing similar concerns among academics and legal analysts sparked by accusations from lawmakers within Netanyahu’s Likud party that the acting head of the Central Elections Committee, Dean Livne, was “clearly politically biased”.

Analysts and observers from across Israel have long pointed to the strongly nationalist undertone of much of Israel’s current affairs coverage and the absence of space given to Palestinians and Palestinian suffering.

When the United Nations’ Independent International Commission of Inquiry concluded in September 2025 that Israel had committed genocide in Gaza, Israel’s Foreign Ministry dismissed the findings as “distorted and false“, a framing echoed across domestic outlets rather than scrutinised.

A subsequent Molad report found only 3 percent of Channel 12’s early war coverage referenced Gaza’s humanitarian crisis, with just two of 206 visuals showing Palestinian civilian casualties. Elsewhere, allegations of Israeli war crimes, including sexual abuse, are either omitted or given pro-government framing, observers told Al Jazeera.

“The Israeli media just doesn’t feature Gaza. It’s not there,” political analyst Ori Goldberg said from outside Tel Aviv. “There’s no sense of solidarity with the journalists killed there, or those they don’t let in. They’re just not mentioned.”

Similarly, discussion panels on the various wars that the Netanyahu administration had embarked upon were typically staffed by ex-generals, who had no question with the need for war, only differences over its prosecution, said Goldberg.

However, even this relative compliance was not enough for a prime minister fighting an election that had come to rely on the appearance of forward momentum and paper enemies to sustain his political project.

“Netanyahu always needs to be seen to be pushing the envelope,” Goldberg added. “He needs a media that will give barely critical coverage of his every word, but one that he can still present as the enemy within.”

July 24 (UPI) — Nicaragua’s government began the process Friday of reforming the Constitution and the legal framework governing the electoral system, days after President Daniel Ortega said the country “will never again hold elections” that would allow the opposition to return to power.

According to an official statement released by the Government of Reconciliation and National Unity, the proposed constitutional and legal reforms were drafted by the National Assembly’s Constitutional Commission in coordination with the Supreme Electoral Council and will be submitted to the presidency for review and authorization.

Once that stage is completed, the National Assembly will open a consultation process next week on the proposed Partial Reform Law to the Political Constitution before it is debated and put to a vote in the full legislature.

According to the statement, the reforms are part of the “Nicaragua Triumphs in Peace and Unity” plan and are intended to strengthen the constitutional framework to guarantee “peace, well-being, security, stability and the continuity of the achievements of the people as president.”

The announcement came five days after Ortega declared, during the commemoration of the 47th anniversary of the Sandinista Revolution’s victory, that Nicaragua “will never again hold elections” so the opposition can “try to take over the government and power,” remarks that drew criticism from the United States, the Organization of American States and opposition organizations.

On Wednesday, National Assembly President Gustavo Porras said Ortega’s remarks did not mean elections would be eliminated, but rather the end of processes that, according to the ruling party, had been influenced by the United States.

“Those elections will never return to this country,” Porras said during a news conference.

“They will be the elections of the Nicaraguan people, national elections to choose our national authorities and our municipal authorities, with the terms established by the Nicaraguan people and with the candidates and conditions established by the Nicaraguan people.”

Porras said the reforms are intended to prevent “the terrible manipulation of the empires and their lackeys” and to guarantee, in his words, “an absolutely clean, transparent and absolutely national election.”

During the same news conference, he said the new legal framework is intended to prevent foreign interests from influencing Nicaragua’s electoral processes and reiterated that “those elections will never return to this country,” referring to what he described as processes controlled by foreign powers.

The National Assembly, controlled by the ruling Sandinista National Liberation Front, will be responsible for debating the reforms, which must follow the procedure established for constitutional amendments before taking effect.

Caracas, July 15, 2026 (venezuelanalysis.com) –  The Venezuelan National Assembly (AN) and a group of former opposition lawmakers who served in the 2015–2020 legislature, led by Dinorah Figuera, announced the launch of a joint working agenda on August 1 aimed at “strengthening democracy” in the country.

National Assembly President Jorge Rodríguez, who is also the Venezuelan government’s lead negotiator, made the announcement on Tuesday via an official statement, reporting that both sides had agreed to “jointly confront the consequences of the twin earthquakes that have plunged the country into mourning.”

