The Great Debate: Big techs: Is a decree regulation or content control?
CNN commentators Vinicius Poit and José Eduardo Cardozo debated, on Monday (1st), in O Grande Debate (Monday to Friday, at 11pm), about big techs: Is a Decree regulation or content control?
The Congress' Social Communication Council decided to create two new thematic groups to analyze the guidelines for the operation of digital platforms in the country, the so-called big techs. The collegiate will focus on the issuance of two decrees from the federal government regarding the activities of these companies.
The new standards increase the responsibility of platforms in removing content considered criminal and require preventive actions against fraud and violence. Experts in digital law warn, however, that the text contains vague concepts that open gaps for questioning.
Among other changes, the decrees define guidelines for combating violence against women in the digital environment. Patrícia Blanco, president of the Council, proposed the creation of a specific commission on platforms and the holding of a public hearing in September.
"The internet cannot be no man's land"
For José Eduardo Cardozo, the decrees unequivocally represent a legitimate exercise of regulation. "Obviously it's about regulation," he said. According to him, in a State of Law all rights have limits, and it is up to the Executive to regulate the law based on the Constitution.
Cardozo highlighted that freedom of expression is not an unlimited right and that illegal conduct outside the internet cannot be practiced in the digital environment either. "What effectively cannot be done face-to-face cannot also be done over the internet", he declared.
Cardozo refuted the idea that the decrees constituted censorship. For him, censorship occurs when a lawful manifestation is removed from circulation arbitrarily, which would not be the case. "Censorship are those situations in which you express content and simply some arbitrary authority decides to take it out of circulation", he explained.
He also argued that regulation creates necessary parameters and that indeterminate concepts are part of the legal world, being common in laws and decrees. "The decree must comply with and guarantee the faithful execution of the law", he concluded.
Decrees create unconstitutional primary innovations
Vinicius Poit presented a divergent position, maintaining that decrees go beyond the regulatory function and create new situations without legal support. "These decrees are not regulating a law. They are creating new things," he said. In Poit's opinion, this is content control and an abuse of Executive power, with the decrees being, in his opinion, unconstitutional.
Poit specifically criticized the attribution of new powers to the National Data Protection Agency, which would act as a general authority for online content - a role that, according to him, is not provided for by law. He also questioned the role of the Federal Attorney General's Office in the context of the decrees, pointing out a possible conflict of interests.
"The Executive can issue decrees to regulate laws that Congress approved, and not to create anything new", he declared. For Poit, the debate on the regulation of big techs should be led by the Legislature, with broad public discussion, and not imposed by decree.
He also warned of the risks of accepting instruments of control that, in other political contexts, could be used in an authoritarian way: "The Constitution is there to prevent good ideas from being justifications for the concentration of power."
The texts generated by artificial intelligence on CNN Brasil are made based on video cuts from the newspapers in its programming. All information is investigated and checked by journalists. The final text is also reviewed by the CNN journalism team. Click here to find out more.
Source: CNN