5. Right to defense and repair
5.1 All content platforms should clearly explain to users why their content has been restricted, limited or removed; or your account or profile suspended, blocked or deleted:
a. The notifications should include, at least, the specific clause of the community rules that the user is supposed to have violated.
b. The notification should be detailed enough to allow the user to specifically identify the restricted content and should include information on how the content or account was detected, evaluated and deleted or restricted.
c. People should have clear information on how to appeal the decision1 2.
5.2 Content platforms should not delete publications or other user-generated content without being notified, without providing clear justification and without giving users the possibility to appeal3, so that they can exercise their right to defense and prevent abuse. In this regard, the platforms must provide users with the opportunity to appeal content moderation decisions, under the following conditions:
a. Appeal mechanisms should be very accessible and easy to use.
b. Appeals should be subject to review by a person or panel of people who were not involved in the initial decision.
c. Users should have the right to propose new evidence or material to be considered in their opinion.
d. Appeals should result in prompt determination and response to the user.
e. Any exception to the principle of universal appeals should be clearly disclosed and compatible with international human rights principles4.
5.3 Users affected by any measure of restriction of their freedom of expression as a result of the decisions of the platforms, depending on the specific regulations of domestic law, must have the right to access legal resources to dispute said decision and reparation mechanisms in relation to the possible violation of your rights5. In this regard, content platforms may not prevent their users from taking legal action against them in their country of residence, which would imply a denial of their right to access Justice 6 in a subsidiary or parallel way to claims through the internal appeal mechanisms. For this purpose, the contract concluded between the user with a content platform must expressly include that the disputes will be governed by the law and the Justice of the country where the user has his/her habitual residence and not by the place where the offices of the platform are located7.
————————————————-
1 Santa Clara Principles
2 Manila Principles – “The notification on content restriction decisions adopted by a platform must, at a minimum, have the following information:
The reasons why the content in question violates the intermediaries restriction policies.
The Internet identifier and a description of the alleged violation of the content restriction policies.
The contact details of the issuing party or its representative, unless this is prohibited by law.
A statement in good faith that the information provided is accurate ”
3 EU agreement with Facebook, Google and Twitter in 2018 “Better social media for European consumers”
4 Santa Clara Principles
5 Freedom of expression and Internet, Office of the Special Rapporteur for Freedom of Expression IACHR, 2013, para. 115
6 EU agreement with Facebook, Google and Twitter in 2018 “Better social media for European consumers”
7 Ídem
Give us your opinion
Error: Formulario de contacto no encontrado.