“Only in unity can we move forward with the reconstruction while keeping the peace,” the text read.

For its part, the opposition group said in a separate statement that the initiative constitutes a “roadmap to promote stability, democracy, and national recovery,” with the goal of beginning “the construction of a new stage that will lead to a Venezuela of progress and freedoms.” According to the document, the agenda will prioritize “strengthening democratic institutions, reinforcing the electoral system, and restoring guarantees for political participation.”

Figuera told media that the talks will involve 10-team delegations from both sides and claimed that the opposition faction will be involved in choosing new electoral authorities and Supreme Court justices, as well as in reforms to existing electoral laws.

She confirmed that the opposition has already selected several participants, including lawyers Juan Miguel Matheus and Sergio Vergara, businessman Jorge Millán, and former National Assembly Vice President Marco Aurelio Quiñones. No members of the Venezuelan government delegation are presently known.

Figuera took over the opposition-majority 2015–2020 National Assembly in 2023, despite its period having ended two years earlier. The legislature repeatedly renewed its own mandate as it maintained “recognition” from Washington as Venezuela’s legitimate authority. The anti-government group likewise retained control over several Venezuelan state assets frozen by the US and allies.

US Secretary of State Marco Rubio reposted the 2015–2020 National Assembly’s roadmap through his X account. US authorities had endorsed the talks when they were first announced in June. Since the January 3 US military strikes and kidnapping of President Nicolás Maduro, Rubio has insisted on a “three-phase plan” that ends with a political “transition.”

The announcement of impending talks contrasted with Rodríguez stating on Saturday that the country “was not in the right frame of mind” to discuss issues related to the National Electoral Council (CNE), the Supreme Court (TSJ), or elections.

“We are concerned about people who have suffered the unimaginable. It would be disrespectful and insensitive for politicians to meet now to decide who should be appointed to the CNE or the TSJ. There will be time for that,” Rodríguez said.

Instead, he urged opposition leaders to work together on responding to the earthquake emergency, including reforms to the country’s housing laws and identifying land for the new constructions.

Just six days before the devastating earthquakes of June 24, Figuera traveled to Caracas with Washington’s backing to head negotiations with the Venezuelan government. During that June 18 visit, she met with Jorge Rodríguez and opposition leaders before traveling to the United States for additional discussions.

Her return took many opposition figures by surprise, as only weeks earlier María Corina Machado, speaking at a meeting of opposition politicians in Panama, had announced her intention to personally lead negotiations with the government over a future electoral process. The far-right leader announced a closed-door meeting with political allies on Wednesday to discuss the upcoming negotiations between the acting Delcy Rodríguez government and a separate opposition faction.

Amid these political developments, Acting President Rodríguez also appointed Johann Álvarez on July 14 as Venezuela’s new Chargé d’Affaires to the United States, tasking him with “representing the country’s interests and advancing a new stage of dialogue, cooperation, and mutual respect.”

Álvarez most recently served as Venezuela’s Minister of Foreign Trade and Superintendent of the country’s Special Economic Zones (SEZs). He replaces Félix Plasencia, who was chosen by Rodríguez to head the Foreign Ministry after merging it with the Foreign Trade Ministry.

Edited by Ricardo Vaz in Caracas.

June 19 (UPI) — Cuba’s parliament approved a package of 174 economic reforms in just one week, marking the most significant shift in government policy in at least 15 years. Driven by President Miguel Díaz-Canel in response to the country’s deepening economic crisis and mounting pressure from the United States, the plan approved Thursday opens the door to private capital and reshapes the rules governing the island’s economy.

Economists and analysts, however, warned that the real impact of the measures will depend on their implementation and on broader institutional changes that remain absent from the government’s plans.

Cuban economist Alfie Ulloa, a professor at the University of Chile’s Law School, told UPI the reforms represent a significant change in official rhetoric but questioned whether they will translate into meaningful change.

“They are a profound adjustment in discourse and, if implemented, would represent an important adjustment to the model. But for now they are nothing more than another declaration like many made in the past. I do not believe they will be implemented, nor that they will truly free the private sector,” Ulloa said.

