President Nayib Bukele of El Salvador is widely known for being well loved by his constituents. Recent polls, following his 2024 re-election, found 90% of his constituents to be in favor of Bukele and his policies. This is in spite of the fact that his re-election campaign ignored El Salvador’s constitutional ban on re-electing a president, and despite the staggering 1% of El Salvador’s population that is currently incarcerated, many of whom face false imprisonment. Bukele’s popularity is widely regarded as a product of voters prioritizing public security over democracy but, although voter preference may play a significant role, Bukele’s stealth authoritarian tactics and suppression of political dissidents has undeniably contributed to his success. His actions have served to legitimize his rule to the general public and silence would be critics of his regime. 

According to Varol’s framework, authoritarians use seemingly legal and legitimate pathways that exist within the existing democratic regime to increase their power, or decrease that of their opponents. In March 2022, Bukele declared a state of emergency in El Salvador in response to severe gang violence in the country. This state of emergency, which suspends constitutional rights for citizens, was initially supposed to last 30 days, but has since been repeatedly renewed by the Salvadorian congress and remains ongoing despite the current low homicide rates in the country. In the time since the state of emergency was declared, Bukele has consolidated power by ignoring constitutional bans on re-election, taking office again, and passing a constitutional amendment that allows him to continuously re-run for office and eliminates presidential term limits. 

While Bukele continues to restructure the government and consolidate power, incarceration rates continue to rise, despite the fact that crime in El Salvador has dropped significantly. Most recently, in April 2026, Bukele signed a constitutional reform that will allow children as young as 12 years old to face life sentences in court. This comes after a constitutional amendment this past March, pushed by Bukele and approved by El Salvador’s congress, that permitted life sentences in El Salvador’s courts to begin with. The sense of urgency that was created by gang violence in 2022 allowed Bukele to rapidly consolidate power and limit constitutional rights for citizens in a manner that was seemingly necessary for the circumstances. Now, however, Bukele is continuing to consolidate his power through constitutional reforms, while also taking actions to center the topic of public safety. To many, these constitutional reforms may seem harmless, or even beneficial, but in reality, about 1% of El Salvador’s population is current imprisoned. Many of those in prison have been wrongly accused and condemned to suffer under an increasingly unjust carceral system, even as Bukele’s administration faces accusations of human rights violations. Meanwhile, critics of these injustices are being targeted by Bukele and his administration. 

In May 2025, a “foreign agents” law passed in El Salvador by Bukele’s administration allowed the government to monitor and restrict people or organizations that receive funding from abroad. This severely impacts third party, non-governmental media and organizations, namely NGOs, limiting civil society and allowing the government to control the social and political narratives within the state. The “Salvadorian Journalists Association”, one of Latin America’s oldest press associations, decided to relocate its base to an undisclosed location as a result of the Foreign Agents law, as they felt they could better service El Salvador from outside of Bukele’s control. This is significant, as established by Enikolopov et al. (2011), because access to independent media alters voting outcomes, with voters who have access to independent media being more likely to vote for an opposition candidate. By limiting organizations receiving outside funding, and monitoring them on a registry, Bukele is exerting control over media sources and even attempting to discredit them by labeling them as foreign.  Attempts at limiting dissidents and restricting the media have also left journalists and those publicly speaking out against Bukele fearing for their safety. This has caused political dissidents, many of whom are journalists, academics, and activists, to flee El Salvador in fear of being imprisoned for their opposition.

It is important to recognize Bukele’s stealth authoritarianism and media overreach in conversations about his regime, because the prevailing narrative around his widespread support from his constituency is that many Salvadorians are simply willing to trade some civil liberties in exchange for a feeling of security, but the story is more complex than that. While it is true that many people do prioritize the newfound safety they feel as a result of Bukele’s crack downs, it is also true that Bukele’s strategic maneuvering and consolidation of power has maintained a veil of legitimacy that makes this trade off seem less costly. This means that, for many, Bukele’s actions do not pose a legitimate threat to democracy, because they employ the powers he was granted under their presumed liberal democratic system. Furthermore, Bukele’s media suppression has effectively silenced the voices of those who were actively criticizing his actions and bringing his wrongdoings to light. This has allowed Bukele to maintain high approval ratings and direct public attention to matters as he sees fit, as there are no opposing voices cutting through the echo chamber that Bukele has created in El Salvador.