30/9/22, 14:55 Oversight Board | Independent Judgment. Transparency. Legitimacy. Facebook’s decision to remove the post also did not comply with international human rights standards on freedom of expression (Article 19, ICCPR). Health-related information is particularly important (A/HRC/44/49, para. 6) and is additionally protected as part of the right to health (Article 12, IESCR; E/C.12/2000/4, para. 11). In Brazil, where awareness raising campaigns are crucial to promote early diagnosis of breast cancer, the Board emphasizes the connection between these two rights. This right to freedom of expression is not absolute. When restricting freedom of expression, Facebook should meet the requirements of legality, legitimate aim, and necessity and proportionality. Facebook’s removal of the content failed the first and third parts of this test. a. Legality Any rules restricting expression must be clear, precise, and publicly accessible (General Comment 34, para. 25). Facebook’s Community Standards permit female nipples in the context of raising breast cancer awareness, while Instagram’s Community Guidelines only mention post-mastectomy scarring. That Facebook’s Community Standards take precedence over the Community Guidelines is also not communicated to Instagram users. This inconsistency and lack of clarity is compounded by removal notices to users that solely reference the Community Guidelines. Facebook’s rules in this area therefore fail the legality test. b. Legitimate aim Any restriction on freedom of expression must be for a legitimate aim, which are listed in Article 19, para. 3 of the ICCPR. Facebook claims its Adult Nudity and Sexual Activity Community Standard helps prevent the sharing of child abuse images and nonconsensual intimate images on Facebook and Instagram. The Board notes that both content categories are prohibited under separate Community Standards and are not subject to the exceptions that apply to consensual adult nudity. These aims are consistent with restricting freedom of expression under international human rights law to protect “the rights of others” (Article 19, para. 3, ICCPR). These include the right to privacy of victims of non-consensual intimate image sharing (Article 17 ICCPR), and the rights of the child to life and development (Article 6 CRC) which are threatened in cases https://www.oversightboard.com/decision/IG-7THR3SI1 11/16