We closed out the year with journalism in Colombia in a weakened state and uncertain as to what the incoming class of public officials will do next amid an ongoing crisis in media and press freedom. With the aim of contributing to the debate, in this edition we present a series of proposals to address nine threats to the future of journalism in Colombia.

By Jonathan Bock, Executive Director of the Foundation for the Liberty of the Press

**The year 2021 marked a turning point for journalism in Colombia.** Only a few months into the year, it had already become clear that there are no guarantees for those engaged in social protests movements. The Ministry of Defense implemented a new cyber patrol policy to monitor the content of posts on social media networks. Meanwhile, majorities in both the Senate and the House approved a bill to shield public officials from press investigations and increase punishments against journalists. In the end the bill was withdrawn thanks to pressure from civil society groups, but the episode laid bare the true intentions of legislators. 

Once again, we are confronted with the murder of a journalist, that of Marcos Efraín Montalvo, in Tulúa. And all the while, global problems intensified too, like the economic crisis facing the media industry, which has only been exacerbated by the pandemic. 

**We finish the year with a press that is weakened and burdened by uncertainty over how the next batch of legislators, and the next president, mean to address these challenges. **The officials elected this year must form a plan to save journalism in this country. Otherwise, the crisis is sure to deepen, and the situation for the press in Colombia will soon have more in common with Venezuela, Nicaragua or El Salvador. 

With the aim of contributing to the debate on how to address these issues, we have consulted experts, studied international cases and closely followed initiatives promoted by UNESCO, the United Nations, and the offices of the Rapporteurs for Freedom of Expression. The result is a series of proposals to address nine problems that threaten journalism.

This roadmap is only a starting point. It should be supplemented with ideas from different sectors and reinforced through wide-ranging discussions that allow us to go deeper into key issue areas, such as the allocation of public resources to support the media. Also,** it will be necessary to find the political will to guarantee greater independence in the public media system and to prevent embezzlement in the allocation of public advertising funds. **

This plan, based on the genuinely held beliefs of our leaders, should be coordinated with proposals that have emerged in other countries, all in the spirit of promoting the idea that access to the media and information be considered a fundamental public good.

Of course, we are aware that none of these solutions is without its drawbacks, and for the moment a perfect fix to the crisis does not exist. Nonetheless, **these solutions are tailored to address each problem individually, considering its specific features and challenges, and designed, above all, not to further damage democracy.**

Take note of this: Since its founding in 1996, FLIP has promoted the defense and protection of journalists to allow them to carry out their work without fear of reprisal. We have never endorsed a political party and we will not do so in the 2022 elections. **FLIP's sole cause and objective is to promote journalism through the defense of the principle of freedom of expression**. We will seek to advance this agenda with all candidates, and we will continue our oversight of those who occupy Congress as well as those who reach the Presidency. 

We closed out the year with journalism in Colombia in a weakened state and uncertain as to what the incoming class of public officials will do next amid an ongoing crisis in media and press freedom. With the aim of contributing to the debate, in this edition, we present a series of proposals to address nine threats to the future of journalism in Colombia.

Preserving Democracy Begins With Protecting Journalism

A group of 25 civil society organizations from seven Latin American countries (Argentina, Brazil, Colombia, El Salvador, Guatemala, Mexico and Nicaragua) **presented a report to the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (IACHR) on trends in indirect censorship of freedom of expression in the region.** At the hearing “Affectations to the right to freedom of expression by state censorship measures in the Americas,” which took place during the 190th period of sessions of the IACHR, the organizations presented their diagnosis and petitions, which have now been compiled in a final report. 

The document brings together data, emblematic cases and analyses that point to three central strategies for undermining freedom of expression in these countries: **stigmatization against the work of the press, social control through new surveillance technologies and the judicialization of freedom of expression on issues of public interest.** 

[Access the report here.](https://cms.flip.datasketch.co/uploads/Impact_of_State_censorship_measures_on_the_right_to_freedom_of_expression_in_the_Americas_e1add8a1eb.pdf)

The organizations identified a similar roadmap applied in different countries to erode democracy by censoring freedom of expression. First, they **highlighted the establishment of a parallel official narrative that stigmatizes the work of the press. The systematic use of stigmatizing language by political leaders directly attacks journalists and critical voices against governments, but affects society as a whole.** 

“It is urgent that the Inter-American system develop concrete standards on the scope of freedom of expression of officials, what their rights and obligations are, and how this impacts State communications in the digital world. This is vital in order to prevent violence derived from stigmatizations disseminated online, which can be understood as enabling messages”, states the report.

