Dino’s ordinance on attacks makes room for “Ministry of Truth”

No one denies that it is necessary to prevent the dissemination of content on social networks that encourage attacks on schools. The ordinance signed by the Minister of Justice and Public Security, Flávio Dino, however, as it is generic and gives powers to the government and social networks that go beyond the provisions of the legislation, can be used to persecute innocent profiles and restrict freedom of expression without reason. Furthermore, the measure does not address the main problem: although the bait that lures young people into attacks is played on social networks, it is in the dark web and on online gaming forums that violence is orchestrated.

>> Be part of the channel Life and Citizenship on Telegram

The ordinance to regulate the fight against school violence on social networks was announced last Wednesday (12). The text provides for the exclusion of content with “violent extremism” that encourage attacks in the school environment. The National Consumer Secretariat (Senacon) will be responsible for initiating administrative procedures to investigate and hold platforms accountable for any non-compliance. Sanctions follow the Consumer Protection Code, such as fines or temporary suspension of platform activities.

The contents that must be blocked by the platforms are described with generic expressions, such as “attacks against the school environment” or that “apology and incitement to these crimes or their perpetrators”. The National Secretariat for Public Security (Senasp) will have the task of coordinating the sharing, between social media platforms and the competent authorities, of data that allow the identification of the user. It will also be responsible for creating a database of alleged “illegal content”, to facilitate identification by the networks’ own automated systems.

Criminal lawyer Andrew Fernandes points out that the main problem with the ordinance is that the Executive Branch has assumed the role of classifying what will be “illicit content”, a prerogative not foreseen in Brazilian legislation. According to the specialist, although there is consensus on the the need to erase violent content that encourages attacks, the ordinance uses broad terms that can give room for abuse, such as the exclusion of harmless posts or posts that criticize the government. In other words, a “Ministry of Truth” can be established with the justification of that these posts would be related to violence in schools.

In addition to the federal government being able to use the measure to encourage the removal of content that is of political interest, João Rezende, a specialist in criminal law, points out that it is illegal to delegate to social media platforms the task of fighting crime, which is the prerogative of the State. “Companies do not have the duty to curb criminal practices, but only an ethical and collaborative duty. Criminal control is the responsibility of the State”, he says.

Rezende also questions whether social networking platforms have the ability to monitor, through their algorithm, and detect sensitive issues and report this information to public authorities.

“The decree works only with the reality of social networks, but the bulk of the activity of extremist movements of attacks on schools is not on the surface of the internet. “, says Rezende. “I don’t know to what extent these platforms could repress or prevent these crimes,” he adds.

The criminal law expert points out that the ordinance addresses a minor aspect in the fight against attacks on schools. The main aspects are related to improving the qualification of police officers in digital crimes and technical structure. In addition to more resources for police intelligence agencies to act strongly in cyber attacks.

Deputies try to prevent “court of truth”

Deputies from the New Party filed a Draft Legislative Decree in the Chamber of Deputies to try to suspend the ordinance that, for them, with an “apparently well-intentioned” argument, creates a “court of truth”. The initiative is signed by parliamentarians Adriana Ventura, Gilson Marques and Marcel van Hattem.

In the justification, the deputies point out that the ordinance can be used by the Executive in an ideological way, with persecution of political disaffections, to define what are “harmful and harmful” and “flagrantly illicit” contents. The parliamentarians also point out that the text violates constitutional provisions and other Brazilian norms, since there is no legal provision to carry out the administrative procedure provided for in the ordinance and the breach of confidentiality of data.

“The problem is that the National Secretariat for Public Security (SENASP) does not have the legal authority to obtain this data. As previously stated, the Ordinance completely innovates in the legal order and does not have any legal basis”, says the project.