Judicial Corruption Score in Cuba
Cuba: Judicial Corruption Score was 0.594 in 2025. ◆ Volatile
Latest (2025)
0.594
Change on year
unchanged
World rank
76th
of 176 countries
All-time high
0.989
in 2013
All-time low
-0.65
in 1952
Years of data
237
1789–2025
Judicial Corruption Score in Cuba, 1789–2025
Source: V-Dem (2026) – processed by Our World in Data.
Analysis
The most recent figure for judicial corruption score in Cuba is 0.594, measured in 2025.
Compared with earlier readings it is down 39.9% over ten years.
Over the whole period, judicial corruption score in Cuba peaked at 0.989 in 2013 and was at its lowest, -0.65, in 1952.
Cuba ranks 76th of 176 countries on this measure, in the middle of the range.
The series is highly variable year to year, so single readings are best treated with caution.
Judicial Corruption Score in Cuba, year by year
| Year | Value | Change |
|---|---|---|
| 1789 | -0.067 | — |
| 1790 | -0.067 | -0.0% |
| 1791 | -0.067 | -0.0% |
| 1792 | -0.067 | -0.0% |
| 1793 | -0.067 | -0.0% |
| 1794 | -0.067 | -0.0% |
| 1795 | -0.067 | -0.0% |
| 1796 | -0.067 | -0.0% |
| 1797 | -0.067 | -0.0% |
| 1798 | -0.067 | -0.0% |
| 1799 | -0.067 | -0.0% |
| 1800 | -0.067 | -0.0% |
| 1801 | -0.067 | -0.0% |
| 1802 | -0.067 | -0.0% |
| 1803 | -0.067 | -0.0% |
| 1804 | -0.067 | -0.0% |
| 1805 | -0.067 | -0.0% |
| 1806 | -0.067 | -0.0% |
| 1807 | -0.067 | -0.0% |
| 1808 | -0.067 | -0.0% |
| 1809 | -0.067 | -0.0% |
| 1810 | -0.067 | -0.0% |
| 1811 | -0.067 | -0.0% |
| 1812 | -0.067 | -0.0% |
| 1813 | -0.067 | -0.0% |
| 1814 | -0.067 | -0.0% |
| 1815 | -0.067 | -0.0% |
| 1816 | -0.067 | -0.0% |
| 1817 | -0.067 | -0.0% |
| 1818 | -0.067 | -0.0% |
| 1819 | -0.067 | -0.0% |
| 1820 | -0.067 | -0.0% |
| 1821 | -0.067 | -0.0% |
| 1822 | -0.067 | -0.0% |
| 1823 | -0.067 | -0.0% |
| 1824 | -0.067 | -0.0% |
| 1825 | -0.067 | -0.0% |
| 1826 | -0.067 | -0.0% |
| 1827 | -0.067 | -0.0% |
| 1828 | -0.067 | -0.0% |
| 1829 | -0.067 | -0.0% |
| 1830 | -0.067 | -0.0% |
| 1831 | -0.067 | -0.0% |
| 1832 | -0.067 | -0.0% |
| 1833 | -0.067 | -0.0% |
| 1834 | -0.067 | -0.0% |
| 1835 | -0.067 | -0.0% |
| 1836 | -0.067 | -0.0% |
| 1837 | -0.067 | -0.0% |
| 1838 | -0.067 | -0.0% |
| 1839 | -0.067 | -0.0% |
| 1840 | -0.067 | -0.0% |
| 1841 | -0.067 | -0.0% |
| 1842 | -0.067 | -0.0% |
| 1843 | -0.067 | -0.0% |
| 1844 | -0.067 | -0.0% |
| 1845 | -0.067 | -0.0% |
| 1846 | -0.067 | -0.0% |
| 1847 | -0.067 | -0.0% |
| 1848 | -0.067 | -0.0% |
| 1849 | -0.067 | -0.0% |
| 1850 | -0.067 | -0.0% |
| 1851 | -0.067 | -0.0% |
| 1852 | -0.067 | -0.0% |
| 1853 | -0.067 | -0.0% |
| 1854 | -0.067 | -0.0% |