Another axis of the report refers to the use of technology to facilitate social control mechanisms through surveillance. To this end, **a series of strategies are listed and identified, such as illegal geolocation, cyberpatrolling, the deployment of surveillance and facial recognition technologies, and access to data held by companies.**

Finally, the report addresses the judicialization of freedom of expression in matters of public interest, abusing legal tools. Based on cases reported in countries in the region, **it highlights strategies of using criminal proceedings, arrests, excessive claims for compensation that often go hand in hand with stigmatization campaigns and can even lead to exile.**

The organizations call on the Commission to: 

- Call the attention of the States of the region to monitor the situation and reaffirm their commitment to the parameters for the protection of freedom of expression. 
- Create a Model Protocol with guidelines for the State on the implications of its digital communication, taking into account the parameters for the protection of freedom of expression, and that works as a measure to prevent online violence and its effect also on offline aggressions. 
- Prioritize the cases pending before the Commission on the issues described in the report. 
- Publish a report on the methods of surveillance and its effects, taking into account the elements presented in the report. 
- And reiterate the request made at a hearing at the 187th session on the abusive judicialization of issues of public interest for a thematic report. 

The hearing in which these claims were presented before the IACHR was recorded and can be accessed [at this link.](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CZmM45Aeu3w)

A group of 25 civil society organizations from seven Latin American countries (Argentina, Brazil, Colombia, El Salvador, Guatemala, Mexico and Nicaragua) presented a report to the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (IACHR) on trends in indirect censorship of freedom of expression in the region. At the hearing “Affectations to the right to freedom of expression by state censorship measures in the Americas,” which took place during the 190th period of sessions of the IACHR, the organizations presented their diagnosis and petitions, which have now been compiled in a final report. 

New report highlights regional trends in violations of freedom of expression rights due to indirect state censorship measures

Censura en internet

In the last decade, States have acquired sophisticated surveillance tools that are installed in cell phones and other devices and can access cameras, microphones, information and private documents of the user. The systematic use of these technological tools by intelligence and security agencies is part of a strategy used for illicit purposes and aimed at monitoring journalists with a political interest.

This surveillance, without limits or regulatory adjustments and in total impunity, has serious impacts on the rights to privacy, freedom of expression and integrity of journalists and creates an intimidating environment in society and in the press that leads to self-censorship and the loss of important voices in democracies.

In Latin America, 11 countries use secret spying tools, including Mexico, El Salvador, Colombia, Guatemala and Chile. From the interception of calls to the monitoring of social networks, the infection of their phones through suspicious links and the extraction of their private information, in the last decade journalists who report on issues of public interest have faced serious intrusions as a result of their work.

### Technical specifications
No control: journalism under surveillance is a production of the Foundation for Press Freedom, FLIP, and Artículo 19.

**Director:** Jonathan Bock **Audiovisual production:** Yann Decaumont **Production:** Paula Saucedo, Yann Decaumont and Camilo Villegas Londoño **Editing:** Yann Decaumont and Camilo Villegas Londoño **Production country:** Colombia, El Salvador, Mexico, United States

In the last decade, States have acquired sophisticated surveillance tools that are installed in cell phones and other devices and can access cameras, microphones, information and private documents of the user. The systematic use of these technological tools by intelligence and security agencies is part of a strategy used for illicit purposes and aimed at monitoring journalists with a political interest.

DOCUMENTARY | No control: journalism under surveillance

This document is part of UNESCO's Social Media 4 Peace project, funded by the European Union, that seeks to strengthen the resilience of societies to illegal content online and content that poses a significant risk to democracy and human rights (UNESCO, 2022). The objective is to gain a deep understanding of the causes, scale, and impact of hate speech and misinformation while promoting freedom of expression and peace through digital technologies in four pilot countries: Bosnia and Herzegovina, Indonesia, Kenya, and Colombia.
The increasing digitization of societies has led to unprecedented opportunities for the free flow of information. However, UNESCO has stated that there are concerns over how digital communication tools have become instrumental platforms for instigating violence and affecting democratic processes (UNESCO 2022). In addition to spreading hate, social media platforms are progressively being used to spread disinformation, false information, and propaganda designed to mislead the population, this was especially noticeable during the COVID-19 health crisis (UNESCO 2022).
The Foundation for Press Freedom (hereinafter FLIP) presents this document describing the current Colombian legal framework for addressing illegal content and content that affects democracy and human rights. This text seeks to contribute to the global discussion on the challenges of achieving an online conversation in line with fundamental rights and freedom of expression, while advancing in the search for solutions to the current difficulties in moderating and curating content in the same global digital environment in which diverse communities coexist in terms of culture, ethnicity, religion, language, to name just a few categories.

