Spain
D. Eliseo v. Spanish Personal Data Protection Agency
Decision Date: March 4, 2024
The Supreme Court of Spain rejected a right to be forgotten claim lodged by the relatives of a court clerk who participated in the case in which the Spanish poet Miguel Hernández was sentenced to death in 1940. The son of Mr. D. Nemesio, who died in 1998, filed a lawsuit against the Spanish Personal Data Protection Agency to remove eighteen websites containing allegedly inaccurate information about his father. The defendant argued that the information was of public interest and had historical relevance since it pertained to the events surrounding the poet's death, and requested that the case be dismissed. After weighing the rights at stake, the Court held that, in matters of public interest and historical relevance, the right to access information and freedom of expression should prevail over the right to be forgotten. The Court held that the legal protection of the data of living persons is the same as that of the deceased. However, the Court found that the inaccuracies alleged by the petitioner were irrelevant or mere details in contrast to the essence of the information on the websites. The Court concluded, in this case, that the right to be forgotten should not apply because the facts surrounding the death of Hernández concern historical or scientific research of significant public interest, protected by freedom of expression and access to information. The Court found that allowing the removal of information of historical relevance would make impossible any robust public inquiry and debate about the past.
 
Hungary
Head of Public Opinion Research Company v. Film Production and Distribution Company
Decision Date: May 4, 2023
The Budapest Court of Appeal in Hungary ruled that a political thriller film, based on real events, was sufficiently fictional such that the depiction of a person in that film could not constitute an infringement of that person’s reputation. After the film was released and an accompanying communication was published by the film production company, a public official filed a complaint that the film’s depiction of a character closely resembling him was an infringement of his reputation. The lower court found that there had been an infringement and awarded damages. On appeal, the Court of Appeal emphasized that a reasonable viewer of a film would understand that it does not attempt to portray the true facts and so that the depiction of individuals would not be perceived as being factually accurate. The Court found the appeal of the film production company to be well-founded and set aside the lower court’s decision in its entirety.

European Court of Human Rights
Żurek v. Poland
Decision Date: June 16, 2022
The European Court of Human Rights found that measures taken against a Polish judge who had spoken out about judicial reform were an infringement of his right to freedom of expression. After making statements in his professional capacity on controversial reforms in Poland, the judge had been removed from various positions, faced disciplinary hearings, and was subjected to financial audit and performance reviews. The Court did not address whether the measures taken against the judge served a “legitimate aim”, focusing primarily on whether they were “necessary in a democratic society”. In finding that there had been a violation, the Court highlighted the public importance of the issues on which the judge spoke, and the need to protect the judiciary against measures that could impact on its independence.

Poland
The Case of Barbara Kurdej-Szatan's controversial Instagram post about the Polish Border Guard
Decision Date: February 3, 2024
A Polish District Court upheld a lower court’s decision to discontinue criminal defamation proceedings against an actress for statements she made in a social media post. The actress had responded to a video of border officials preventing a group of immigrants, including women and children, from crossing the Polish border with Belarus, and had said “They are heartless machines with no brains with NOTHING! Machines blindly following orders!". She later removed the post and issued an apology. The Court acknowledged that the actress’s choice of words was inappropriate as they were insulting and vulgar, but stressed that the nature of the words did not justify a finding that the statement constituted criminal defamation.

Social Media Regulation and the Rule of Law: Key Trends in Sri Lanka, India and Bangladesh. The Centre for Communication Governance at National Law University Delhi, LIRNEasia, and the School of Law at BRAC University published a report that outlines the social media regulation frameworks and trends in Sri Lanka, India, and Bangladesh. South Asia is an understudied region in terms of platform regulation, even though the three countries in focus have seen a public debate on the matter unfolding for the past few years. The report aims to fill that research gap, analyzing “(a) the intermediary liability framework governing social media platforms; (b) the relevant cybersecurity and other information and communication technology (ICT) regulations; and (c) key speech laws (mostly penal) applicable to end-users.” Case studies show that in Sri Lanka, India, and Bangladesh, social media governance relies on control of the online information flow, with its practices being internet shutdowns, content blocking, and online speech criminalization. There is a growing centralization of power in all three countries and an absence of functioning parliamentary and court oversight over executive decisions that restrict speech.

●  IACHR Special Rapporteur on Freedom of Expression Call for Public Consultation in Writing or Virtually. The Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (IACHR) is preparing a thematic report on freedom of expression and unprotected speech and invites civil society groups, international organizations, rights advocates, academic institutions, and other interested parties to contribute with relevant inputs. Submissions are welcome either in writing (by July 1, 2024) or orally in an online public consultation on July 1, 2024 (apply by June 21). Find out more here.

● FIFAfrica24 Call for Session Proposals and Travel Support Applications. The Collaboration on International ICT Policy for East and Southern Africa (CIPESA) announced a call for session proposals for the 2024 Forum on Internet Freedom in Africa (FIFAfrica24). A platform for multistakeholder debate on how to advance digital rights, FIFAfrica24 will welcome hundreds of attendees in Dakar, Senegal, on September 25-27, 2024. CIPESA notes session proposals could include “panel discussions, lightning talks, exhibitions, and skills workshops.” The deadline is June 17, 2024, at 6 pm East Africa Time. Learn more and apply here.