| 1855 | -0.067 | -0.0% |
| 1856 | -0.067 | -0.0% |
| 1857 | -0.067 | -0.0% |
| 1858 | -0.067 | -0.0% |
| 1859 | -0.067 | -0.0% |
| 1860 | -0.067 | -0.0% |
| 1861 | -0.067 | -0.0% |
| 1862 | -0.067 | -0.0% |
| 1863 | -0.067 | -0.0% |
| 1864 | -0.067 | -0.0% |
| 1865 | -0.067 | -0.0% |
| 1866 | -0.067 | -0.0% |
| 1867 | -0.067 | -0.0% |
| 1868 | -0.067 | -0.0% |
| 1869 | -0.067 | -0.0% |
| 1870 | -0.067 | -0.0% |
| 1871 | -0.067 | -0.0% |
| 1872 | -0.067 | -0.0% |
| 1873 | -0.067 | -0.0% |
| 1874 | -0.067 | -0.0% |
| 1875 | -0.067 | -0.0% |
| 1876 | -0.067 | -0.0% |
| 1877 | -0.067 | -0.0% |
| 1878 | -0.067 | -0.0% |
| 1879 | -0.067 | -0.0% |
| 1880 | -0.067 | -0.0% |
| 1881 | -0.067 | -0.0% |
| 1882 | -0.067 | -0.0% |
| 1883 | -0.067 | -0.0% |
| 1884 | -0.067 | -0.0% |
| 1885 | -0.067 | -0.0% |
| 1886 | -0.067 | -0.0% |
| 1887 | -0.067 | -0.0% |
| 1888 | -0.067 | -0.0% |
| 1889 | -0.067 | -0.0% |
| 1890 | -0.067 | -0.0% |
| 1891 | -0.067 | -0.0% |
| 1892 | -0.067 | -0.0% |
| 1893 | -0.067 | -0.0% |
| 1894 | -0.067 | -0.0% |
| 1895 | -0.067 | -0.0% |
| 1896 | -0.067 | -0.0% |
| 1897 | -0.067 | -0.0% |
| 1898 | -0.067 | -0.0% |
| 1899 | -0.067 | -0.0% |
| 1900 | -0.067 | -0.0% |
| 1901 | -0.067 | -0.0% |
| 1902 | -0.067 | -0.0% |
| 1903 | -0.067 | -0.0% |
| 1904 | -0.067 | -0.0% |
| 1905 | -0.067 | -0.0% |
| 1906 | -0.067 | -0.0% |
| 1907 | -0.067 | -0.0% |
| 1908 | -0.067 | -0.0% |
| 1909 | -0.067 | -0.0% |
| 1910 | -0.067 | -0.0% |
| 1911 | -0.067 | -0.0% |
| 1912 | -0.067 | -0.0% |
| 1913 | -0.067 | -0.0% |
| 1914 | -0.067 | -0.0% |
| 1915 | -0.067 | -0.0% |
| 1916 | -0.067 | -0.0% |
| 1917 | -0.067 | -0.0% |
| 1918 | -0.067 | -0.0% |
| 1919 | -0.067 | -0.0% |
| 1920 | -0.067 | -0.0% |
| 1921 | -0.067 | -0.0% |
| 1922 | -0.067 | -0.0% |
| 1923 | -0.067 | -0.0% |
| 1924 | -0.067 | -0.0% |
| 1925 | -0.067 | -0.0% |
| 1926 | -0.067 | -0.0% |
| 1927 | -0.067 | -0.0% |
| 1928 | -0.067 | -0.0% |
| 1929 | -0.067 | -0.0% |
| 1930 | -0.067 | -0.0% |
| 1931 | -0.067 | -0.0% |
| 1932 | -0.067 | -0.0% |
| 1933 | -0.067 | -0.0% |
| 1934 | -0.067 | -0.0% |
| 1935 | -0.067 | -0.0% |
| 1936 | -0.067 | -0.0% |
| 1937 | -0.067 | -0.0% |
| 1938 | -0.067 | -0.0% |
| 1939 | -0.067 | -0.0% |
| 1940 | -0.067 | -0.0% |
| 1941 | -0.067 | -0.0% |
| 1942 | -0.067 | -0.0% |
| 1943 | -0.067 | -0.0% |
| 1944 | -0.067 | -0.0% |
| 1945 | -0.067 | -0.0% |
| 1946 | -0.067 | -0.0% |
| 1947 | -0.067 | -0.0% |
| 1948 | -0.067 | -0.0% |
| 1949 | -0.067 | -0.0% |
| 1950 | -0.067 | -0.0% |
| 1951 | -0.067 | -0.0% |
| 1952 | -0.65 | +870.1% |
| 1953 | -0.65 | -0.0% |
| 1954 | -0.65 | -0.0% |
| 1955 | -0.65 | -0.0% |