The package includes 23 areas of transformation and more than 170 measures aimed at loosening state control over the economy. Among the most significant are allowing direct foreign investment in small and medium-sized private businesses, reviewing activities currently prohibited to the private sector, authorizing direct imports and exports by both state and non-state actors, granting greater autonomy to enterprises and gradually replacing broad subsidies with targeted assistance for vulnerable populations.

The reforms also eliminate broad price controls, a policy Díaz-Canel acknowledged had failed after years of inflation, shortages and expansion of the informal market.

While presenting the plan, the president admitted that part of the country’s current crisis stems from longstanding internal problems.

“There are obstacles that do not come from abroad or from the embargo. There is bureaucracy, delays, regulations that prevent people from producing and decisions that we have postponed,” Díaz-Canel said.

The proposal amounts to an implicit acknowledgment of economic policy failures that Cuban authorities had largely attributed to the U.S. embargo for decades. Analysts noted that several of the measures had been debated previously and rejected by the country’s communist leadership.

Many of the initiatives mirror reforms introduced decades ago in China and Vietnam, although they arrive as Cuba faces one of its worst economic crises since the collapse of the Soviet Union.

Cuban economist Mauricio de Miranda, a professor at the Pontifical Xavierian University in Cali, Colombia, argued in social media posts that the program points toward a transition from bureaucratic socialism to a form of capitalism controlled by political elites.

“It will become the fast track for relatives and close associates of those in power to become shareholders without anyone knowing where their capital came from,” he warned.

De Miranda said Cuba will inevitably need to privatize part of its state-owned assets to attract investment and rebuild its struggling economy. However, he argued that the process lacks the institutional safeguards needed to prevent wealth from being concentrated among groups close to the government.

“Something like this would require a capital market with clear rules, transparency and equal opportunity,” he said.

Questions about legal protections for investors have also emerged as a central criticism.

“None. Cuba is not a state governed by the rule of law. Citizens are completely defenseless before the state,” Ulloa said when asked about protections for potential investors.

He added that investing in Cuba remains highly risky because government power faces few constraints and judicial institutions lack independence.

Cuban economist Pedro Monreal also criticized the process, questioning the secrecy surrounding the package in a lengthy post on X.

“It should not be surprising that the first act of the ‘transformation proposals’ show has reaffirmed public frustration over the secrecy of those proposals,” Monreal wrote.

Monreal also pointed to the failure of the so-called “Monetary Reorganization Task,” a 2021 reform that eliminated the country’s dual-currency system but became associated with surging inflation and declining purchasing power. He argued that experience severely undermines the credibility of the new package.

Despite the skepticism, several specialists acknowledged that some measures could help address urgent problems if fully implemented.

Ulloa said a genuine opening to private investment, particularly from Cubans living abroad, could help revive agriculture, services and food production. He cautioned, however, that critical sectors such as energy, infrastructure, transportation and banking require investment levels that are unlikely to materialize in the near term.

The Cuban government said Thursday that former President Raúl Castro explicitly endorsed the reforms and expressed full support for the package, describing it as what “best serves the Revolution today.”

For critics, that endorsement highlights one of the process’ central contradictions.

The measures acknowledge problems that independent economists have identified for years, yet leave intact the political structure that many blame for creating the crisis.

“The most important point from my perspective is that we are not talking about deep reforms within a new globalized economy. We are simply talking about removing obstacles,” Manuel Cuesta Morúa, vice president of the Council for Democratic Transition in Cuba, told Radio Martí.

He said the reforms arrive too late because Cuba’s economy now operates under extensive U.S. sanctions.

According to Cuesta Morúa, progress will require political and diplomatic negotiations to make the measures viable. He argued that the package merely liberalizes some restrictions but does not yet constitute a genuine economic reform program.

He added that authorities must first address citizens’ immediate needs, create confidence through legal certainty and open Cuban society in broader ways.

Analysts agree that the central question is whether this latest reform effort will produce tangible change or join a long list of initiatives that were announced and later postponed.

Regarding the matter, Vice President JD Vance said, “Right now, we are talking with the Cuban government about how they might change their behavior to achieve that. We’ll see what they do and, obviously, if they do one thing, we’ll do another. If they make smart decisions, we’re going to have a much better relationship with that island.”

