In early September, EFF submitted an amicus brief to Ecuador’s Constitutional Court supporting a constitutional challenge filed by Ecuadorian NGOs, including INREDH and LaLibre. The case challenges the constitutionality of the Ley Orgánica de Inteligencia (LOI) and its implementing regulation, the General Regulation of the LOI. EFF’s amicus brief argues that the LOI enables disproportionate surveillance and secrecy that undermine constitutional and Inter-American human rights standards. EFF urges the Constitutional Court to declare the LOI and its regulation unconstitutional in their entirety. More specifically, our submission notes that: “The LOI presents a structural flaw that undermines compliance with the principles of legality, legitimate purpose, suitability, necessity, and proportionality; it inverts the rule and the exception, with serious harm to rights enshrined constitutionally and under the Convention; and it prioritizes indeterminate state interests, in contravention of the ultimate aim of intelligence activities and state action, namely the protection of individuals, their rights, and freedoms.” Core Legal Problems Identified Vague and Overbroad Definitions The LOI contains key terms like “national security,” “integral security of the State,” “threats,” and “risks” that are left either undefined or so broadly framed that they could mean almost anything. This vagueness grants intelligence agencies wide, unchecked discretion, and fails short of the standard of legal certainty required under the American Convention on Human Rights (CADH). Secrecy and Lack of Transparency The LOI makes secrecy the rule rather than the exception, reversing the Inter-American principle of maximum disclosure, which holds that access to information should be the norm and secrecy a narrowly justified exception. The law establishes a classification system—“restricted,” “secret,” and “top secret”—for intelligence and counterintelligence information, but without clear, verifiable parameters to guide its application on a case-by-case basis. As a result, all information produced by the governing body (ente rector) of the National Intelligence System is classified as secret by default. Moreover, intelligence budgets and spending are insulated from meaningful public oversight, concentrated under a single authority, and ultimately destroyed, leaving no mechanism for accountability. Weak or Nonexistent Oversight Mechanisms The LOI leaves intelligence agencies to regulate themselves, with almost no external scrutiny. Civilian oversight is minimal, limited to occasional, closed-door briefings before a parliamentary commission that lacks real access to information or decision making power. This structure offers no guarantee of independent or judicial supervision and instead fosters an environment where intelligence operations can proceed without transparency or accountability. Intrusive Powers Without Judicial Authorization The LOI allows access to communications, databases, and personal data without prior judicial order, which enables the mass surveillance of electronic communications, metadata, and databases across public and private entities—including telecommunication operators. This directly contradicts rulings of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights, which establish that any restriction of the right to privacy must be necessary, proportionate, and subject to independent oversight. It also runs counter to CAJAR vs. Colombia, which affirms that intrusive surveillance requires prior judicial authorization. International Human Rights Standards Applied Our amicus curiae draws on the CAJAR vs. Colombia judgment, which set strict standards for intelligence activities. Crucially, Ecuador’s LOI fall short of all these tests: it doesn’t constitute an adequate legal basis for limiting rights; contravenes necessary and proportionate principles; fails to ensure robust controls and safeguards, like prior judicial authorization and solid civilian oversight; and completely disregards related data protection guarantees and data subject’s rights. At its core, the LOI structurally prioritizes vague notions of “state interest” over the protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms. It legalizes secrecy, unchecked surveillance, and the impunity of intelligence agencies. For these reasons, we urge Ecuador’s Constitutional Court to declare the LOI and its regulations unconstitutional, as they violate both the Ecuadorian Constitution and the American Convention on Human Rights (CADH). Read our full amicus brief here to learn more about how Ecuador’s intelligence framework undermines privacy, transparency, and the human rights protected under Inter-American human rights law.

The biggest change to the service is the addition of GameNight, a growing collection of more than 25 local multiplayer games that Amazon says are "designed to bring friends family together in the living room."

TechCrunch Disrupt 2025 roundtables bring founders, investors, and operators together for interactive small-group discussions on AI, fintech, space, and more. Check the full schedule, and don’t miss your chance to save up to $444 and 60% off a second pass before prices rise at the door.

Wonder will use the fresh funds to double its engineering team and accelerate its push into IP ownership and original content production.

At TechCrunch Disrupt 2025, the Startup Battlefield 200 finalists will take the stage one last time to compete for the $100,000 equity-free prize. Deciding their fate will be a select group of the most respected and influential investors in the industry — our final round judges. Meet them here.

Cluely’s Roy Lee isn’t afraid to stir the pot — and he’s taking that bold energy to the Disrupt Stage at TechCrunch Disrupt 2025, happening October 27–29 at San Francisco’s Moscone West. Register now to join, and save up to $444 on your pass + 60% off a second.

The layoffs represent about 4% of Rivian's workforce. The company has made two other smaller cuts since June.

"Madman Murphy has not only lapped the purple-haired Delauro, he is the front-runner by far in the horde of Marxist marathoners plaguing this republic."

The Oxford Union president-elect who debated Charlie Kirk and celebrated his attack was voted out, while two school teachers mocked Kirk's death at "No Kings" protests.

This is not just a widespread problem within one agency; it's a cancer that has spread throughout the federal government thanks to activist leftists in career bureaucratic positions.