| 1956 | -0.65 | -0.0% |
| 1957 | -0.65 | -0.0% |
| 1958 | -0.65 | -0.0% |
| 1959 | 0.77 | -218.5% |
| 1960 | 0.77 | +0.0% |
| 1961 | 0.77 | +0.0% |
| 1962 | 0.77 | +0.0% |
| 1963 | 0.77 | +0.0% |
| 1964 | 0.77 | +0.0% |
| 1965 | 0.77 | +0.0% |
| 1966 | 0.77 | +0.0% |
| 1967 | 0.77 | +0.0% |
| 1968 | 0.77 | +0.0% |
| 1969 | 0.77 | +0.0% |
| 1970 | 0.77 | +0.0% |
| 1971 | 0.77 | +0.0% |
| 1972 | 0.77 | +0.0% |
| 1973 | 0.77 | +0.0% |
| 1974 | 0.77 | +0.0% |
| 1975 | 0.77 | +0.0% |
| 1976 | 0.77 | +0.0% |
| 1977 | 0.77 | +0.0% |
| 1978 | 0.77 | +0.0% |
| 1979 | 0.77 | +0.0% |
| 1980 | 0.77 | +0.0% |
| 1981 | 0.77 | +0.0% |
| 1982 | 0.77 | +0.0% |
| 1983 | 0.77 | +0.0% |
| 1984 | 0.77 | +0.0% |
| 1985 | 0.77 | +0.0% |
| 1986 | 0.77 | +0.0% |
| 1987 | 0.77 | +0.0% |
| 1988 | 0.77 | +0.0% |
| 1989 | 0.77 | +0.0% |
| 1990 | 0.77 | +0.0% |
| 1991 | 0.77 | +0.0% |
| 1992 | 0.77 | +0.0% |
| 1993 | 0.77 | +0.0% |
| 1994 | 0.77 | +0.0% |
| 1995 | 0.77 | +0.0% |
| 1996 | 0.77 | +0.0% |
| 1997 | 0.77 | +0.0% |
| 1998 | 0.77 | +0.0% |
| 1999 | 0.77 | +0.0% |
| 2000 | 0.77 | +0.0% |
| 2001 | 0.77 | +0.0% |
| 2002 | 0.77 | +0.0% |
| 2003 | 0.77 | +0.0% |
| 2004 | 0.77 | +0.0% |
| 2005 | 0.77 | +0.0% |
| 2006 | 0.77 | +0.0% |
| 2007 | 0.77 | +0.0% |
| 2008 | 0.77 | +0.0% |
| 2009 | 0.77 | +0.0% |
| 2010 | 0.77 | +0.0% |
| 2011 | 0.77 | +0.0% |
| 2012 | 0.77 | +0.0% |
| 2013 | 0.989 | +28.4% |
| 2014 | 0.989 | +0.0% |
| 2015 | 0.989 | +0.0% |
| 2016 | 0.989 | +0.0% |
| 2017 | 0.732 | -26.0% |
| 2018 | 0.732 | +0.0% |
| 2019 | 0.732 | +0.0% |
| 2020 | 0.732 | +0.0% |
| 2021 | 0.732 | +0.0% |
| 2022 | 0.732 | +0.0% |
| 2023 | 0.594 | -18.9% |
| 2024 | 0.594 | +0.0% |
| 2025 | 0.594 | +0.0% |
Cuba compared with similar countries
- Cuba's 0.594 is above the median for upper middle income countries, which is -0.12. (48 countries reporting)
- Cuba's 0.594 is above the median for Latin America & Caribbean, which is 0.213, 2.8× the median. (25 countries reporting)
Averages by decade
| Decade | Average | Lowest | Highest | Years |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1780s | -0.067 | -0.067 | -0.067 | 1 |
| 1790s | -0.067 | -0.067 | -0.067 | 10 |
| 1800s | -0.067 | -0.067 | -0.067 | 10 |
| 1810s | -0.067 | -0.067 | -0.067 | 10 |
| 1820s | -0.067 | -0.067 | -0.067 | 10 |
| 1830s | -0.067 | -0.067 | -0.067 | 10 |
| 1840s | -0.067 | -0.067 | -0.067 | 10 |
| 1850s | -0.067 | -0.067 | -0.067 | 10 |
| 1860s | -0.067 | -0.067 | -0.067 | 10 |
| 1870s | -0.067 | -0.067 | -0.067 | 10 |
| 1880s | -0.067 | -0.067 | -0.067 | 10 |
| 1890s | -0.067 | -0.067 | -0.067 | 10 |
