Freedom of Expression Challenges in Latin America: How Does Cuba Fit in this Context?

What challenges, opportunities, and trends currently exist in Latin America with regard to freedom of expression? As usual, the Regional Alliance for Freedom of Expression and Information Alianza tries to explain this through its periodic report on the state of this right in Latin America. The Alliance is an international network of 17 organizations from different countries that study and promote freedom of expression and access to public information.

The Reportinspired by Article 13 of American Convention on Human RightsThis year, it was coordinated by a member of the Argentine Alliance: the Civil Society for Equality and Justice (ACIJ). The document updates the situation that Latin America faces today with regard to freedom of expression on the Internet and the censorship practices that are being reproduced in the virtual space.

According to the findings of the report, among the main threats to freedom of expression on the continent are the phenomena associated with the intensive monitoring of citizens’ online expressions by governments through communication, security and control technologies. Likewise, disinformation and hate speech or private regulation of content are reproduced on digital platforms.

The ACIJ investigation warns that in recent years various practices of mass surveillance by governments in the region have been identified. Among these practices are PC interference, mobile hacking, data mining and exploitation by large digital platforms, social engineering, and facial recognition software for surveillance, among others.

In addition, it outlines some specific practices used with the aim of censoring or limiting speech in the public sphere. Thus, monitoring of posts on social networks or digital media is used, which is criminalized as a form of censorship, since states do not have the possibility to directly manipulate these online platforms.

How does the state act in online surveillance?

The report also highlights that in countries in the region where authoritarianism prevails, mass surveillance techniques are often used as tools of repression against dissenting expressions. Some forms of censorship derived from surveillance operate indirectly through consequent intimidation, as does the criminalization or civil complaint of expressions made on social networks.

In this sense, criminal or civil cases against individuals or groups have been identified as a result of these mass surveillance practices in Cuba and other countries in the region (Argentina, Nicaragua, Venezuela, Honduras and Guatemala).

In the Cuban case, the controversial Decree-Law 370 On the “Computing of Society in Cuba”, in force since 2019, made it possible to promote criminal cases with broad powers to impose fines on Internet publications that mean “1) the publication, through public data transmission networks, of information contrary to the social interest, morals, good habits and safety of people .

The ACIJ report confirms that there are many activists or journalists who have received this type of fine. Cuban activist Juan Luis Bravo was sentenced to two years in prison for refusing to pay the fine. Posts on social networks were also used to open criminal cases that led to house arrest. This was the case of activists Tania Bruguera and Carolina Barreiro, who were accused of inciting crime for some posts on social networks.

Legalizing State Surveillance Online

Within the continent, Cuba is one of the few countries with regulations regarding mass surveillance. Argentina and El Salvador were added to the archipelago; However, the situation in Cuba is acting in the opposite direction to those states.

In Argentina, the National Intelligence Act (25520) prohibits agencies that carry out intelligence activities to “obtain information, produce intelligence or store data about people, solely because of their race, religious belief, private actions or political opinions, or to join or belong to a organizations”.

El Salvador’s penalties, through the special law against computer crimes and Related, in Article 12 of it, to imprisonment for up to eight years for those who “obtain for improper purposes stored or confidential data or information contained in a system using information and communication technology or in any of its components.”

However, Cuba uses the legislation to exercise the opposite: The Cuban Observatory for Human Rights and Colectivo + Voces warn that “discretionary powers have been given – even to ISPs – to extend surveillance and act accordingly. Expanding these powers without judicial oversight has been a concern for UN rapporteurs. In the report issued regarding Decree-Law 35 and its complementary regulations.

On the other hand, regarding the existence of approved projects or regulations that create or encourage the creation or design of public authorities that interfere in matters of Internet censorship, it seems that there is a regulation in this regard only in Cuba. This is Resolution 105 of the Ministry of Communications, which approves the “National Action Model Regulation for Responding to Cyber ​​Security Incidents”.

This regulation provided for the establishment of a specialized body for cyber security, with the participation of officials from the Ministry of Communications, the Interior and the Armed Forces. However – the ACIJ report notes – that the plans that would determine how it would be organized and the powers of that authority are unknown – which would have the potential to “(…) prevent, detect and respond in a timely manner to the manner in which potential enemy, crime and harmful activities might occur. In cyberspace.To this day, the Computer Network Security Bureau is the authority responsible for the surveillance, surveillance and defense of networks and the Internet in Cuba.

Distortion and hate speech

With regard to disinformation and hate speech, these are two phenomena that present a series of challenges in terms of protecting freedom of expression. These messages can influence by discouraging other legitimate expressions or amplifying the scenario of discrimination against vulnerable groups.

As the ACIJ report notes, “technology has enabled the creation and dissemination of false or manipulated information, as well as discourse that incites discrimination, intolerance, and violence toward certain groups. These new channels, in turn, facilitate the anonymization of these expressions and seriously impede the application of classic “solutions” such as Right of reply and subsequent compensation by the responsible persons.”

In contrast, in the case of disinformation, the document highlights that it tends to intensify where democratic space is narrow, leading to a vicious cycle, which severely damages institutions and democracy. The authoritarian rhetoric and anti-democratic ideas often promoted by disinformation can also contribute to a greater or lesser degree to damage freedom of expression.

An April 2021 report by the UN Special Rapporteur on Freedom of Expression, by Irene Khan, noted this issue: “There is growing evidence that disinformation tends to thrive where human rights are limited, the public information system is not robust and where the quality of the media is The media, its diversity, and its independence are low. Conversely, when freedom of opinion and expression is protected, civil society, journalists and others are able to challenge fallacies and present other perspectives.”

We also suggest:

If you are interested in legal issues, you can visit our project legal touchwhere you will find analyzes and discussions about the laws, rights and legal procedures in Cuba.

Also follow us on Twitter: Tweet embed