From October 2022 to March 2023, FLIP reviewed in detail the applicable legal framework in Colombia regarding hate speech, disinformation and, in general, content that may violate human rights online. Subsequently, FLIP spoke with experts in freedom of expression who provided their perspectives and analyzed the extent to which the legal system is in line with international standards on the subject and the greatest challenges faced by the legislation to address the problem.

In several countries around the world, civil society faces States that criminalize content that criticizes the government, religion, or other public institutions; this is the case, for example, in Tanzania where publications that cause "public discomfort" are sanctioned (Kaye, 2020). In other countries, such as China, governments can hold internet platforms accountable and impose multimillion-dollar penalties over content posted by citizens, without following due process (Kaye, 2018). Thus, to avoid fines, platforms become hypervigilant of citizens' opinions.

In other countries, such as Bosnia and Herzegovina, public conversation is characterized by the presence of content that openly incites hatred on ethnic, national, and religious grounds.  Neither the state nor the platforms have found a way to protect communities vulnerable to violence. (Mediacentar Sarajevo 2022).

This is not the case in Colombia. Although the legal framework is far from perfect, the regulatory instruments are —in general terms— in line with most international standards on freedom of expression online. Colombia counts with the tutela action, a favorable mechanism for the defense of those affected by online content, and with a constitutional jurisprudence that has roughly strengthened the guarantee of the right to inform and be informed on the Internet. However, as shown throughout the text, the absence of public policies and some gaps and inconsistencies in the regulations leave room for abuse and create vulnerabilities for the population that ends up exposed to disinformation and aggression online.

Similarly, decades of internal armed conflict and a historical process of state configuration in the midst of a fragmented and unequal society result in a hostile public conversation. While marginalized communities denounce being victims of discriminatory online content, democratic processes such as presidential, regional and legislative elections are facing disinformation strategies online. Meanwhile, the country continues to aggressively discuss the events, causes and consequences of the war that took place during most of the XX century and is still going on.

This text is divided into four chapters. The first chapter describes the characteristics of online public conversation in Colombia. It also presents the historical context and details the circumstances in which risky content for democracy and human rights  content is published and disseminated in the country; this usually happens in public conversations associated with the armed conflict, in debates related to current situations that involve discriminated and vulnerable communities, and —mainly— during electoral periods in which smear campaigns against the media and journalists occur and disinformation strategies to manipulate voters develop.

The second chapter presents a literature review that clarifies concepts addressed throughout the text and elaborates on international standards on the subject. The third chapter contains  the body of the legal framework that describes the current regulations in Colombia to address potentially risky content for democracy and human rights and presents the alternatives fo dealing with such content. The fourth chapter analyzes the extent to which this framework is in line with international standards and reflects on the effectiveness of the legal tools to address the problem of hate speech and disinformation.

In parallel with the development of the conflict and cycles of political violence, Colombian civil society has been striving for decades to advance in peacebuilding. As part of these efforts, it is essential to understand how to promote a broad and robust conversation in digital environments, that guarantees diverse points of view, and protects the right of citizens to receive truthful and unbiased information. A conversation in which victims can know the truth about the events of the conflict and in which there is also, as Francisco de Roux said, recognition of "the plurality of narratives about the causes and memories of the conflict" (Hacemos Memoria, 2018). Yet, achieving this balance requires an enormous effort from the State as well as Internet platforms and an active role of civil society. This document seeks to contribute in that direction.

From October 2022 to March 2023, FLIP reviewed in detail the applicable legal framework in Colombia regarding hate speech, disinformation and, in general, content that may violate human rights online. Subsequently, FLIP spoke with experts in freedom of expression who provided their perspectives and analyzed the extent to which the legal system is in line with international standards on the subject and the greatest challenges faced by the legislation to address the problem.

Other publications

Search

Filters

Preserving Democracy Begins With Protecting Journalism

New report highlights regional trends in violations of freedom of expression rights due to indirect state censorship measures

DOCUMENTARY | No control: journalism under surveillance

Regulating Disinformation, Hate Speech and Other Online Content in Colombia: A Legal Framework Analysis