| 1900s | -0.067 | -0.067 | -0.067 | 10 |
| 1910s | -0.067 | -0.067 | -0.067 | 10 |
| 1920s | -0.067 | -0.067 | -0.067 | 10 |
| 1930s | -0.067 | -0.067 | -0.067 | 10 |
| 1940s | -0.067 | -0.067 | -0.067 | 10 |
| 1950s | -0.3914 | -0.65 | 0.77 | 10 |
| 1960s | 0.77 | 0.77 | 0.77 | 10 |
| 1970s | 0.77 | 0.77 | 0.77 | 10 |
| 1980s | 0.77 | 0.77 | 0.77 | 10 |
| 1990s | 0.77 | 0.77 | 0.77 | 10 |
| 2000s | 0.77 | 0.77 | 0.77 | 10 |
| 2010s | 0.8462 | 0.732 | 0.989 | 10 |
| 2020s | 0.663 | 0.594 | 0.732 | 6 |
Countries ranked near Cuba
More social development data for Cuba
- Refugees under the mandate of the UNHCR by country or territory of 115 (2025)
- Refugees under the mandate of the UNHCR by country or territory of 29,395 (2025)
- Political Rights Rating 7 (2025)
- Electoral democracy 0 (2025)
- Political rights rating fh, annual growth rate 0 % change on previous year (2025)
- Political rights rating fh, gaps filled 7 (2025)
- Refugees under the mandate of the UNHCR by country or territory of 0.0027 units per person (2025)
- Refugees under the mandate of the UNHCR by country or territory of 29,395 (2025)
- Refugees under the mandate of the UNHCR by country or territory of 0 units per person (2025)
- Refugees under the mandate of the UNHCR by country or territory of 0 units per US$ of GDP (2020)
Frequently asked questions
- What is judicial corruption score in Cuba?
- Judicial corruption score in Cuba was 0.594 in 2025, according to V-Dem (2026) – processed by Our World in Data.
- What is the highest judicial corruption score recorded in Cuba?
- The highest recorded value was 0.989 in 2013.
- What is the lowest judicial corruption score recorded in Cuba?
- The lowest recorded value was -0.65 in 1952.
- How does Cuba rank for judicial corruption score?
- Cuba ranks 76th out of 176 countries with data for 2025.
- Is judicial corruption score rising or falling in Cuba?
- Over the last ten years it is down 39.9%. The long-run trend across the full record is volatile.
- Where does this Cuba data come from?
- The figures come from V-Dem (2026) – processed by Our World in Data, published as part of Judicial Corruption Score. Statizoid updates them automatically from the source API.
Download this data
CSV · JSON — 237 observations, free to reuse under CC BY 4.0 (Our World in Data).
About this data
Data by V-Dem. Expert estimates of how often individuals or businesses make undocumented extra payments or bribes to obtain a favorable judicial decision, or speed up or delay the process. Higher scores mean less corruption. A score of 0 is approximately the average across all countries and years.