Just hours later, details of the measures emerged. For now, however, the White House has remained silent.

Lesley Horton, the UK’s Chief Property Ombudsman, said: “If implemented carefully and supported by clear guidance and appropriate training, these reforms can create a home buying and selling system that is faster, fairer and better equipped to meet the needs of consumers in the years ahead.”

June 12 (UPI) — Cuba’s government on Friday announced a broad package of economic reforms aimed at restructuring key aspects of the country’s economic model, just hours after the United States imposed a full financial blockade on state oil company Unión Cuba-Petróleo, or CUPET.

Speaking on state television, Cuban President Miguel Díaz-Canel defended the shift toward decentralization, saying that “these are times when change is necessary.”

The measures are part of the government’s 2026 Economic and Social Program, a roadmap inspired by the economic models of China and Vietnam. Havana says the plan is intended to address the island’s deep economic crisis, high inflation and widespread shortages of goods and services.

The reforms came only hours after U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio announced on X sanctions against CUPET, freezing all of the company’s assets under U.S. jurisdiction and prohibiting commercial transactions with it.

Rubio said that “Cuba’s communist elites have turned energy into a tool of social control and profit,” accusing the government of hoarding fuel supplies for its own benefit and using them to repress the Cuban people.

“President Donald Trump wants a new future for the Cuban people with greater freedom and opportunity,” Rubio wrote.

The secretary of state said the sanctions were justified because CUPET operates assets that were allegedly confiscated from U.S. owners decades ago. Washington also warned that foreign companies continuing to do business with the state oil company could face secondary sanctions.

Cuba announced the measures two days after the Miami Herald reported on a proposed commercial agreement between Florida-based Vanguard Energy and Cuban agencies to deliver 250,000 barrels of gasoline and diesel fuel intended exclusively for Cuba’s private sector, small and medium-sized enterprises and humanitarian organizations.

The arrangement included a five-year lease of state-owned storage tanks operated by CUPET. Under the proposal, Vanguard would retain ownership of the fuel to prevent it from being diverted to the Cuban government and would operate outside the island’s banking system.

However, within hours of the agreement becoming public, the U.S. State Department halted the shipment, saying the company did not possess a specific license authorizing the transaction and reaffirming that the Trump administration’s sanctions against Cuba remain fully in force.

Despite the tightening U.S. restrictions, Díaz-Canel rejected suggestions that the reforms were a response to pressure from Washington, describing them as a necessary internal restructuring effort.

The economic plan centers on decentralization and greater openness to investment. Municipal governments and state-owned companies will receive expanded authority over imports, exports and foreign currency management in an effort to reduce bureaucratic obstacles.

The government also plans to ease restrictions on private small and medium-sized businesses, open financial investment opportunities for Cubans living abroad and allow foreign companies to lease agricultural land to boost food production.

To support the reforms, Havana plans a significant reduction of the central bureaucracy, cutting the number of government ministries to 20 from 27 through mergers and eliminations.

Díaz-Canel said Cuba must move toward “new models and new actors” capable of making use of existing infrastructure, acknowledging that sectors such as tourism have been hurt by U.S. sanctions.

“We cannot focus only on the large international hotel chains when many of them, because of pressure from the United States government, have left the country,” he said. “We are developing real estate and tourism projects with new models and other actors that have not traditionally participated in these sectors.”

On energy policy, Díaz-Canel said Cuba would continue shifting toward solar power and renewable energy sources.

“We are going to eliminate, as much as possible, the restrictions that exist on vehicle imports,” he said. “We will continue prioritizing, through tariffs and pricing policies, the importation of electric vehicles powered by solar energy.”

Recent U.S. measures against Cuba have significantly tightened the decades-old embargo through Executive Order 14404 and additional restrictions targeting the energy sector, including CUPET. The sanctions also affect senior government officials, their relatives and military-linked entities.

Washington says the measures are intended to cut off revenue to the Cuban government, encourage political change and punish human rights abuses.

Cuban authorities argue that the restrictions have worsened an already severe economic crisis marked by chronic shortages and power outages that have lasted more than 48 hours in some parts of the island.

