We are taking a short break but will be thinking of global freedom of expression in the meantime. 
Our newsletter will reach you again the week of July 22.

Oversight Board Case of Iranian Woman Confronted on Street
Decision Date: March 7, 2024
The Oversight Board overturned Meta’s original decision to remove an Instagram video of a man confronting a woman for not wearing a hijab in Iran. Meta originally removed the post after considering that a phrase from the caption was a credible threat targeting the man in the video, which violated the Violence and Incitement policy. According to the Board, the post did not violate the policy as the phrase was figurative speech used to express anger at the regime. Moreover, the Board found the removal unnecessary and recommended Meta add a policy lever to its Crisis Policy Protocol used in Iran (policy levers are temporary policy changes that aid Meta in addressing the situation in designated at-risk countries such as Iran).

Oversight Board Case of Girls’ Education in Afghanistan
Decision Date: December 8, 2023
The Oversight Board overturned, in a summary decision, Meta’s decision to remove a user’s post on Facebook expressing concern about the education of girls in Afghanistan after the Taliban takeover. The user urged people to raise their concerns about the importance of girls’ education and highlighted the negative consequences of failing to do so. Meta originally removed the content arguing that it violated the Dangerous Organizations and Individuals policy which prohibits content supporting designated dangerous groups such as the Taliban. The company overturned its original decision when it was notified of the case by the Board. Meta held that the content did not violate any policy and that the post’s removal was an error. The Board noted that this case was an example of an enforcement error of the Dangerous Organizations and Individuals policy—which allows content criticizing designated organizations or individuals, or talking about them in a neutral way—that could impair political commentary on the impact of the Taliban takeover on girls’ education.

The Case of Violence Against Women
Decision Date: July 12, 2023
The Oversight Board overturned Meta’s decisions to remove two Instagram posts condemning and raising awareness about gender-based violence. Meta originally removed the contents because they violated, according to the company, its Hate Speech policy. The first post included a statement that was characterized by two at-scale reviewers as an unqualified behavioral statement and the second post included a statement deemed as an expression of contempt against men. The Board found both posts did not violate the aforementioned policy as they aimed to raise awareness about violence against women and did not promote offline harm or create an environment of discrimination against men. The Board also decided that the posts aligned with Meta’s value of “Voice” as they sought to raise awareness. Additionally, the Board concluded that the removal of the posts was inconsistent with Meta’s human rights responsibilities as the measure didn’t meet the requirements of legality, necessity, or proportionality. The Board recommended Meta modify its policies to include an exception that allows content raising awareness about gender-based violence.  

The Case of Dehumanizing Speech against a Woman
Decision Date: June 27, 2023
On June 27, 2023, the Oversight Board issued a summary decision overturning Meta’s original decision to leave up a Facebook post that attacked an identifiable woman by comparing her to a truck. In December 2022, a Facebook user posted a photo of a woman with a caption describing her as a used truck in need of repairs, saying she was “advertised all over town.” Although the content was reported more than 500 times, Meta decided to keep the content online. When the Board notified Meta of this case, the company reversed its original decision and removed the content arguing it violated Meta’s Bullying and Harassment policy. The Board recognized Meta’s correction of its initial error and recommended Meta to holistically address concerns regarding the ambiguity of its Bullying and Harassment policy to reduce the errors when moderating content.

● Russia: Moscow Court Sentences Playwright and Director in Ongoing Crackdown on Free Expression. PEN America and the Artists at Risk Connection condemn a Moscow Court’s sentencing of two women artists – theater director Zhenya Berkovich and playwright Svetlana Petriychuk – to six years behind bars. Their charges of “justifying terrorism” respond to the production of the Finist, the Bright Falcon play about Russian women who, following online recruitment, went to Syria and joined ISIS. “Berkovich and Petriychuk used theater to highlight the dangers and consequences of terrorism,” commented Polina Sadovskaya, PEN America’s Director for Advocacy and Eurasia. “It is a terrible, tragic irony that they have now been found guilty of terrorism charges themselves.” During the court process, which was closed to the public in June 2024, state witnesses insisted that the play had “signs of radical feminist ideology,” “romanticized the image of a terrorist,” and “discriminated against Russian men.”

● Iran: Court Hands Down New Sentence Against Nobel Laureate. Human Rights Watch demands that the Islamic Republic of Iran immediately release Narges Mohammadi, imprisoned human rights defender and Nobel Peace Prize winner. Mohammadi has just received another sentence – one more year in prison for “propaganda against the state” – imposed by Branch 29 of the Tehran Revolutionary Court that cited her call to boycott the recent elections, letters to Swedish and Norwegian lawmakers, advocacy in support of the “Woman, Life, Freedom” movement, and denouncement of the Iranian public officials for torture and sexual assault of journalist and student Dina Ghalibaf. The new sentence adds to the two years in prison and 74 lashes imposed on Mohammadi by the same court in January 2022. The human rights defender has been forced to endure prolonged solitary confinement – a form of torture as recognized by UN experts.

Shattering Women’s Rights, Shattering Lives: Parliamentary Ad-Hoc Inquiry into the Situation of Women and Girls in Afghanistan and Iran. The Gender Apartheid Inquiry, conducted by a Panel of UK Parliamentarians and the International Bar Association’s Human Rights Institute, seeks to investigate the situation for women and girls in Afghanistan and Iran and join the conversation on codifying gender apartheid. The Inquiry’s recently published report argues that while the Rome Statute includes the crime of gender persecution, “the experience of women and girls in Afghanistan and Iran, although different in some respects, requires a more accurate representation in law” due to the institutionalization and scale of oppression. The report reviews the states of education, employment, movement, expression, assembly, association, and access to justice for women and girls in the two countries. The Inquiry then examines the gender apartheid concept and considers legal avenues for codifying it.

● Is AI-Facilitated Gender-Based Violence the Next Pandemic? by Rangita de Silva de Alwis and Elodie Vialle. Published by The Regulatory Review, University of Pennsylvania, the article interrogates a new threat to women’s freedom of expression – AI-generated mis- and disinformation. The authors point to the rising gender-based violence online and the disproportionate effect it has on women human rights activists and women journalists. Calling for legislation that takes the intersections of AI and gender into account, the authors urge tech companies to respect the rights enshrined in both ICCPR and CEDAW.