RIO DE JANEIRO (AP) — A U.S. congressional committee has released secret Brazilian court orders to suspend accounts on social media platform
The Republican-controlled House Judiciary Committee released a staff report late Wednesday describing dozens of decisions by Brazilian Supreme Court Justice Alexandre de Moraes ordering X to suspend or remove nearly 150 user profiles from its platform in recent years.
The 541-page report is the product of committee subpoenas directed to X. By his order, De Moraes had forbidden X from making them public.
“To comply with its obligations under U.S. law, X Corp. responded to the Committee,” the company said in a statement to X on April 15.
The statement comes amid a battle Musk is waging against de Moraes.
Musk, a self-proclaimed absolutist of free speech, has vowed to publish de Moraes’ orders, likening it to censorship. His campaign was applauded by supporters of far-right former President Jair Bolsonaro, who claimed they were targets of political persecution and found common cause with ideological allies in the United States.
De Moraes led a five-year investigation into so-called “digital militias” that allegedly spread defamatory fake news and threats to Supreme Court justices. The investigation has expanded to include those who incited nationwide demonstrations aimed at overturning Bolsonaro’s 2022 election defeat. These protests culminated in the Brazilian capital on January 8, when Bolsonaro supporters attacked government buildings, including the Supreme Court, in an attempt to impeach President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva.
De Moraes’ critics claim he has abused his powers and should not be allowed to unilaterally ban social media accounts, including those of democratically elected legislators. But most legal experts think his brash tactics are legally valid and also justified due to the extraordinary circumstances in which democracy is endangered. They note that their decisions were either approved by their fellow justices or were not challenged.
The secret orders announced by the congressional committee were issued by both Brazil’s Supreme Court and the top electoral court, which de Moraes currently presides over.
The Supreme Court press office declined to comment on the possible consequences of their release when contacted by The Associated Press.
“Musk is truly a very innovative businessman; “He’s innovated with electric cars, he’s innovated with rockets, and now he’s invented a new form of disobeying a court order through an intermediary,” said Carlos Affonso, director of the nonprofit Institute of Technology and Society. “He said he would release the documents and find someone to do it for him.”
Affonso, who is also a professor of civil rights at Rio de Janeiro State University, said the orders were legal but worth debating, given that users were not informed why their accounts were suspended and whether this action was taken by or against the platform. order of a court. The orders given to X included in the report also rarely provide justification.
The Supreme Court press office said in a statement Thursday afternoon that the decisions do not contain reasons, but the company and people whose accounts have been suspended can gain access by requesting the court’s decision.
While Musk has repeatedly condemned de Moraes’ orders as suppressing the principles of “free speech” and amounting to “aggressive censorship,” the company under his ownership has bowed to government demands from around the world.
Last year, for example, X blocked posts critical of Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan, and in February it blocked accounts and posts in India at the behest of the country’s government.
“The government of India has issued administrative orders requiring X to act on certain accounts and posts, which are subject to potential penalties, including significant fines and imprisonment,” X’s global affairs account posted on February 21. accounts and posts in India only; However, we do not participate in these actions and argue that freedom of expression should also extend to these missions.”
Brazil is an important market for X and other social media platforms. About 40 million Brazilians, or about 18% of the population, access X at least once a month, according to market research group eMarketer.
X complied with the restraining orders under threat of heavy fines. De Moraes usually demanded compliance within two hours and set a daily fine of 100,000 reais ($20,000) for non-compliance.
It is unclear whether the 150 suspended accounts represent all of the accounts Moraes ordered suspended. Until the committee report, it was not known whether the total was a handful, a few dozen or more. Some of the suspended accounts in the report were later reactivated.
On April 6, Musk took to X to challenge de Moraes, questioning why he was “demanding so much censorship in Brazil.” The next day, the tech mogul said he would stop complying with court orders to block the accounts and that de Moraes should either resign or be removed from office. Predicting that X might be shut down in Brazil, he instructed Brazilians to use a VPN to maintain their access.
De Moraes quickly brought Musk into the ongoing investigation into digital militias and launched a separate investigation into whether Musk was involved in obstruction, criminal association and sedition. On April 13, X’s legal representative in Brazil also wrote to Moraes that he would comply with all court orders, according to the letter seen by the AP.
Affonso said that the committee’s announcement of de Moraes’ orders targeted US President Joe Biden’s administration rather than Brazil. The report cites Brazil as “a stark warning to Americans about the threats posed by domestic government censorship.”
Terms like “censorship” and “free speech” have become political rallying cries for US conservatives since at least the 2016 presidential election; They were disappointed that right-leaning commentators and high-profile Republican officials were kicked out of Facebook and Twitter before Musk’s version violated the rules.
“The reason the far right needs him (Musk) is because they need a platform, a place to promote themselves. And Elon Musk needs far-right politicians because they will protect his platform from regulations,” said David Nemer, a Brazil native and professor at the University of Virginia who studies social media.
Freedom of expression in the United States is a constitutional right that is much more tolerant than in other countries, including Brazil. Still, the release of the report appeared to galvanize Bolsonaro and his far-right supporters.
Late Wednesday, just after the court rulings were issued, Bolsonaro ended his speech at a public event with a call for applause for Musk.
His audience eagerly obeyed.
___
AP writer Barbara Ortutay contributed from San Francisco
___
Follow AP’s Latin America and Caribbean coverage at https://apnews.com/hub/latin-america