Previous 4 / 7 Next

INQ 4874 / DF presença da GOOGLE, YOUTUBE, ex-TWITTER e atual X, FACEBOOK BRASIL, KWAI, TIK TOK, TWITCH E TELEGRAM MESSENGER, o real perigo dessa INSTRUMENTALIZAÇÃO CRIMINOSA – e de sua utilização para os crimes praticados – dos provedores de redes sociais e de serviços de mensageria privada e a necessidade da constituição de um grupo de trabalho para a apresentação de propostas de autorregulação e regulamentação legislativa, no sentido de se evitar, nos termos constitucionais e legais, a permanência das condutas ilícitas reiteradas de maneira permanente nas diversas plataformas, por meio de incitação ao crime, conteúdo discriminatório, discurso de ódio, discurso atentatório ao Poder Judiciário, e condutas contra a lisura das eleições e ao Estado Democrático de Direito. Posteriormente, com a constituição do Grupo de Trabalho, pela Portaria TSE 173, de março de 2023, as empresas, inclusive a exTWITTER e atual X, participaram de outras 5 (cinco) reuniões no TRIBUNAL SUPERIOR ELEITORAL, nos dias 06/03/2023, 14/03/2023, 21/03/2023, 29/03/2023 e 04/04/2023, sempre de maneira pública e transparente. Novamente, no presente ano de 2024, os provedores de redes sociais e de serviços de mensageria privada foram convidados a colaborar com o CIEDDE (Centro Integrado de enfrentamento a desinformação e defesa da Democracia), tendo seus representantes legais, inclusive aqueles do ex-TWITTER e atual “X”, participado de diversas reuniões com o Secretário Geral e com o Diretor Geral do TRIBUNAL SUPERIOR ELEITORAL . Essa evidente conexão, em especial, aponta a permanente e habitual INSTRUMENTALIZAÇÃO CRIMINOSA dos provedores de redes sociais e de serviços de mensageria privada, para a prática de inúmeras e gravíssimas infrações penais, cujo indícios de conduta dolosa, entretanto, até o momento não estavam presentes. Ocorre, que, na data de 6/4/2024, o dono e CEO (Chief Executive Officer) da provedora de rede social “X” - anteriormente “Twitter” -, ELON MUSK, iniciou uma campanha de desinformação sobre a atuação 4 Documento assinado digitalmente conforme MP n° 2.200-2/2001 de 24/08/2001. O documento pode ser acessado pelo endereço http://www.stf.jus.br/portal/autenticacao/autenticarDocumento.asp sob o código E1F5-03DA-9F8A-9E25 e senha A746-EDD0-1DA7-2A2C

Select target paragraph3

● ● ●

Federal Supreme Court of Brazil v. Elon Musk and X

Case Law

Country

Brazil

Country Location

Latitude: -9.531069703582213

Longitude: -52.923056365109474

Country Location (linked Case Law): Brazil

Decision Date: 7 de abr. de 2024

Case Status: Closed

Keywords

Content Moderation
Digital Rights
Disinformation
Judicial Censorship
Social Media

Judicial Body: Supreme Court (court of final appeal)

Court Name: Federal Supreme Court of Brazil

Case Number: Inq. 4.874

Case Summary: The Federal Supreme Court (STF) of Brazil ordered that Elon Musk, CEO of the social network X (formerly Twitter), be included as a suspect in a criminal inquiry into online propaganda. Musk had posted on X accusing a Supreme Court Justice of censoring freedom of expression and violating Brazilian law and stating that X would not abide by judgments issued by the Supreme Court against it. The Court found that Musk had used X to conduct a disinformation campaign about the Brazilian Supreme Court and Superior Electoral Court, exacerbating the risks to the security of the judiciary, and had contributed to the criminal action being investigated by the Supreme Court in various cases. The Court also ordered that X refrain from disobeying the judicial orders it had already issued.

Case Significance: Mixed Outcome

The ruling represents a mixed outcome, as it restricts freedom of expression while prioritizing the protection of democracy and public order, especially when the CEO of a major social network states that he will not comply with the decisions of the Supreme Court. The decision also highlights the balance between limiting harmful online behavior and upholding judicial authority against significant threats to democratic institutions. But, while the measures imposed on Elon Musk and X underscore a firm stance against the dissemination of fake news and the incitement of criminal activities and reflect the judiciary’s role in safeguarding democratic processes and public safety, these actions raise serious concerns about the potential overreach of judicial power and the impact on free speech, especially given that legal frameworks for digital regulation are still under debate in Brazil. Additionally, the broad use of terms like “disinformation” can be problematic because these labels may be applied subjectively, as evidenced in this decision that characterizes Musk’s actions as a “disinformation campaign”. Regardless of its accuracy, Musk’s statements involve expressing an opinion to which individuals are entitled, which is not the same as the appropriate definition of disinformation.

This ruling was delivered in a context where the Federal Supreme Court of Brazil has initiated several inquiries to investigate alleged illegal activities in the digital realm, including fake news and digital militias.

The first inquiry was the 4.781/DF, known as the “Fake News Inquiry“, initiated in March 2019, to investigate alleged dissemination of fraudulent news, false reports of crimes, malicious accusations, threats, and other purportedly illegal activities impacting the honor and security of the Federal Supreme Court, its members, and their families. This also focused on financing schemes and mass dissemination on social media platforms aimed at undermining or jeopardizing the independence of the Judiciary and the Rule of Law. In this inquiry, among other measures, the Supreme Court ordered Facebook and Twitter to suspend the accounts of individuals under investigation for “dissemination of fake news, false accusations, threats” and other illegal conduct, “affecting the honorability and security of the Supreme Court, as well as that of its members and their families”.

Subsequently, several other inquiries related to this matter were initiated by the STF, including Inq. 4.828/DF, which was initiated based on a request from the Prosecutor General (PGR) to investigate events that occurred on April 19, 2020, and their antecedents, due to reported gatherings of individuals in front of Brazilian Army barracks, calling for military intervention and the return of the dictatorship in Brazil. In July 2021, within Inq. 4.828/DF, another investigation, Inq. 4.874/DF (“Digital Militias Inquiry”), was launched based on evidence and indications suggesting the presence of a digital criminal organization involved in the production, dissemination, financing, and political activities like those identified in Inq. 4.781 (“Fake News Inquiry”). The Court found that these activities were allegedly aimed at undermining democracy and the rule of law in Brazil.

Following the attempted coup on January 8, 2023, the Supreme Court ordered the initiation of additional inquiries at the request of the Office of the Prosecutor General: Inq. 4.920/DF, concerning the financiers of the acts, who allegedly provided financial support for the attempted coup; Inq. 4.921/DF, concerning the instigation participants, who in some way encouraged the acts; Inq. 4.922/DF, concerning the intellectual authors and executors, who entered prohibited areas and committed acts of vandalism and destruction of public property; and Inq. 4.923/DF, concerning the state authorities responsible for improper omission.

The decision establishes a binding or persuasive precedent within its jurisdiction.

Related Law

Constitución

Source Name and URL: Global Freedom of Expression

Collection

Columbia

Date Updated: 18 de out. de 2024

Primary Documents

Decision (Portuguese).pdf
Portuguese
Download View

CYRILLA: Global Digital Rights Law

Select target paragraph3

Federal Supreme Court of Brazil v. Elon Musk and X

Primary Documents

Notifications