PROTECTION OF HUMAN RIGHTS AGAINST HATE SPEECH ON SOCIAL MEDIA AND FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION

Abstract

The advent and popularization of social media and digital platforms in recent decades have profoundly transformed communication, political, and social dynamics on a global scale. What initially presented itself as a promising space for democratizing access to information, expanding opportunities for expression, and strengthening citizen participation in public debate has gradually revealed its dark side: an environment conducive to the accelerated and massive dissemination of hate speech, disinformation, and content that undermines human dignity and the foundations of the democratic rule of law. This phenomenon, far from being a merely technological issue, represents a complex legal, political, and social challenge that demands multidimensional and interdisciplinary responses.

In the Brazilian context, this issue takes on even more sensitive and urgent dimensions. A country marked by profound structural inequalities, a history of violence and discrimination against minority and vulnerable groups, and a democracy still consolidating after a long period of dictatorship, faces the challenge of balancing robust protection of freedom of expression—a fundamental pillar of any democratic regime and an express constitutional guarantee—with the equally pressing need to curb demonstrations that promote hatred, intolerance, and social exclusion. As Sarlet (2021, p. 221) observes, "freedom of expression, while essential to democracy, cannot serve as a shield for practices that deny human dignity itself and the pluralism that characterizes an open society."

The 1988 Federal Constitution, known as the "Citizen Constitution," established an unequivocal commitment to protecting human dignity, building a free, just, and supportive society, and promoting the well-being of all, without prejudice or discrimination of any kind (Articles 1, III, and 3, I and IV). At the same time, it enshrined freedom of expression (Art. 5, IV), freedom of expression of intellectual, artistic, scientific, and communication activities (Art. 5, IX), and freedom of journalistic information (Art. 220) as inviolable fundamental rights. This apparent paradox—the need to simultaneously protect freedom of expression and human dignity—constitutes the core of the contemporary legal debate on the limits of discourse in the public sphere, especially in the digital environment.

Social media, with their algorithmic architecture primarily oriented toward maximizing user engagement and time spent online, often amplify extreme, polarizing, and emotionally charged content, creating what Sunstein (2017) calls "echo chambers" and Pariser (2012) calls "filter bubbles"—digital environments where individuals are predominantly exposed to information and opinions that reinforce their preexisting beliefs, with little or no exposure to divergent perspectives. This phenomenon, combined with the speed at which content disseminates on digital platforms and the possibility of anonymity or pseudonymity, creates particularly favorable conditions for the proliferation of hate speech online.

According to data from the TIC Domicílios 2024 survey, conducted by the Regional Center for Studies for the Development of the Information Society (CETIC.BR, 2024), 97% of Brazilians over the age of 10 are internet users, and of these, 81% use social media regularly. This high level of penetration of digital platforms into the daily lives of Brazilian citizens amplifies both the democratic potential and the risks associated with these spaces. A survey carried out by SaferNet Brasil (2023) recorded a 41% increase in reports of hate speech on social media compared to the previous year, with emphasis on racist manifestations (in the form of discrimination based on race, based on the false understanding that there would be human races superior to others) (DIAS, [2025]), xenophobic (hostility and hatred expressed against people because they are foreigners or because they are seen as foreigners) (SILVA, [2024]), homophobic (negative attitudes and feelings, such as aversion, disgust, fear and aggression, against individuals who identify as lesbian, gay, bisexual, transsexual and transvestite) (MENDES, [2025]) and misogynistic (hatred or aversion towards women, manifested through attitudes and behaviors that devalue, discriminate against and violate them) (CAMPOS, [2025]).

The relevance of this topic becomes even more evident when we observe the concrete impacts that online hate speech has on the lives of historically marginalized individuals and groups. Recent studies, such as that by Recuero and Soares (2021), demonstrate significant correlations between spikes in hate speech on social media and increased cases of physical violence against minorities. Furthermore, the phenomenon has direct implications for the quality of democratic debate and for institutional stability itself, as evidenced by recent episodes in Brazilian history, in which narratives of hate and misinformation contributed to extreme polarization and attempts to delegitimize democratic institutions (RECUERO; SOARES, 2021).

In the legal sphere, Brazil faces the challenge of updating its regulatory framework to adequately respond to this new reality. The Brazilian Internet Civil Rights Framework (Law No. 12,965/2014), created amid growing internet popularity in Brazil and the need to minimally regulate internet use and guarantee user rights, emerged from debates and public consultations involving civil society, the government, and the private sector. Although it represented a significant advance in establishing principles, guarantees, rights, and duties for internet use in the country, it has proven insufficient in the face of the complexity and dynamic nature of problems related to online hate speech. In particular, the civil liability regime for internet application providers set forth in Article 19—which conditions liability to disobedience of a specific court order—has been the subject of intense academic, legislative, and jurisprudential debate.

