Germany
The Case of Renate Künast
Decision Date: December 19, 2021
The Federal Constitutional Court of Germany held that a politician was entitled to receive information about Facebook users who had posted defamatory statements about her. The politician had been subjected to offensive and disparaging statements on Facebook, and sought an order from the ordinary courts to obtain the related user data under the German Telemedia Act. The ordinary courts issued orders only in respect of the users whose statements the courts held constituted “punishable insult”. The politician then approached the Federal Constitutional Court. The Court held that the ordinary courts’ decisions had failed to recognize the scope and significance of the politician’s general right of personality and had not correctly balanced the right to freedom of expression with that right of personality. The Court held that the decisions had infringed the politician’s constitutionally-protected right to personality and set them aside, remanding the case back to the Berlin Appellate Court.

Peru
Unconstitutionality of Legislative Decree 1237 (Extortion Felony)
Decision Date: June 2, 2020
The Constitutional Court of Peru dismissed a claim that a Legislative Decree, which altered the definition of extortion, infringed a number of fundamental rights and freedoms, and was hence unconstitutional. Legislative Decree 1237 modified article 200 of the Criminal Code by broadening the definition of extortion beyond the traditional requirement of “an undue economic benefit or advantage” to include obtaining “an advantage of any other kind.” The applicant argued that the definition was more applicable to coercion rather than to extortion and could imply an infringement of the right to protest and its related rights. The Court addressed the alleged infringements of (1) the principle of legality, (2) the right to protest, (3) the right to freedom of assembly, (4) the right to freedom of expression, (5) the right to freedom of opinion, (6) the right to freedom of conscience, (7) the right to political participation, and (8) the right to petition, and dismissed each of them. Nonetheless the Constitutional Court made an extensive interpretation of article 200 in order to limit the application of this rule against the right to protest, thereby recognizing the right to protest as an autonomous fundamental right protected by the Constitution

Argentina
The Case Against Daniel Santoro
Decision Date: December 11, 2020
The Federal Chamber of Mar del Plata revoked the charges against journalist Daniel Santoro for the alleged offences of attempted coercion and attempted extortion in relation to his association with a source, also charged with coercion and extortion. The Chamber decided on an appeal filed by Santoro’s defense against an order from a Federal Judge, which had charged Santoro for participating in the crimes as a result of his relationship with Marcelo D’Alessio, the co-defendant. D’Alessio, on the other hand, was being charged for impersonating a DEA agent and for purportedly having colluded with Santoro on the publication of damning news articles to coerce and extort two businesspersons involved in a corruption scandal. The Chamber considered that there was not enough evidence of Santoro’s participation in the criminal offences and concluded that different conversations between the defendants were related to their source-reporter relationship and therefore were protected, regardless of their ill-intended use by D’Alessio.

Bangladesh
The Case of Shahidul Alam
Decision Date: August 19, 2019

The Supreme Court of Bangladesh upheld the order of the High Court division of the Supreme Court of Bangladesh, in which the High Court had ordered a stay on the investigation of photojournalist and human rights activist Dr. Shahidul Alam, under the (now repealed) Section 57 of the Information and Communication and Technology Act 2006 (ICT). Dr. Alam allegedly made false and malicious comments and statements on a facebook live video and in an interview regarding protests against the death of two students who had died due to lack of road safety mechanisms and traffic mismanagement by the Government. The High Court suspended the investigation of him and issued a ruling asking the government why the investigation against him should not be declared illegal and contrary to the Constitution of Bangladesh and the Digital Security Act, 2018. The High Court’s order of stay was challenged, and in appeal, four judges of the appellate division of the Supreme Court upheld the stay order of the High Court and directed the High Court to dispose of the case in a time bound manner. 

Brazil
Ricardo Zarattini Filho v. Diario de Pernambuco
Decision Date: October 28, 2016
The Brazilian Superior Court of Justice held that a politician was entitled to protection of the right to be forgotten when a newspaper published an interview in which he was accused of previous terrorist activity. The politician had applied to the lower court for damages, arguing that he had been cleared of all charges relating to the terrorist act referred to in the newspaper article. The court of first instance found that the politician's public image was damaged and ordered the newspaper to pay damages. The appellate court emphasized the right to information and overturned the lower court's decision. On appeal the Superior Court reinstated the first instance court's order, holding that "the protection of the dignity of the human person in the information society includes the right to be forgotten”. A special appeal, brought by the newspaper, is still pending.