X formerly Twitter

Why we banned X, Brazil’s Attorney General explains need to end legal disputes

Advertisements

Brazil’s Attorney General has defended the country’s ban of the social media platform X (formerly Twitter).

The law officer urged the country’s Supreme Court to end legal challenges against the decision.

According to him, the platform’s suspension does not infringe on free speech, dismissing claims that the ban was unconstitutional.

Indeed, Justice Alexandre de Moraes had ordered the ban on August 30, following X’s failure to appoint a local legal representative, a requirement under Brazilian law for social media platforms operating in the country.

Also, X was previously criticized for ignoring court orders to remove content deemed harmful, including misinformation and extremist rhetoric.

The Attorney General’s statement came in response to appeals from the Brazilian Bar Association and the political party, Partido Novo, which contested the platform’s suspension and the imposition of fines for those bypassing the ban via virtual private networks (VPNs).

The office argued that the legal tools used to challenge the Supreme Court’s decision were inappropriate and lacked merit.

Justice Marques Nunes, who is reviewing the appeals, is expected to bring the case before the full court after Brazil’s upcoming municipal elections in October.

Meanwhile, the Supreme Court had already supported Moraes’ ruling, maintaining the ban as of September 2.

The legal battle has ignited significant debate in Brazil’s political circles, with some lawmakers arguing that the ban threatens free speech.

In particular, conservative congressman Nikolas Ferreira accused the courts of selectively targeting voices on the right. Ferreira, whose social media accounts were blocked after last year’s elections, voiced concerns about a lack of transparency in the process.

On the other side, politicians like Congressman Ivan Valente criticized Musk’s stance as an attack on Brazil’s sovereignty. Valente argued that allowing international interference from figures like Musk sets a dangerous precedent for the nation’s control over its digital landscape.

About The Author

Advertisements