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.
“A very strong democratic crisis in all surveys indicates that democracy is not at its most popular moment,” said Agustina Del Campo, Director of the Center for Studies on Freedom of Expression, University of Palermo, at our webinar this week. The discussion of the Inter-American legal standards on freedom of expression—some of the most progressive and influential globally—came at an especially urgent time.
Since 2010, the Inter-American Legal Framework Regarding the Right to Freedom of Expression has become a key reference for courts, states, academics, and civil society throughout the Americas. “We [aimed to] systematize progress in a manner that is understandable and can be used […] by the army of people who want to defend freedom of expression,” reflected Catalina Botero Marino, Framework Author and Former Special Rapporteur for Freedom of Expression at the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (IACHR).
15 years later, the IACHR’s Office of the Special Rapporteur, led by Pedro Vaca Villarreal, released the updated 2025 edition of the Framework, highlighting how the Inter-American system has expanded the scope of specially protected speech. The Rapporteurship soon followed with a thematic report on hate speech—CGFoE participated in the civil society consultations as part of the preparation process.
The webinar, joined by Pedro Vaca Villarreal, Catalina Botero Marino, Agustina Del Campo, and Roberto Saba, Professor of Constitutional Law and Human Rights at the University of Buenos Aires – University of Palermo, discussed both recent publications in the context of steadily eroding conditions for the exercise of freedom of expression in the region. More than 70 participants from around the world signed up to join. In case you missed it: the conversation, in Spanish, is available on our YouTube channel.
On Saturday, March 28, across the United States, at least 8 million people joined the third nationwide “No Kings” protest against the Trump administration. In this week’s Protest Monitor edition, we spotlight the movement—find out more below. Photos: “No Kings” protesters in Waitsfield, Vermont, on March 28, 2026, captured by CGFoE Associate Director Hawley Johnson
Inter-American Court of Human Rights
Zelaya v. Honduras
Decision Date: October 3, 2025
The Inter-American Court of Human Rights held that Honduras violated Leonela Zelaya’s right to freedom of expression, under Article 13 of the American Convention on Human Rights, by arbitrarily detaining her on discriminatory grounds linked to her gender identity and expression and by later disregarding that identity during the investigation into her death. The case arose in a context of structural violence against LGBTIQ+ persons in Honduras, particularly trans women, and concerned Leonela, a trans woman, sex worker, and person living in extreme poverty, who was repeatedly detained by police in 2004 and later killed in Comayagüela. After her death, State authorities registered her as male, referred to her in stigmatizing terms, and failed for years to conduct a diligent investigation. Before the Court, the Inter-American Commission argued that the State had interfered with Leonela’s ability to live and express her identity as a trans woman, while Honduras partially acknowledged responsibility, including for discriminatory treatment based on her gender identity. The Court reaffirmed that gender identity and gender expression are protected under Article 13 and held that Leonela’s detentions were arbitrary, discriminatory, and carried out under vague police rules that enabled abuses based on prejudice. It further held that the State violated Article 13 by erasing Leonela’s gender identity in official and judicial records during the criminal investigation. The Court ordered Honduras to reopen the investigation with reinforced due diligence and a gender perspective, publish and disseminate the judgment, hold a public act acknowledging responsibility, reform its police legislation, and adopt additional measures aimed at preventing repetition.
Kenya
Kahiu v. Creative Economy Working Group
Decision Date: January 26, 2026
The Court of Appeal of Kenya at Nairobi held that the High Court of Kenya had erred in finding that its jurisdiction had been prematurely invoked, and it clarified that constitutional challenges to legislation and administrative decisions could properly be brought before the High Court even where a statutory appeal mechanism existed. The case arose after filmmaker Wanuri Kahiu submitted her film Rafiki to the Kenya Film Classification Board for classification, but the Board restricted the film’s exhibition on April 26, 2018, on the grounds that it depicted homosexuality and was inconsistent with Kenyan law and cultural values. Kahiu and the Creative Economy Working Group subsequently filed a constitutional petition challenging the restriction and the constitutionality of several provisions of the Film and Stage Plays Act (Kenya). The High Court dismissed the petition after holding that the statutory appeal procedure had not been exhausted. On appeal, the Court reasoned that the earlier interlocutory ruling of Justice Grace Okwany had already affirmed the High Court’s jurisdiction and therefore the High Court’s contrary finding violated the doctrine of res judicata. The Court further held that although freedom of expression under Article 33 of the Kenyan Constitution was not absolute and could be limited under Article 24, the statutory appeal mechanism under the Act was inadequate to determine constitutional questions, and therefore the petition could properly be heard by the High Court while most provisions of the regulatory framework governing film classification remained constitutionally valid.
Court of Justice of the European Union
European Commission v. Hungary
Decision Date: June 5, 2025
The Advocate General of the Court of Justice of the European Union considered, in an independent opinion, that several provisions of Hungary’s 2021 “protection of children” amendments violated European Union law, including the right to freedom of expression and information guaranteed under Article 11 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union. These amendments restricted minors’ access to content promoting or portraying “gender identities that do not correspond to sex assigned at birth, sex reassignment or homosexuality.” The European Commission challenged the law, arguing it was discriminatory and unlawfully restricted freedom of expression. The Advocate General found that the measures were discriminatory as they restricted “LGBTI content” while allowing heterosexual or cisgender content. The opinion further held that the restrictions unjustifiably interfered with freedom of expression and information without evidence that such content caused any harm to minors.
CGFoE’s Marija Šajkaš Gives Guest Lecture on Freedom of Expression at Sciences Po. Last week, CGFoE Senior Communications Manager Marija Šajkaš delivered a guest talk at the joint Master’s program in Journalism and International Affairs of Sciences Po and Paris School of International Affairs. Addressing students from Brazil, Turkey, Spain, Poland, and France, Šajkaš focused on the state of freedom of expression in the United States and the Balkans, threats to journalists, Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation, covering the case of Daphne Caruana Galizia, and the protection of journalists, citing CGFoE’s recently published Special Collection Paper on women’s right to freedom of expression.
