Between January 1 and June 30, 2026, Cubalex documented 53 events involving enforced disappearance In Cuba, this practice, prohibited by international law, continues to be used by Cuban authorities as a mechanism of repression, punishment, and intimidation.
Although many of these disappearances were resolved the same day with the subsequent appearance of the detained person in a police unit or prison, Others lasted for several days, keeping family members and friends in a situation of absolute uncertainty.
In all cases, the common element was the refusal of the authorities to report on the whereabouts or situation of the person deprived of liberty, placing them outside the protection of the law for a period of time.
Enforced disappearance does not require the victim to remain missing for weeks or months to be considered an enforced disappearance. Under international law, it is sufficient that state agents deprive a person of their liberty and subsequently deny acknowledging that detention or conceal their fate or whereabouts, preventing access to effective judicial protection.
A pattern linked to political repression
Most of the events recorded by Cubalex were associated with arbitrary arrests, many of them carried out to prevent the exercise of fundamental rights such as freedom of expression, assembly or peaceful demonstration. Several disappearances occurred in the context of social protests or of repressive operations deployed to prevent them.
Another significant group of cases involved people deprived of their liberty, particularly political prisoners, whose families lost contact with them following protests within prisons, complaints about the conditions of confinement, or transfers between penitentiary establishments carried out without any official information.
In these cases, the deliberate concealment of the whereabouts of people deprived of their liberty increases the risk of torture, ill-treatment and other serious human rights violations, as well as deepening the suffering of their families.
The Canaleta mutiny: uncertainty after a violent repression
One of the most serious incidents documented during the semester occurred in the Canaleta prison, in Ciego de Ávila.
The protest It began in the early hours of February 19, 2026, This comes after a suicide attempt by an inmate and the refusal of prison authorities to provide medical attention to another inmate who had requested it. Both incidents occurred within a context of degrading living conditions repeatedly denounced by incarcerated individuals and their families.
The riot was suppressed with extreme violence. Subsequently, Numerous inmates were transferred without their families knowing their destination or state of health. During those days, reports even circulated on social media about possible deaths, although Cubalex was unable to independently verify that information.
As of the closing of this report, the organization had also not been able to fully clarify whether additional deaths occurred during the repression among the people transferred under conditions constituting enforced disappearance.
Other relevant documented cases
Among the events recorded during the first half of the year, the forced disappearances of several citizens also stand out. They arrived in Cuba from Florida in a speedboat, whose whereabouts remained hidden. for days after being arrested by the authorities.
In March 2026, Cubalex filed Urgent Action requests with the Committee against Enforced Disappearances on behalf of Conrado Galindo Sariol, Cristian Ernesto Acosta Guevara, Leordán Enrique Cruz Gómez, Amijail Sánchez González, Roberto Álvarez Ávila and José Manuel Rodríguez Castelló, who were on the boat.
Cubalex also documented the forced disappearance of the athlete who was critical of the regime. Javier Martín “Spiderman”, the case of the political prisoner of 11J Yunaikys Linares and the disappearances recorded after the arrests that took place in Boatswain In June, among other events that demonstrate the repeated use of this practice by the Cuban authorities.
Although the contexts are diverse, all these cases share the same pattern: deprivation of liberty followed by concealment of the victim's whereabouts and the refusal of the authorities to provide timely information to their relatives.
The closure of the courts exacerbates the vulnerability to enforced disappearances
This repressive practice is compounded by an additional obstacle: the growing difficulties in accessing judicial mechanisms designed to protect personal freedom.
A recent example occurred after the release of the political prisoner Luis Manuel Otero Alcántara. After fully serving his five-year prison sentence, he was taken from the Guanajay prison by State Security agents and remained at large for approximately a week before being forced into exile.
During that period, the Havana Provincial People's Court, the competent body to hear a habeas corpus petition, It remained closed —including the courthouse in the capital— despite it being a working day. The Supreme People's Court was also closed. As a result, it was impossible to immediately file an appeal specifically intended to question the legality of his deprivation of liberty and demand information about his whereabouts.
This situation constitutes a further violation of the right of access to justice and hinders the exercise of a judicial guarantee designed to protect people against illegal detentions and enforced disappearances.
In a previous analysis, Cubalex warned that, in the current context of the Cuban judiciary, It is unthinkable that judicial authorities could conceive of habeas corpus as a true shield for citizens against the power of the State..
The limitations are also embedded in the legal design of the procedure itself. Article 796.2 of Law No. 143 stipulates that an appeal of a habeas corpus petition must be resolved within three days, “after first hearing the prosecutor.” However, the rule does not provide for a public hearing nor does it guarantee that the defense can present its arguments orally or in writing before the appellate court.
In practice, this significantly reduces the chances that the resource will function as an effective mechanism to prevent or end an enforced disappearance.
A practice incompatible with Cuba's international obligations
Enforced disappearance constitutes one of the most serious violations of international human rights law. In addition to simultaneously affecting rights such as liberty, personal integrity, and recognition as a person before the law, it places the victim in a situation of extreme vulnerability to acts of torture, extrajudicial execution, or cruel, inhuman, and degrading treatment.
Cuba ratifiedThe International Convention for the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance and the prohibition of this practice is part of customary international law and creates obligations for all States.
The 53 cases documented by Cubalex during the first half of 2026 show that enforced disappearance continues to be used in Cuba not as an isolated incident, but as a tool of social control and political repression. The lack of information provided to families, the absence of effective legal recourse, and the impunity with which the authorities act create a situation of profound vulnerability for the victims and their loved ones.