The (Superior Electoral Court) released this Monday (19) the court’s initial proposal for the rules on electoral propaganda without expanding rules involving the use of , despite the strong evolution of this and type of since the 2024 election – first .
Among the proposed changes, on the other hand, is the limitation of social networks in the event of “proven false users” or those who are committing crimes.
Until its final approval, the expectation is that the topic of AI can still be covered. Even in the TSE, the argument is that this will depend on the suggestions sent to the court.
Experts consulted by Sheet point out that there are gaps in the rules on the subject and that it would be important to move forward. There is no consensus, however, as to whether the most important changes would fall within the regulatory umbrella.
Among the rules approved in 2024 is a ban on calls and the use of “fabricated or manipulated” content with the aim of disseminating untrue or seriously decontextualized facts. Campaigns also cannot use robots to contact voters.
Furthermore, it required that AI content be expressly identified as such. These prohibitions tend to be maintained.
At the TSE, the assessment of a wing of ministers is that the current resolution would already be effective enough to contain the spread of false content produced through this type of tool.
Other members of the TSE, however, believe that constantly updating these rules is imperative, as technological devices are increasingly ingenious, capable of producing hyper-realistic videos that go viral on social media and can confuse voters. Therefore, an improvement in standards cannot be ruled out.
According to a person close to the president of the TSE, Minister Cármen Lúcia, one of the points for possible improvement concerns the system for receiving complaints. Another is the need to speed up dialogue with big techs to remove false content made with AI.
From this Monday until the 30th, interested parties can send suggestions to the court. Public hearings are scheduled to take place from February 3rd to 5th.
After that, the texts will be voted on in the TSE plenary. The person who will lead the discussions is Minister Kassio Nunes Marques, vice-president of the court.
At the STF (Supreme Federal Court), the assessment of at least four ministers is that the result of the election should also have an impact on the election. The expectation is that, given the Supreme Court’s definition, big techs will be more proactive and adopt a more collaborative stance with the TSE in relation to the rapid removal of publications, under penalty of severe fines.
Bruno Bioni, founding director of the organization Data Privacy Brasil, says that, although it is considered that the resolutions will still undergo changes until their approval, the signal is a more timid approach and maintenance of the previous rules on AI.
Like other experts, he points out that one possibility would be . Today the main rules focus on the social media companies that publish the content.
Francisco Brito Cruz, law professor at IDP (Brazilian Institute of Education, Development and Research), also points out this possibility of targeting companies that generate AI, foreseeing, for example, the prohibition of certain requests (“prompts”) and the generation of watermarks.
Furthermore, he is wary of the proposed form of restriction on the removal of profiles. “The problem is that this is not simply making a rule on how to remove profiles that is more rational. It is preventing the removal of certain profiles, in my view, unjustifiably” says Brito Cruz, giving as a hypothetical example profiles that would not be false, such as gossip or some bet, and that were publishing irregular electoral propaganda.
According to the proposed text, the removal of profiles “should only be applied when it is a proven false user, related to a person who does not even exist outside the virtual world (automated profile or robot) or whose publications are aimed at committing a crime”.
Paloma Rocillo, director of the Institute for Reference in and Society (Iris), assesses that, in addition to the proposed resolution not providing for new obligations on AI, it is problematic because it does not advance ways to make previous standards effective, with an increase in .
“AI tools are even more popular without regulation that guarantees minimum parameters of rights and obligations,” she says, pointing to a scenario in which a bill on the subject has not yet been approved by Congress.
Electoral lawyer Francisco Almeida Prado Filho, in turn, assesses that the proposal on profiles ensures freedom of expression, at the same time, guaranteeing legal certainty by providing for specific hypotheses. “It makes sense that the removal of profiles only occurs in exceptional cases,” he says.
For him, the discussion regarding including companies generating AI in the rules could end up going beyond the limits of the Electoral Court’s competence, arguing that it should probably come from the Legislature.
As for the current rules, he points out that any non-compliance could even lead to the disqualification of candidates. “The biggest problem is supervision, especially when this content is disseminated by third parties, not directly by the candidates”, he says.
Understand the debate on resolutions in the TSE
The TSE announced this Monday (19). From there, the court will hear suggestions from interested parties. The final version will be voted on by the court plenary. As vice-president of the TSE, Kassio Nunes Marques is responsible for leading this process
It is through resolutions that the TSE regulates and details prescribed points of electoral legislation.
In recent years, however, the court’s actions, especially in relation to rules on social networks, have also generated conflicts over whether it was exceeding its competences in part of the rules.
- 19 to 30 Jan: period for court
- January 27th: deadline for requesting the use of the floor in public hearings
Hearing Feb 3, at 10am
Hearing February 4th, at 10am
Hearing February 5th, at 11am
-
Election propaganda
-
Representation and electoral complaints
-
Electoral offenses
-
Special transport for voters with disabilities or reduced mobility
-
Consolidation of standards related to citizens in elections