At the same time, the Federal Supreme Court (STF) has been called upon to rule on emblematic cases involving the conflict between freedom of expression and other fundamental rights, such as Habeas Corpus (HC) 82,424/RS (Ellwanger Case), Claim of Non-Compliance with a Fundamental Precept (ADPF) 130/DF (Press Law), Direct Action of Unconstitutionality by Omission (ADO) 26/DF (criminalization of LGBTphobia), and Inquiry 4,781/DF (Fake News Inquiry). These decisions, while fundamental for establishing interpretative parameters, have not yet consolidated a uniform and comprehensive understanding of the limits of freedom of expression in the digital environment and the legal definition of hate speech.

Internationally, several countries and regional blocs have adopted more assertive regulatory approaches regarding digital platforms and online hate speech. The European Union, with the Digital Services Act (DSA) and the Code of Conduct on Countering Illegal Hate Speech Online, and Germany, with the Netzwerkdurchsetzungsgesetz (NetzDG), are examples of initiatives that seek to establish clearer obligations for platforms in terms of content moderation and algorithmic transparency. These international experiences offer important references for the Brazilian debate, although it is essential to consider the specificities of the national context when formulating regulatory responses.

Given this complex and challenging scenario, this dissertation proposes to investigate the following research question: How can Brazilian law balance freedom of expression with combating hate speech on social media, respecting constitutional principles and international commitments to the protection of human rights?

The hypothesis guiding this research is that protecting human rights in Brazil requires the development of clearer legal parameters for limiting freedom of expression when it converts into hate speech, especially on social media, requiring not only more specific standards but also greater accountability for digital platforms. The assumption is that it is possible – and necessary – to develop a normative, institutional and jurisprudential model that reconciles the broad freedom of expression guaranteed by the 1988 Federal Constitution with the prohibition of demonstrations that, under the guise of this freedom, promote exclusion, discrimination and the denial of human dignity.

Regarding its structure, the dissertation is organized into an Introduction, Theoretical Framework, Methodology, Results and Discussions, and Final Considerations.

I highlight the content of the Theoretical Framework, which addresses the concept of human rights, the principle of human dignity and the right to non-discrimination, the historical and philosophical evolution of freedom of expression, its configuration in the Brazilian constitutional system, the specificities of freedom of information, communication, and the press, and the constitutional limits and clauses prohibiting freedom of expression. It also highlights the study of hate speech, exploring its legal and philosophical concepts, the differences between offensive speech, hate speech, and discriminatory speech, human dignity as a limit to the expression of thought, Brazilian criminal classification, and the parameters of the Inter-American and European human rights systems. It continues with an analysis of the role of social media as contemporary public arenas, the challenges related to algorithms, viralization, and platform liability, the Brazilian Civil Rights Framework for the Internet, the General Data Protection Law (LGPD), and freedom of expression, the legal dilemmas of content moderation, and emblematic cases in Brazil. Finally, the Theoretical Framework discusses the protection of vulnerable groups as a duty of the State, hate speech as a form of symbolic and structural violence, the jurisprudence of the Supreme Federal Court (STF) and the Inter-American Court (ICC), proposals for a balanced normative and jurisprudential model, and the role of digital education, democratic regulation, and a culture of peace in combating hate speech.

Throughout this investigative journey, we seek to contribute to the advancement of the legal debate on a topic of growing social, political, and constitutional relevance, offering theoretical and practical support for the construction of a regulatory model that effectively protects both freedom of expression and human dignity in the digital environment.

1.1 OBJECTIVES
1.1.1 General Objective

To critically analyze the legal foundations, normative parameters, and practical challenges related to the regulation of hate speech on digital platforms in Brazil, considering the tensions between freedom of expression and human dignity.

1.1.2 Specific Objectives
a) Examine the historical and philosophical evolution of the concept of freedom of expression and its configuration in the Brazilian constitutional system;
b) Analyze the legal concept of hate speech, its characteristics, and its distinctions from other forms of controversial expression;
c) Investigate the role of social media as contemporary public arenas and the specific challenges that their technological and economic characteristics pose to the regulation of speech;
d) Critically evaluate the current Brazilian regulatory framework and the legislative proposals under discussion on the topic; e) Analyze the jurisprudence of the Supreme Federal Court (STF) and the Inter-American Court of Human Rights on freedom of expression and hate speech;
f) Propose guidelines for a balanced regulatory and jurisprudential model that reconciles the protection of freedom of expression with the effective fight against hate speech.