The ongoing debate in the Brazilian Supreme Federal Court (STF) regarding the constitutionality of Article 19 of the Brazilian Civil Rights Framework for the Internet (MCI) has sparked intense discussions about the responsibility of platforms in moderating online content. According to this article, internet application providers are generally not liable for content generated by third parties unless they fail to comply with a court order for its removal.
Arguments supporting or opposing the constitutionality of this approach are significant. On one hand, there is a focus on protecting freedom of expression and concerns about prior censorship. On the other, there is a call for more effective deterrence of illegal online activities, such as the spread of fake news and hate speech, and holding those who benefit from such activities accountable.
According to Rodrigo Azevedo, Director of the Digital Law Dispute Resolution Chamber of ABPI (CDD/ABPI), regardless of which side is correct in this debate, Article 21 of the European Union’s recently enacted Digital Services Act (DSA) may offer a complementary approach to building a safer and more transparent Internet in Brazil, addressing concerns from both perspectives.
This provision introduces alternative dispute resolution (ADR) into the discussion. It requires platforms in the European Union to provide an accessible, transparent, and impartial system for resolving disputes between users and platforms. This mechanism can be used, for instance, in cases involving content moderation decisions, such as content removal or account suspensions.
“Providing appropriate dispute resolution mechanisms could be an interesting solution to the issues identified in Article 19 of the MCI. It would offer users an alternative to the Judiciary—faster, more specialized, and equally impartial—to exercise their rights on platforms,” Azevedo explains.
