Rules of the Meta court was wrong to ban the porn star’s Instagram account

The highest courtyard in Colombia judged that Meta had violated the right of porn to freedom of expression when he deleted his Instagram account.

Friday, the Constitutional Court of the South American nation said that the technology company had removed the account of Esperanza Gómez “without clear and transparent justification” and without providing treatment similar to other similar accounts.

The 45 -year -old man, the account of which had more than five million followers, is one of the most famous adult content actresses in Colombia.

Meta argued in the case that she had violated her rules on nudity. The company, which also owns Facebook and WhatsApp, did not immediately react to the decision.

Ms. Gómez had alleged that the closure of her account had affected her ability to work and had been influenced by her pornographic work beyond the platform. She also said Meta had not followed a regular procedure.

In its decision, the court said that, although it recognized the need for the social media platform to moderate the content, this did not justify the closure of the account of a pornstar “without clear and transparent justification”.

He also found that Meta “applied her nudity and sexual services in an incoherent manner”, with other accounts with similar content remaining.

The court said that social media stations were protected by the Constitution of Colombia and should only be limited in a proportional manner if necessary.

He ordered Meta to “examine and adjust the policy of using Instagram conditions and the privacy policy so that users are clearly aware of the mechanisms to challenge moderation decisions” and “define his rules on implicit sexual content.

If social media platforms use offline activities as a content moderation criterion, they should clearly say, said the court.

The court did not specify sanctions for non-compliance, nor if Ms. Gómez would receive a reparation.

The BBC contacted Meta to comment.

It is not the first time that South American court has required a social network to modify its policies.

The Supreme Court of Brazil said that the Supreme Court judged that social media was directly responsible for the illegal content, including hatred speech, and should immediately act to delete it and the accounts that proliferate it.

This decision followed a judge ordering the suspension of dozens of x accounts for having allegedly distributed the disinformation.

This led the social media platform briefly prohibited in Brazil, before starting to comply with the decision and paid a fine of $ 5.1 (3.8 million pounds sterling).