According to the president of the Supreme Court, article 19 of the Civil Rights Framework for the Internet is insufficient today, but must be maintained in cases of offenses and crimes against honor.
The president of the Federal Supreme Court (), , expressed his opinion on the current legislation that regulates the responsibility of social networks. He stated that the current rule is only partially unconstitutional and that article 19 of the Marco Civil da Internet, which was sanctioned in 2014, does not fully meet the demands of the current context. However, Barroso defends the maintenance of this article for situations involving offenses and crimes against honor. Article 19 determines that platforms can only be held civilly liable after failing to comply with a court order to remove content.
“Removal in the case of offenses and crimes against honor cannot be done without a judicial decision. Even if it is alleged that they represent crimes of insult, slander or defamation, they must remain under article 19 under penalty of violating freedom of expression. We are talking about platform accountability. Obviously not from the author of the insult”, said the minister. Furthermore, the president of the STF spoke out against the objective liability of platforms, suggesting a more balanced approach in relation to penalizing companies for posts made by their users.
He emphasized the urgency of establishing new control criteria over social networks, highlighting the need to combat illicit and dangerous practices, such as the dissemination of misinformation and hate speech. The ongoing trial in the STF on the Marco Civil da Internet is generating heated debates. Barroso proposed creating a “duty of care” for platforms, instead of requiring active monitoring of all content. In contrast, the minister argued that social networks should be held responsible regardless of a prior court decision.
*Report produced with the help of AI
Published by Fernando Dias
