Brazil chief justice opens criminal probe into Elon Musk

Hanno Labuschagne

Hanno Labuschagne

Journalist
Staff member
Joined
Sep 2, 2019
Messages
5,515
Reaction score
3,804
Brazil chief justice opens criminal probe into Elon Musk

Brazil Supreme Court Justice Alexandre de Moraes opened an inquiry into whether Elon Musk obstructed justice, escalating a spat with the billionaire over his social media platform X.

Moraes said in a document released by the court the billionaire “started a disinformation campaign” and that X — formerly known as Twitter — is committing abuse of economic power in order to “illegally influence public opinion.”

[Bloomberg]
 
Good. It's high time someone took on Eelawn

Wait. I thought TwitterX was dead? :unsure:
 
Why is a judge opening an inquiry? Their job is meant to judge issues bought before them by other people in a neutral way according to the law.
 
Why this dude get involved in foreign political issues
 
konfab said:
Why is a judge opening an inquiry? Their job is meant to judge issues bought before them by other people in a neutral way according to the law.
Click to expand...
Different countries have different judicial systems. You can't apply the SA (or US) judicial system to Brazil.
 
Throwback in time:

www.theguardian.com

Musk promises to investigate Twitter suspension of far-right Brazilian figures

High-profile names, including grandson of military dictator, complained they were being denied free speech
www.theguardian.com www.theguardian.com

Musk promises to investigate Twitter suspension of far-right Brazilian figures​

High-profile names, including grandson of military dictator, complained they were being denied free speech

Elon Musk has promised to investigate why several far-right personalities in Brazil were removed from Twitter after some high-profile names, including the grandson of a former military dictator, complained they were being denied free speech.

Twitter Brasil suspended profiles of three rightwing politicians recently elected to congress: Carla Zambelli, Gustavo Gayer, and Nikolas Ferreira, a 26-year-old who won 1.5m votes and has 2 million followers.

They and other supporters of the extremist president Jair Bolsonaro were removed from the platform in the past week in response to an undisclosed legal demand.

All criticised the decision, as did Paulo Figueiredo Filho, the grandson of João Figueiredo, Brazil’s military president between 1979 and 1985, and now a commentator for the rightwing media operation Jovem Pan.

“Hey @elonmusk, your company has been imposing a draconian ideological censorship of the Brazilian people’s right to free speech,” Figueiredo tweeted. “We are at a critical moment in our history! Wtf is going on?? We thought you bought Twitter exactly for this reason! Rise and lift the censorship NOW!”

“I will look into this,” Musk replied.
Click to expand...

It wasn't only Twitter (back then). I already touched on the, uhm, let's say, phenomenon in the other thread.
 
sjm said:
Different countries have different judicial systems. You can't apply the SA (or US) judicial system to Brazil.
Click to expand...
I know standards are low because it is Brazil, but you are wrong.

Judges cannot be a party to the case they are adjudicating. This is true in both civil and common law tradition. Brazil's constitution still contains separation between the executive and the judiciary.

The correct party to do this would be Brazil's equivalent of the prosecuting authority.
 
Sies maan, imagine probing Elon... damn filthy Brazilians.
 
Hanno Labuschagne said:
Moraes said in a document released by the court the billionaire “started a disinformation campaign” and that X — formerly known as Twitter — is committing abuse of economic power in order to “illegally influence public opinion.”

[Bloomberg]
Click to expand...
Funny how this was not a problem when Jack "Manbun" Dorsey owned it? I wonder why?
 
Not surprised.

They demanded X hand over user data, X said no.
 
Pegasus said:
Ok. That was January last year.
Click to expand...

Yes, but Brazil has long meddled with the media/social media. Bolsonaro also promoted censorship:

time.com

What Brazil's New Social Media Rules Mean For the Future of the Internet

Brazil is making it harder for social media companies to moderate misinformation
time.com time.com

Brazil’s Restrictive New Social Media Rules Could Be an Omen For the Future of the Internet​

razilian President Jair Bolsonaro signed a decree on Monday that temporarily bans social media platforms from removing many types of content, including misinformation about COVID-19 and the country’s upcoming presidential election.

Brazil’s new rules appear to be the first in the world to make certain types of content takedowns illegal under national law, even as other national governments around the world implement rules that force social media companies to take down more types of content proactively.

What do the rules say?​

The decree targets what Bolsonaro’s presidential press office called “arbitrary removal” of content including accounts, profiles and posts. Under the new rules, tech companies must only remove posts if they fall under a narrow set of definitions including terrorism, threats of violence, sexual crimes and cyberattacks, unless they obtain a court order.

The measures would prevent social media companies from easily removing content including medical and political misinformation. Bolsonaro has repeatedly posted misinformation about COVID-19, and has claimed that voter fraud would be the only explanation if he loses the upcoming October 2022 presidential election—something pollsters say is likely. Facebook, Twitter and YouTube have all previously removed COVID misinformation shared by Bolsonaro.

“The rules are bad news for Brazil,” Javier Pallero, the Argentina-based policy director for the digital rights group Access Now, told TIME, adding that the decree “ties the hands of internet platforms to deal with hate speech, disinformation campaigns and coordinated harassment.”

“We need democratic rules to make content moderation in platforms more transparent, fair and accountable,” Pallero said. “But these attempts from iliberal politicians are far from that—and aim only at giving a free pass to anti-democratic speech.”
Click to expand...

It is all ironic really. When it came to censoring Bolsonaro the West aligned regimes happily obliged. Western media attacked Bolsonaro, but Bolsonaro also attacked the media.

To quote this BBC article (English translated):

www.bbc.com

'Repórter tem que apanhar mesmo': ataque de Bolsonaro gera onda de ameaças físicas a jornalistas - BBC News Brasil

Para bolsonaristas, agressão presidencial contra o repórter seria sinal de defesa da esposa e de integridade de Bolsonaro; especialistas ouvidos pela BBC apontam para deterioração de situação institucional brasileira.
www.bbc.com www.bbc.com

President Jair Bolsonaro, why did your wife Michelle receive R$89,000 from Fabrício Queiroz?"

A journalist's question about suspicions about the first lady's financial transactions was repeated more than 1 million times on Twitter after the president responded by saying he would like to "fill (the reporter's) mouth with a beating."

Despite the criticism and notes of repudiation, the threat of physical aggression made by the president also reverberates in the form of more attacks and support for violence against press professionals, in addition to progressive "bubbles" on social media.

On Twitter, Facebook and Instagram, supporters of Jair Bolsonaro have used the president's phrase as an incentive for aggression, in rhetoric that moves from traditional verbal attacks to concrete threats of physical violence.

In demonstrations of support for Bolsonaro, Brazilians say, for example, that journalists deserve to "take a beating in the mouth" and say that the president "only made a mistake" in not attacking the reporter.
Click to expand...

@Vorastra is that more or less correctly translated by Google?

What is to be seen here is the one end on the spectrum attacking the other end, vice versa. There is a game here.
 
konfab said:
I know standards are low because it is Brazil, but you are wrong.

Judges cannot be a party to the case they are adjudicating. This is true in both civil and common law tradition. Brazil's constitution still contains separation between the executive and the judiciary.

The correct party to do this would be Brazil's equivalent of the prosecuting authority.
Click to expand...

Examining magistrate - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org en.wikipedia.org

An examining magistrate is a judge in an inquisitorial system of law who carries out pre-trial investigations into allegations of crime and in some cases makes a recommendation for prosecution. Also known as an investigating magistrate, inquisitorial magistrate, or investigating judge, the exact role and standing of examining magistrates varies by jurisdiction
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter