Columbia Global Freedom of Expression seeks to contribute to the development of an integrated and progressive jurisprudence and understanding on freedom of expression and information around the world.  It maintains an extensive database of international case law. This is its newsletter dealing with recent developments  in the field.

We look forward to celebrating CGFoE’s 10 years on April 25, 2024, and are inviting you to join us. Our landmark event, Safeguarding Free Expression: The Role of Judicial Systems in Pivotal Times, will welcome freedom of expression advocates from around the world. Will you be in New York City? Reserve your ticket here. The event will take place at the Italian Academy, Columbia University, and is free and open to the public.

We have exciting news: Aryeh Neier, president emeritus of the Open Society Foundations, will be our keynote speaker at the opening session of the high-level conference co-chaired by UNESCO. Before joining the Open Society, Aryeh Neier spent twelve years as Executive Director of Human Rights Watch, of which he was a founder in 1978. Catalina Botero Marino, UNESCO Chair on Freedom of Expression at Universidad de los Andes, Colombia, Co-Chair of Meta’s Oversight Board, and former Consulting Director of Columbia Global Freedom of Expression, will give opening remarks virtually.

We bring newly published cases to you this week. In a recent ruling, Uruguay’s Court No. 1 of Tacuarembó held that a public prosecutor couldn’t file a complaint for slander and libel against the newspaper La Kandela—and its legal representatives—for publishing an article criticizing the actions of the Ministry of the Interior, and its cabinet minister, in a case of property seizure. The ECtHR found that Portugal violated Patricio Monteiro Telo de Abreu’s freedom of expression by convicting Telo de Abreu of defamation for reposting three political cartoons on his personal blog. In another ECtHR ruling but with a different outcome, the Court’s Fifth Chamber unanimously found that the sanction imposed by the French Criminal Court on the applicant, Mr. Denis Leroy, for publishing a cartoon of the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks—along with a caption highlighting his satisfaction with the outcome of the terrorist attacks—did not unlawfully limit the applicant’s freedom of expression.

Decisions this Week

Uruguay
Second Turn Departmental Prosecutor of Tacuarembó v. La Kandela
Decision Date: February 6, 2024
Court No. 1 of Tacuarembó (Uruguay) held that a public prosecutor couldn’t file a complaint for slander and libel against the newspaper La Kandela—and its legal representatives—for publishing an article criticizing the actions of the Ministry of the Interior, and its cabinet minister, in a case of property seizure. Tacuarembo’s Second Turn Departmental Public Prosecutor, Ms. Irene Penza, filed a complaint against La Kandela, Sebastián Ríos, and Jorge Del Pino, for slander and defamation arguing that an article accusing the Ministry of the Interior, and its cabinet minister, Matías Rodríguez, of favoring citizen Jorge Correa in an investigation regarding the seizure of his property, was false and offensive. The defendants, for their part, requested the annulment of  Penza’s complaint on the grounds that she lacked the authority to initiate criminal proceedings for defamation and slander. The Court held that the new Uruguayan Code of Criminal Procedure provides that complaints for the private offense of defamation and slander must be filed by the persons affected or injured by the false or offensive news. Consequently, it ruled that the complaint filed by prosecutor Penza was null and void and ordered the case to be closed.

European Court of Human Rights
Telo de Abreu v. Portugal
Decision Date: June 7, 2022
The European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) found that Portugal violated Patricio Monteiro Telo de Abreu’s freedom of expression, as enshrined in Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights, by convicting Telo de Abreu for reposting online three political cartoons. Telo de Abreu was convicted of defamation, by national Portuguese courts, for reposting caricatures on his personal blog that depicted a municipal councilor as a pig wearing sexually suggestive clothing. The ECtHR reversed the decision, reasoning that the Portuguese courts did not strike the right balance between freedom of expression and the right to honor and reputation. The Court concluded that political satire constitutes important democratic speech and that it should be permitted unless the government can show that the restriction or interference with freedom of expression is necessary in a democratic society.

Leroy v. France
Decision Date: October 2, 2008
The Fifth Chamber of the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) unanimously found that the sanction imposed on the applicant, Mr. Denis Leroy, for publishing a cartoon about the September 11th, 2001 terrorist attacks which included a caption highlighting his satisfaction with the outcome of the terrorist attacks, did not unlawfully limit the applicant’s freedom of expression. The impugned cartoon was published in Ekaitza, a local weekly publication based in the Basque region of France. The applicant was convicted by the Bayonne Criminal Court as an accomplice for condoning terrorism while Ekaitza’s publishing director was found guilty of condoning terrorism, resulting in fines and an obligation to publish at their own cost the entirety of the Court’s judgment in various publications. The ECtHR rejected the applicant’s Articles 9 and 10 challenge finding that the French Government had lawfully restricted Leroy’s freedom of expression on the grounds that the cartoon went beyond the expression of mere criticism of American imperialism, and rather supported and glorified its violent destruction. The ECtHR also considered the context of the publication, which in its opinion increased Leroy’s responsibility. However, the ECtHR found that the applicant’s right to a fair trial was violated according to Article 6, Paragraph 1 of the ECHR.

