The minister of the (Supreme Federal Court) reversed in a decision on Monday (16) the sentence imposed on federal deputy Marco Feliciano (PL-SP) by an actress who simulated a crucifixion during the 2015.
The congressman had been sentenced by the São Paulo Court to pay R$100,000 in compensation for moral damages as part of a public civil action filed by ABCDS (Associação Ação Brotar pela Cidadania e Diversidade Sexual). Feliciano’s defense filed a complaint with the Supreme Court, and the magistrate granted the request.
Kassio considered that Feliciano did not exceed freedom of expression in a post on social media criticizing the performance of transsexual actress Viviany Beleboni in the role of Jesus Christ at the time of her death. The deputy’s demonstration was one of several other reactions.
“By not identifying in the case now being examined the excesses that characterize discriminatory speech, I understand that the complainant did not go beyond the legitimate exercise of freedom of expression, as defined in the binding jurisprudence of this Court”, states the decision.
In the publication, Feliciano associated the act carried out by the actress with other political demonstrations in which Christian symbols were desecrated, such as “Slut March” and “Marcha da Maconha”, as mentioned in the magistrate’s decision.
“Images that shock, attack and hurt. Can this? It’s freedom of expression, they say. Can mocking faith at the naked church door? Can putting Jesus in a gay kiss? Can putting a crucifix in the anus? Can tearing religious symbols? Using symbols Catholics can’t say that I’m against all this? I’m intolerant, right?”
The São Paulo Court had based the conviction on the understanding that Feliciano had exceeded the right to freedom of expression by making associations beyond criticism of the event and the actress’s performance, and had generated confusion by posting photos that were not from the LGBT Parade. .
Kassio, however, understood that the decision was “laconic” in its reasoning and did not provide sufficient elements to categorize the deputy’s statement as an abuse of freedom of expression.
The minister argued that denying Christian religions the right to express value judgments based on their moral codes would be the same as depriving them of the essentiality that defines them.
He stated that freedom of expression, as the court’s jurisprudence points out, finds limits in hate speech against historically marginalized groups. But, for the rapporteur, the pluralism of society requires tolerance to different ways of living and thinking.
“This extreme category, however, cannot be confused with a mere unfavorable opinion, which finds refuge in the inviolable space of each individual’s conscience”, highlighted Kassio.
“Tolerance, however, should not be confused with forced agreement, as, in a democracy, different schools of thought reserve the right to oppose each other and express their disapproval of certain ideas and behaviors”, he concluded.
In 2019, the STF and transphobia in the law of racist crimes until the National Congress approves legislation on the topic. Minister Celso de Mello, rapporteur of one of the actions, said that this Thursday’s Supreme Court decision “does not interfere with or compromise religious freedom.”