● US: Supreme Court Strikes Down Colorado Ban on Conversion Therapy. On Tuesday, March 31, in an 8–1 decision, the US Supreme Court held that Colorado’s ban on conversion therapy, as applied to licensed counselors’ talk therapy, constitutes a content- and viewpoint-based restriction on speech subject to strict scrutiny, resolving a prior split among federal courts. The Human Rights Campaign (HRC), which filed an amicus brief in the case on behalf of leading health care scholars, condemned the ruling as “cruel” and “leaving children vulnerable to abusive and ineffective practices.” In her dissent, Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson referenced the HRC’s submission and mapped out the stakes: “Ultimately, because the majority plays with fire in this case, I fear that the people of this country will get burned.” CGFoE is preparing the analysis of the decision. See more conversion therapy cases here.
● African Comparative Law Casebook on Sexual Orientation, Gender Identity, and Gender Expression. The International Commission of Jurists released an updated comparative law Casebook on national court rulings concerning sexual orientation, gender identity, gender expression, sex characteristics, and justice across Africa. Following the 2011 publication of over 108 case summaries, the new Casebook adds 20 decisions from domestic courts in 11 countries. Meant for lawyers, judges, and human rights activists, the Casebook also seeks to advance public interest litigation in the protection of the rights of sexual and gender minorities.
● #KeepItOn Coalition 2025 Report. In 2025, the global #KeepItOn coalition of hundreds of civil society organizations recorded 313 internet shutdowns in 52 countries, an increase from 304 shutdowns documented in 2024 and 289 in 2023. The new report, Rising Repression Meets Global Resistance: Internet Shutdowns in 2025, shows that both democracies and autocracies resort to connectivity blackouts to intimidate and chill speech as well as to hide grave human rights violations. Emphasizing citizens’ resistance, the report highlights Myanmar, Iran, Tanzania, and Nepal. For more, explore CGFoE’s Special Collection Paper on internet shutdowns and relevant cases in the database.
Last Thursday, March 26, in Santiago, Chile, police fired water cannons at students protesting against controversial education reforms. On Saturday in London, the UK, an anti-far-right march drew half a million people, according to the organizers; 18 supporters of Palestine Action were arrested despite the February High Court ruling. In Israel, anti-war protests in around 20 locations, including Tel Aviv and Jerusalem, drew hundreds and were violently dispersed under wartime emergency regulations, with 22 arrests. On Sunday, in Moscow and other cities in Russia, 25 people were arrested protesting against internet shutdowns and the blocking of Telegram; at least two were beaten. On Monday, in Gaza, Palestine, a protest marked Palestinian Land Day, denouncing Israel’s proposed death penalty law for Palestinian prisoners. On Tuesday in Belgrade, Serbia, protesting the police search of Belgrade University, hundreds of students clashed with police who dispersed demonstrators with truncheons.
On Saturday, March 28, “No Kings” protests—more than 3,300 coordinated demonstrations against the Trump administration—gathered at least 8 million people across the United States, with solidarity actions happening around the world. The protest, the largest in modern US history, marked the third such mobilization since June 2025. The organizers plan a nationwide strike on May 1.
Demands: The organizers frame their message in opposition to escalating authoritarianism—a regime “doubling down on fear and force to intimidate communities and silence dissent.” Protesters focused on the Iran war, immigration crackdown, rising costs of living, the Epstein files, and overall democratic backsliding. A flagship event took place in Minnesota, where ICE operations led to the killing of Renée Good and Alex Pretti.
Significance: March 28 was described as the largest single-day nonviolent demonstration in recent US history, following the “No Kings” of October 2025 (around 7 million people) and June 2025 (around 5 million). Nearly half of the actions were held in red states, with some rural, Republican-leaning communities joining for the first time.
State Response: While the demonstrations were largely peaceful, a few incidents occurred, including clashes with counter-protesters in Dallas, resulting in several arrests. In Los Angeles, police deployed tear gas and arrested 74 people for failing to follow a dispersal order after the rally ended. In Portland, 3 arrests were made due to post-rally incidents at the ICE facility. The White House dismissed the protests: “The only people that care about these Trump derangement therapy sessions are the reporters who are paid to cover them,” said spokeswoman Abigail Jackson.
FoE Violations: The protests also responded to mounting First Amendment violations. On March 28, the American Civil Liberties Union provided live coverage, underscoring the fragility of protest rights under the current administration. In its guide for protesters, the ACLU stresses that law enforcement can only shut down a protest as a “last resort” and must give a clear warning and opportunity to comply before arrests can be made.
● The Use Of Generative AI In Advertising: Towards A Flexible And Risk-Based Approach, by Joan Barata Mir. In his latest paper, Visiting Professor at Faculdade de Direito – Católica no Porto and CGFoE Expert Dr. Joan Barata Mir examines the use of AI to produce commercial content, in relation to the transparency and labelling provisions that different legal systems have for synthetic content.
● Nureyev Ballet, Censored in Russia for “Gay Propaganda,” Premieres in Berlin. This past March in Berlin, a ballet tribute to legendary Soviet dancer Rudolf Nureyev returned to the stage. Having initially premiered at the Bolshoi in Moscow in 2017, the ballet was pulled from the theater’s repertory amidst Russia’s crackdown on LGBTIQ+ rights. You can watch the ballet, a celebration of artistic freedom, here.
This newsletter is reproduced with the permission of Global Freedom of Expression. For an archive of previous newsletters, see here.
Leave a Reply