Decree expands state secrecy over procurement and security records

The Executive Branch reformed articles 2 and 3 of Executive Decree No. 45870-MSP to expand the scope of state secrecy regarding information from the National Public Security Council, the National Intelligence and Security Directorate (DIS), and the “Elite Force” working group. The reform was published as Executive Decree No. 45962-MSP in La Gaceta No. 197 on Monday, October 19, 2026, within the Executive Branch–Decrees section, and is effective as of its publication.

The decree was signed at the Presidency of the Republic, in San José, on October 9, 2026, by President Laura Fernández Delgado and the Minister of Public Security, Gerald Campos Valverde. The regulation is issued based on articles 140 paragraphs 3) and 6), 30, and 130 of the Political Constitution, as well as articles 11, 12, 13, 14, and 21 of the General Law of Public Administration.

The text reforms the Declaration of State Secrecy issued via Executive Decree No. 45870-MSP on July 27, 2026. According to the recitals, the objective is to “delimit with absolute clarity the substantive scope of the reservation” and establish the duty of confidentiality for “all actors involved (public and private).” The Executive also invokes the Constitutional Chamber rulings numbers 880-90, 989-1994, 7265-1999, 16359-2016, and 11951-2025, which require secrecy to be interpreted restrictively.

What information remains reserved

The new article 2 expands the list of covered matters, which “include, but are not limited to”:

• Operating methods of organized crime and police dynamics for prospecting and deployment.
• Operational capacities, special procedures, response plans, command structures, and intervention protocols.
• Technological resources, intelligence mechanisms, and inter-institutional coordination.
• Logs of agreements, presentations of police action strategies, and reliability evaluation protocols with their results.
• Protection plans for officials, budget lines, expenditure items, and budgets.
• All actions, administrative files, preliminary studies, technical requirements, bids, awards, financing, contracts, and execution phases of public procurement linked to these bodies.
• Sessions, meetings, recordings, plans, minutes, and agreements generated within these bodies.
• National Security and Defense actions or operations ordered or coordinated by the Presidency of the Republic with the respective minister.

Procurement: the exception that remains

The decree expressly excludes from the declaration “ordinary administrative contracting procedures, the general execution of public budgets, general expenditure items, and financial oversight,” which will continue to be governed by the principles of publicity, transparency, and accountability.

The reservation applies, instead, regardless of whether operational management or contracting is carried out with State institutions, non-state public entities, consortia, or national or foreign private entities. Each classification will require an examination of necessity, suitability, and proportionality that substantiates a certain, imminent, and direct risk, and this justification must be communicated to whoever requests the restricted information. The declaration will remain in effect as long as the risk persists and will be subject to review mechanisms for declassification.

Obligations for private parties and limits of secrecy

Article 3 obliges heads of institutions, members of police forces, support staff, and advisors to maintain “absolute confidentiality and privacy,” regardless of their contracting regime. This duty extends to consultants, advisors, contractors, and other private parties providing technical, professional, or administrative services, whether remunerated or not; in such cases, they must mandatorily sign a clause of submission to state secrecy, and the involved public institution must ensure its signing.

The text itself clarifies that this duty is understood without prejudice to collaboration, the provision of information, and accountability before constitutional control and superior oversight bodies, the Legislative Assembly in the exercise of its investigative powers, the courts of justice, and the Public Ministry, when formally requested. In those cases, confidentiality may not be invoked to deny or obstruct the requests.

The reform arrives in a context where the Executive maintains that criminal structures can correlate public data—tactical equipment specifications, intelligence technologies, budget items, and supplier payrolls—to identify vulnerabilities in the state apparatus. For readers, the change implies that requests for access to information regarding contracting, budgets, and minutes from security bodies may be rejected with a risk justification, while ordinary oversight and formal requests from the Assembly and the Public Ministry remain formally safeguarded.

Source: La Gaceta, No. 197, Monday, October 19, 2026, Executive Power–Decrees, pp. 3-4 (official reference: IN202601133582).