The minister of the Federal Supreme Court (STF) Rosa Weber suspended this Tuesday (14) the effects of the provisional measure issued by the federal government which, in practice, limits the blocking of content published on social networks. The suspension will last until the judgment of the actions contesting the measure by the Court.
Weber is the rapporteur of eight lawsuits in the Supreme Court against the MP, filed by six parties (PT, PSB, PSDB, Novo, PDT and Solidariedade), by senator Alessandro Vieira (Cidadania-SE) and by the Brazilian Bar Association. The group maintains that the MP violates the Constitution and asks for its annulment.
In a decision almost simultaneous with that of Rosa Weber, the president of the National Congress, senator Rodrigo Pacheco (DEM-MG), announced on Tuesday that the parliament will return the provisional measure to Planalto – which, in practice, extinguishes the MP and also suspends the validity of the rules. See video:
Pacheco returns Bolsonaro MP that changes the Marco Civil da Internet
The MP, which has the force of law, was enacted on the 6th and changes the Marco Civil da Internet, which regulates the use of the computer network in Brazil. The text establishes “rights and guarantees” for users of social networks and defines rules for the moderation of content on social networks. According to the rule, there must be a “just cause” and “motivation” in cases of “cancellation or suspension of features of accounts or profiles maintained by users of social networks”.
Also according to the MP, the user has the right to “adversary, full defense and appeal” in cases of content moderation, and the social media provider will have to offer an electronic channel dedicated to the application of these rights.
The text also provides for the right to “return the content” published by the user – including texts and images, when required – and the restoration of the account, profile or original content in case of “undue moderation”.
“The right to return the content made available by the user on the social network and the requirement of just cause and motivation in cases of cancellation or suspension of features of accounts or profiles maintained by users of social networks, as well as in cases of exclusion of content,” informed the General Secretariat of the Presidency.
In the decision, released almost at the same time as Rodrigo Pacheco’s act, Rosa Weber asks that the suspension of the rules be based on a virtual judgment in the Supreme Court at the end of this week, for the analysis of the other ministers.
In this judgment, the justices of the STF can even argue that the actions against the MP should be dismissed, since the provisional measure will already have expired.
The analysis in the virtual plenary will start in the first minutes of next Thursday (16), with an expected completion at 23:59 on Friday (17). The dates were set by the president of the STF, minister Luiz Fux.
The minister stressed that the issuing of provisional measures, by the President of the Republic, must take place in exceptional situations. He criticized what he considered an excess of this type of rule.
“It is not new that, in practice, the excessive, exaggerated and abusive edition of provisional measures has been observed, despite their exceptional nature. For a long time, this Supreme Court has registered enormous concern with this phenomenon, in which there is appropriation of the the agenda of the National Congress, causing a real subversion of the constitutional legislative process, with a clear misconfiguration of the separation of powers,” he wrote.
Rosa Weber considered it impossible “the placement, through a provisional measure, of matters relating to fundamental rights and guarantees”.
“And don’t claim that the provisional measure under analysis, instead of restricting, only disciplines the exercise of individual rights in social networks, maximizing their protection, which would be lawful through the aforementioned normative species”, he pointed out.
“Any and every conformation of fundamental rights necessarily implies restricting them, so that only law in a formal sense, coming from the National Congress, can do so, for reasons relating to democratic legitimacy, for greater transparency, for deliberative quality, by the possibility of participation of civil society actors and by the constitutional reserve of congressional law”, he added.