“Attacks on freedom of expression abroad serve as a wake-up call for America.” This is one of the phrases that best summarizes the report of the Judiciary Committee of the United States House of Representatives, which disclosed confidential decisions of the Federal Supreme Court of Brazil related to X, formerly Twitter, and other social networks.
The sentence, which is in the report itself, is short, but it summarizes how far the global far right can go to regain power. The spectacular dissemination of the material, in addition to demonstrating contempt for the Brazilian judicial system, also shows that it is even worth defending a neo-Nazi group to return to power. This is the case of Era Fascista, one of the Telegram channels suspended by Minister Alexandre de Moraes, and which Bolsonarists and North American deputies are radically coming out in defense.
Subscribe to our free newsletter Exclusive and free content. Direct to your inbox Continue Reading
Registration sent
But, before delving into criticisms of judicial decisions, it is necessary to be clear: the content of the material is a blatant example of manipulation of public opinion. Published by a committee with a Republican majority, the report has an eight-page introductory text that is, in practice, a pamphlet: it paints a scenario of censorship in Brazil to attack Joe Biden, Donald Trump’s opponent in this year’s elections.
The title of the report, the result of documents delivery by Elon Musk’s social network X, is symptomatic: “The attack on freedom of expression abroad and the silence of the Biden administration: the case of Brazil”. Another excerpt helps explain the objectives of the Trumpist deputies: to return to power. “Congress must take seriously the warnings from Brazil and other countries that seek to suppress freedom of expression online. We must never think that this cannot happen here.”
The committee’s president is Republican Jim Jordan, considered one of the greatest exponents of the extreme right in the USA. In 2022, CNN revealed that Trump spoke on the phone, directly from the White House, with Jordan for 10 minutes on the morning of January 6 — just before the attacks on the Capitol. That afternoon, Jordan took to the House floor to oppose Biden’s certification.
List shows blocked channels: ‘Era Fascista’ is one of them.
The problem is that Jordan’s text about Brazil not only lacks a methodology to support the serious conclusions, it also distorts the documents leaked by Elon Musk. North American deputies ignore the Brazilian legal and constitutional bases that guide the measures adopted by the Federal Supreme Court, the STF, and the Superior Electoral Court, the TSE, to combat disinformation and protect democracy — in the face of the imminence of a coup after Lula’s election…
The tone of the text is the simplistic generalization of 88 Brazilian court decisions as a supposed threat to freedom of expression. The report portrays all of these measures as if they were taken by Alexandre de Moraes and as unjustified censorship, without taking into account the specific contexts of each case. Many of them involved deliberate incitement to a coup d’état.
Report minimizes coup attempt – or naturally admits January 8th
One of the decisions, for example, by influencer Ed Raposo, is illustrative of the seriousness of rejected publications in Brazil. Here are some of the phrases from the tweets that appear in Moraes’ order that ordered the suspension of his accounts: “If the TSE does not accept, the moderating power comes into action”. “Moraes won’t accept anything, it’s good that everyone knows that. The solution will be different.” “Bolsonaro didn’t have 51% of the votes, he had AT LEAST 51%”.
The fact is that the material underestimates the threats to Brazilian democracy — which reveals, at best, a complete disconnect with the country’s political and legal reality. At worst, he naturally admits what happened on January 8, 2023 here in Brazil.
In this way, the committee aligns itself with the most radical elements of the Brazilian extreme right. It is worth remembering that one of Bolsonaro’s closest allies, senator Ciro Nogueira, from the PP of Piauí, has a view opposite to that defended by North American deputies. In an interview with The New York Times published in January this yeardefended the greater rigor with which Brazil has dealt with coup threats.
“The United States did not experience a dictatorship, an authoritarian period. We never want this to return to our country”, said Nogueira. In the same report, Steven Levitsky, professor at Harvard University and author of the book “How Democracies Die”, highlighted that Ciro Nogueira and other leaders of the Brazilian right “publicly accepted the results of the elections”, which would be “very different from the response of the Republicans.”
But the attack made by the report also disregards the seriousness of other issues facing the STF, including neo-Nazism. One of the groups that Moraes blocked, for example, has the following name: “Era Fascista”.
By the way, journalist Letícia Oliveira, who monitors extremist groups, published prints in which the administrator of another supposedly neo-Nazi group, which brought together more than 900 people, asked members to send messages and call Alexandre de Moraes’ number – a practice known as doxxing, or online harassment, which is a crime.
Bolsonaristas fuss, but keeping orders confidential is everyday in criminal justice
Here, one of the points in the report that has caused outrage among Bolsonarists is an alleged order from Moraes for companies to hide court decisions when removing profiles. Within minutes, the argument was refuted.
“Ordering a company to comply with an order, and keeping that order confidential, is everyday practice in criminal justice. Every day hundreds of judges decide the same. Wanting to transform this into a relevant fact is either bad faith or ignorance. There is no third way”, wrote lawyer Marcelo Fellerjust last night, at X itself.
In response to a follower, he had to explain something that should be obvious: Moraes’ decisions are subject to criticism, but they must be consistent. “You can criticize the min. Alexandre through different approaches. Before doing so, I suggest studying. For the criticism to be substantiated. And there is a possible basis”, replied Feller.
There is an international strategy underway to bring the extreme right back to power.
Lawyer Estela Aranha, former Secretary of Digital Rights in the Lula government, it was in the same vein. She argued that US companies also admit that the decision is not informed to the user who is the target of justice: “The “law enforcement” forms of all social networks provide a field that the authority requesting data or deletion of content must indicate whether it should be confidential or not for the user”.
“Every day, there is a request to delete material or data information, for example child sexual abuse content (known as pedophilia). There is no way you can inform the account holder that such a body is investigating because they would delete all evidence,” he wrote.
Aranha and Feller’s lucidity reminds us how grotesque the lack of consultation with Brazilian experts in preparing the report is. The absence of local voices familiar with Brazil’s legal and political context compromises any possible positive intention that could be interpreted.
READ TOO:
The report, contrary to the basic precept of honesty with information, also fails to privilege sources and evidence that corroborate its preconceived theses, ignoring those that could contradict them and thus compromising its objectivity and impartiality. The most cited source in bibliographical references, for example, are links from the Twitter profile of Jordan, head of the committee, referenced on seven occasions.
In view of this, there is an observation and a warning to be made. The finding: the document from the Judiciary Committee of the United States House of Representatives is nothing more than a blatant attempt at political manipulation. The warning: there is an international strategy underway to bring the extreme right back to power.
Not everyone can afford to pay for news right now.
And this is making it increasingly difficult to fund life-changing investigations.
Most newspapers deal with this by limiting access to their most important works through subscriptions.
But at Intercept Brasil, we believe that everyone should have equal access to information.
If you can, there are many good reasons to support us:
1) Our goal is impact: we force the rich and powerful to respect people like you and to respect the law
2) We are funded by readers, not corporations, and we are non-profit: every dollar goes towards our mission of no-nonsense journalism, not to pay dividends
3) It’s cheap, easy and safe and you can cancel whenever you want
Choose to strengthen independent journalism and keep it available to everyone with a monthly donation. Thanks.
BE PART OF IT
Become a part of Intercept