Between Freedom and Security: The Debate on the Limits of the State in Central America

Abstract

This article analyzes the debate between security, freedom, and limits on state power in Central America, using El Salvador’s state of exception since 2022 as its starting point. The purpose is to understand how far a state can expand its authority to respond to a security crisis without compromising the principles of a liberal state. The article follows a political philosophy approach based on Hobbes, Montesquieu, and liberalism, together with Central American authors who study security, democracy, and hardline security discourses. The analysis shows that the demand for extraordinary measures does not arise only from a preference for authoritarianism, but also from fear, social frustration, and the perception that ordinary institutions are unable to protect the population. However, security results do not remove the need for controls, defined duration, and respect for rights. The cases of Costa Rica and Guatemala show that this dilemma has become part of a regional conversation. The article concludes that security and freedom should not be understood as opposite choices, but as principles that need to remain in balance.