Sixth Edition of the CELE Regional Workshop for Legislators, Advisors, and Public Officials

At the Center for the Study of Freedom of Expression (CELE) at the University of Palermo, we held our sixth regional workshop for legislators, legislative advisors, and public officials on June 25, 2026, bringing together a wide range of public policy makers from across Latin America. Matías González Mama, Coordinator of the Latin America Regional Office, opened and moderated the event. The meeting addressed two challenges facing democracies in the digital age through two modules. One focused on regulating children’s and adolescents’ access to social media. The other addressed the growing threat of strategic lawsuits against public participation (SLAPP) targeting journalists and individuals critical of public officials.

Javier Pallero led the first session, while Mariela Galeazzi and Solciré Previñano of Amnesty International (Argentina section) led the second. 

The Debate on the Regulation of Digital Platforms

Javier Pallero invited participants to critically reflect on the growing wave of legislative initiatives seeking to restrict children and adolescents’ access to social media. While acknowledging concerns regarding the impact of these platforms on the mental health and privacy of children and adolescents, he argued that prohibitive approaches (such as the recent total ban adopted by Australia) are disproportionate measures that create new risks.

One of the main risks identified was the implementation of age verification systems. Javier distinguished between mechanisms for identifying users and those aimed at estimating age, noting that both pose significant challenges. He also highlighted the complexities of implementing these systems in Latin America, where it is common for the same device to be shared by adults and children and adolescents (C&A).

While these mechanisms aim to enforce age-based access restrictions, they also pose a significant threat to users’ anonymity and privacy. The infrastructure required to verify or estimate age on a large scale can lead to surveillance systems susceptible to misuse, thereby compromising the very privacy that these measures seek to protect.

As an alternative, Pallero proposed “raising the baseline of protection” for all users through three main pillars:

• Restricting targeted advertising practices that exploit personal data and manipulate behavior.
• Increasing algorithmic transparency so that people understand how content is selected and presented.
• Strengthening parental control tools so that families can make decisions in line with their circumstances.

This approach prioritizes the establishment of structural safeguards over exclusively restrictive measures, recognizing that children and adolescents are rights holders and that their access to information and freedom of expression must be protected. She also noted that these safeguards must also apply to age verification or estimation mechanisms, ensuring that they do not involve the unnecessary collection or sharing of personal data by the government or companies, with the resulting risks to privacy.

Inter-American Standards on Freedom of Expression

Mariela Galeazzi and Solsiré Previñano presented the safeguards that the Inter-American System has developed regarding freedom of expression, based on the American Convention on Human Rights and the case law of the Inter-American Court and Commission. One of the central principles was that expressions regarding public officials and matters of public interest enjoy enhanced protection. This differentiated protection reflects the essential role that public debate plays in a democratic society.

The speakers also addressed the phenomenon of SLAPPs (Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation), explaining that these legal actions do not truly seek to protect legitimate rights, but rather to intimidate and silence journalists and critical voices regarding public officials through the financial, time-consuming, and psychological burden of facing litigation. According to inter-American standards, harm to freedom of expression begins with the mere filing of the lawsuit, regardless of its final outcome.

As an example, they cited the criminal complaints filed by Argentina’s current president against journalists, illustrating how legal mechanisms can be used to have a chilling effect on the practice of journalism and public criticism. They also shared recommendations for judges and legal practitioners to identify and dismiss these types of abusive lawsuits early on, before they can produce their intimidating effects.

Final Reflections by Agustina del Campo

At the close of the meeting, our director Agustina del Campo noted that episodes of public alarm surrounding technology and youth have historically led to excessive restrictions that ultimately harm those they seek to protect. She also warned against the tendency to rely on technological solutions that promise to solve complex social problems but create new risks without addressing their root causes.

She also emphasized that minors should not be viewed as a homogeneous group: the capabilities, needs, and rights of a 13-year-old differ from those of a 17-year-old, so regulatory responses must reflect those differences.

Finally, he warned of a troubling trend in the region: the use of arguments about protecting democracy to justify measures that restrict the free flow of ideas. In this vein, CELE submitted an amendment of the amicus curiae brief before the Inter-American Court of Human Rights in the context of Guatemala’s request for an advisory opinion on the scope of the American Convention regarding the existence of a human right to democracy and its implications for the protection of the democratic order. This submission reinforced concerns about the use of arguments regarding the “protection of democracy” to justify restrictions on freedom of expression, especially in electoral contexts and situations of high polarization. It was emphasized that, while phenomena such as disinformation pose real challenges, state responses must not result in mechanisms of censorship or surveillance that ultimately weaken the very democratic debate they claim to protect. Agustina stated:

“We must remain vigilant when those in power invoke democracy to silence dissent, when protection becomes a pretext for control, and when the defense of rights is used to justify their restriction.”

She concluded by noting that Latin America has a solid legal framework for human rights and a network of institutions and organizations committed to defending freedom of expression, capable of building a digital future that respects fundamental rights.