International organizations, including the United Nations, have warned about the humanitarian impact on the civilian population.

Caracas, May 26, 2026 (venezuelanalysis.com) – Venezuelan Attorney General Larry Devoe announced on Monday a formal investigation into recent unrest at the Barinas Judicial Detention Center (INJUBA). 

The prison began to make headlines last week when inmates seized control of the facility to denounce ill-treatment and physical abuse from authorities. The investigation followed the dismissal of prison director Elvis Macuare Guerrero, who had held the post for less than a week before the revolt.

“The Attorney General’s Office announces the launch of a criminal investigation into the events that took place on May 24, 2026, at INJUBA, where inmates staged a protest,” read the official statement. The investigation will focus on accusations of “cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment” allegedly carried out by security personnel inside the facility.

The probe followed dramatic scenes in which prisoners climbed onto the roof, burned mattresses, and held up banners demanding an end to what they described as a regime of terror. 

According to testimonies gathered by local journalists on the ground, the inmates accused prison authorities of recurring violence and torture, including systematic beatings and forced “ice-cold baths with electric currents.”

The riot was sparked after guards reportedly confiscated belongings and subjected a group of prisoners to violent searches.

In response to the unrest, authorities transferred over 100 female inmates out of the Barinas facility to reduce tensions. On Tuesday, General Giuseppe Cacioppo, head of the Barinas governorship security office, told press that the situation at INJUBA was calm and under control, with a further 818 male prisoners transferred to other penitentiary centers throughout the country.

Rodríguez raises judicial reform priorities

The Barinas inmate unrest coincided with the Venezuelan government announcing the impending release of hundreds of prisoners. On Friday, Acting President Delcy Rodríguez announced that 500 prisoners would be liberated “in the coming hours.” 

Three officers from the former Metropolitan Police were among those already confirmed free. Héctor Rovaín, Erasmo Bolívar, and Luis Molina were serving 30-year sentences for their involvement in the violence leading up to the brief 2002 coup against then-president Hugo Chávez. They had been arrested in 2003 and convicted in 2009.

According to official figures provided by the presidency, since the February approval of the Amnesty Law, a total of 8,740 people have received amnesty. Of these, 8,426 were still facing trial or under probation-type measures and had their cases dropped.

However, the government announcements have also drawn criticism. The Justicia, Encuentro y Perdón (JEP) NGO cautioned that “this type of public pronouncement [announcing more releases] generates enormous expectations,” warning that any failure to comply would represent a “new and cruel affront to human dignity.”

Rodríguez explained that the latest freed individuals had their cases and sentences reviewed through a “different mechanism,” evaluated via the Commission for Judicial Revolution and the Program for Peace and Democratic Coexistence, as opposed to the Amnesty Law.

During a televised working session on Saturday, the acting president framed the ongoing releases and the investigation into the Barinas prison riot as part of a broader transformation of the penal system. She likewise enacted a reform to the Organic Law of the Supreme Court (TSJ), expanding the number of magistrates from 20 to 32.

Rodríguez acknowledged prison overcrowding as one of the main issues plaguing the Venezuelan penitentiary system. She claimed that, according to official statistics, 68% of the incarcerated population in Venezuela comes from the poorest economic strata and vowed to advance judicial reforms that tackle the “criminalization of poverty.”

The Venezuelan leader went on to announce the beginning of the National Consultation for Penal Justice Reform on June 1. The public consultation aims to address what she identified as the “three great challenges” of the current system: procedural delays, judicial corruption, and the criminalization of poverty.

Rodríguez went on to denounce the “partisan and political” manipulation of the justice system.

The commission tasked with the consultation, headed by Attorney General Devoe, will hold meetings with academics, NGOs, judicial system workers, and other relevant actors.

Venezuela’s justice system came under the spotlight recently with the case of Victor Quero, who had an amnesty request denied despite having died in state custody months earlier. Authorities did not inform his mother, Carmen Navas, who continued to visit the prison in search of information. Navas passed away days after her son’s death was publicly acknowledged. The Attorney General opened an investigation into the case.

In recent years, human rights NGOs and prisoner relatives have denounced systematic due process violations and poor incarceration conditions.

Edited by Ricardo Vaz in Caracas.