Community Highlights & Recent News

● Call for Participation – Examining Freedom of Online Communication Across Transatlantic Borders. The Alexander von Humboldt Institute for Internet and Society (HIIG), the Leibniz Institute for Media Research | Hans-Bredow-Institut (HBI), Columbia Global Freedom of Expression, and the UNESCO Chair on Freedom of Communication and Information will co-host an academic workshop in New York and are inviting early career scholars to participate digitally. As the US awaits a Supreme Court ruling that could reshape the nature of speech online, and the EU implements its landmark Digital Services Act, the Academic Roundtable will discuss transatlantic legal perspectives on freedom of online communication and expression on digital platforms. The workshop welcomes research projects on the topic. If you are an early career researcher and interested in presenting your thesis to leading US and European legal experts in the field of platform research, send a short application with an outline of your project to c.ollig@leibniz-hbi.de by April 22, 2024. The Roundtable will take place on April 30, 2024, 10 am – 6 pm (ET). Learn more here. 

● Upcoming Event – The IAPA Will Start the Updating of the Salta Declaration at Its Mid-Year Meeting. The Inter American Press Association (IAPA) will convene to begin updating the 2018 Salta Declaration on Principles of Freedom of Expression in the Digital Age in view of the latest technological changes, discuss free speech legislation with US and European experts, and analyze the state of press freedom in the Americas. In a three-day meeting, the event will start with “thematic panels on violence against journalists, legal and judicial harassment against media and denial of access to public information in 26 countries in the Americas.” On the event’s second day, the IAPA will cover the objectives of the Salta Declaration updates and analyze the EU’s Digital Services Act and the Digital Markets Act as well as journalism preservation laws in the US. On the third and final day, the IAPA will host more panels – on the Enhanced Fundamentals Lab, media sustainability, misinformation, and content moderation – and adopt resolutions to send to the governments of the Americas. April 17-19, 2024. Register here. The online event is free and open to the public.

● Colombia: In Historic Victory for Human Rights, IACtHR Finds Colombia’s State Agencies Violated Human Rights of Lawyers Defending Activists, by Karen Gullo and Veridiana Alimonti. Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) reports on a landmark ruling of the Inter‑American Court of Human Rights (IACtHR), which held that the Colombian government was responsible for the two-decade harassment, surveillance, and persecution of members of the Jose Alvear Restrepo Lawyers Collective (CAJAR), a human rights organization that defends victims of political repressions. The Court found that the state had violated the CAJAR members’ rights to life, privacy, personal integrity, and freedom of expression and association, among others. In 2022, EFF joined ARTICLE 19, Fundación Karisma, and Privacy International, represented by Berkeley Law’s International Human Rights Law Clinic, in filing an amicus brief and urging the Court “to rule that Colombia’s legal framework regulating intelligence activity and the surveillance of CAJAR and their families violated a constellation of human rights.” EFF analysts Karen Gullo and Veridiana Alimonti highlight the Court’s most important conclusions in their article. 

●  CoE’s Recommendation Represents a Significant Milestone in the Fight Against SLAPPs.On April 5, 2024, the Council of Europe’s Committee of Ministers adopted Recommendations on Countering the Use of SLAPPs; the Coalition Against SLAPPs in Europe (CASE) welcomed the document. CASE hails the recommendations as “robust and authoritative standards” for the member states to meet. However, CASE also encountered a few ambiguities in the text, regarding the early dismissal mechanism in particular, “that could, if interpreted in a restrictive manner, hinder efforts to counter the use of SLAPPs.” CASE encourages member states to “clarify and fortify these provisions to ensure the law is comprehensive, leaving no room for exploitable loopholes or circumvention.” CASE’s full analysis of the document and guidance on transposing the recommendations into national laws will be published soon.

Teaching Freedom of Expression Without Frontiers

This section of the newsletter features teaching materials focused on global freedom of expression which are newly uploaded on Freedom of Expression Without Frontiers.

Vilify, Ridicule, Disinform: Political Communication and Media Trust in the Age of Generative AI, by Christian Schwieter and Milan Gandhi. A collaboration between the Friedrich Naumann Foundation for Freedom and the Institute for Strategic Dialogue (ISD), the paper interrogates political communication and media trust in the age of AI, along with possible technical and policy solutions. ISD Research Fellows Christian Schwieter and Milan Gandhi start by explaining generative AI systems and survey ways through which political actors have been resorting to AI tools. The report builds on the empirical analysis and tailors its insights for policymakers. One of the recommendations is to “[r]aise awareness of how seemingly non-political uses of generative AI can be exploited for politics, in particular the creation of non-consensual intimate content.” After evaluating emerging solutions, including legislation, the authors conclude with an emphasis on the importance of “restoring citizens’ trust in democratic institutions” and stress that technology regulation and reduction of disinformation are solutions of only a partial nature. 

Post Scriptum

● How to Fight Misinformation Without Censorship: Taiwan’s approach puts other countries to shame, by Jacob Mchangama. In this article, published by Persuasion, Jacob Mchangama, CEO of the Future of Free Speech Project, argues that Taiwan sets an example for other democracies in its effective response to China’s hostile disinformation. Mchangama juxtaposes the Taiwan model built on openness and transparency with the European approach to disinformation. Relying on “organic and civil society-led initiatives,” the former combats disinformation without sacrificing freedom of expression in contrast with the latter. Mchangama unpacks the Taiwan model, listing its multiple elements – “a web of organizations [that] mutually [reinforce] each other’s work” – including think tanks, like Doublethink Lab, crowdsourced fact-checking initiatives, like Cofacts, and fact-checking organizations, like MyGoPen. Crucially, Mchangama argues, Taiwan’s government supports these civil society initiatives and strives to avoid free speech restrictions, having abandoned the Digital Intermediary Services Act proposal, which “many viewed the law as thinly veiled state censorship.”

This newsletter is reproduced with the permission of Global Freedom of Expression.  For an archive of previous newsletters, see here.