human rights responsibilities as a business.
Freedom of expression (Article 19 ICCPR)
Article 19, para. 2, of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) provides
that “everyone shall have the right to freedom of expression; this right shall include freedom
to seek, receive and impart information and ideas of all kinds, regardless of frontiers, either
orally, in writing or in print, in the form of art, or through any other media of his choice.”
Article 19 provides for broad protection of expression, including expression which people may
find offensive (General Comment 34, para 11).
While the right to freedom of expression is fundamental, it is not absolute. It may be
restricted, but restrictions should meet the requirements of legality, legitimate aim,
necessity, and proportionality (Article 19, para. 3, ICCPR). The Board has acknowledged that
while the ICCPR does not create obligations for Meta as it does for states, Meta has
committed to respect human rights as set out in the UNGPs. ( A/74/486, paras. 47-48).
Meta’s policies prohibit specific forms of discriminatory and hateful expression, absent a
requirement that each individual piece of content incite direct and imminent violence or
discrimination. The Special Rapporteur on free expression has noted that on social media,
“the scale and complexity of addressing hateful expression presents long-term challenges.” (
A/HRC/38/35, para. 28) The Board, drawing upon the Special Rapporteur’s guidance, has
previously explained that such prohibitions would raise concerns if imposed by a
government, particularly if enforced through criminal or civil sanctions. As the Board noted in
its Knin Cartoon, Depiction of Zwarte Piet, and South African Slurs decisions, Meta can
regulate such expression, demonstrating the necessity and proportionality of its actions due
to the harm that results from the accumulation of content.
I. Legality (clarity and accessibility of the rules)
Any restriction on freedom of expression should be accessible and clear enough in scope,
meaning and effect to provide guidance to users and content reviewers as to what content is
and is not permitted on the platform. Lack of clarity or precision can lead to inconsistent and
arbitrary enforcement of the rules ( General Comment No. 34, para 25; A/HRC/38/35, para.
46).
The Board notes that Meta made changes to the Community Standard on June 29, aligning
the terminology used in its public-facing Bullying and Harassment Community Standard and