For noting that biological males were taking advantage of a law meant to help females, Gabriel Quadri’s political career is now in danger.
For noting that biological males were taking advantage of a law meant to help females, Gabriel Quadri’s political career is now in danger.
T alk of Twitter free speech may be all the rage right now in the United States, but a look around the world begs the question: What good is ostensible social-media freedom if governments can silence and sanction you with the harshest of penalties for what you post online? The international landscape for state censorship of online speech is bleak. There exists a dangerous and mounting global trend to criminalize expression, including online speech, blurring the line between dictatorship and democracy, and wreaking havoc on human rights.
In Mexico, a sitting congressman, Gabriel Quadri, may lose the right to run for office ever again because of what he posted on Twitter — a grave violation of his civil and political rights that should attract international attention. Quadri, an avowed liberal, took issue when seats reserved for women in Mexico’s congress were claimed by men who identify as transgender. Now, for the mere act of tweeting, he’s a tried and convicted “gender-based violator” under Mexican law. His case makes clear that while Twitter HQ may be galvanizing in defense of free speech, for so long as repressive governments wield censorship power, the Internet is no safe space for free expression.
Mexico’s gender-parity law requires equal representation of men and women in Congress. In a series of eleven respectful, yet impassioned tweets, posted in February 2022, Quadri voiced his concern about the devaluing of women’s opportunities. For this, he was dragged into litigation and charged, under the whim of Mexico’s National Electoral Institute court system as a “violent political offender.” Found guilty by the electoral court, the congressman currently lives under the threat of becoming ineligible to run for any public office in the future. At any point, the Institute could bar him from future candidacy. To add insult to injury, he has been forced to issue a public apology drafted for him by the court and to post a summary of his conviction on Twitter for 15 days at two set times per day.
An environmentalist who has based his career off of eschewing violence, the former presidential candidate and longstanding politician has run out of avenues for justice in Mexico. Last Friday, Quadri appealed for his case to be heard by the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights. As a party to the American Convention on Human Rights, Mexico may be sanctioned by the Inter-American system’s human-rights procedures. As Quadri states, “In standing up for my right to free speech, I am fighting for the free speech rights of my constituents, and those of every Mexican.” Freedom of speech is a fundamental human right belonging to every person, and the silencing of political leaders creates a culture of fear throughout society. If elected representatives aren’t free to debate the issues of our time, what hope is there for everyone else?
Like many a concerned citizen the world over, in taking to Twitter, what Quadri did was seek open conversation on a highly relevant matter of serious societal importance. He committed no crime and endorsed no violence. His case mirrors that of Finnish member of Parliament, Päivi Räsänen, charged with the “crime” of hate speech that carried with it a two-year prison sentence. A longstanding civil servant, medical doctor, and grandmother, Räsänen has been subjected to three years of onerous legal proceedings for a 2019 tweet expressing her views on marriage and sexuality.
Let us not forget that in some parts of the world, you can be sentenced to death for what you post online. In Nigeria, Rhoda Ya’u Jatau is on trial for blasphemy charges after sharing a message condemning the brutal killing of Deborah Yakubu, who was stoned to death for her Christian faith last May. Blasphemy carries with it a potential sentence of death in Nigeria. Also, upcoming at the Supreme Court of Nigeria is the appeal of Sufi musician Yahaya Sharif-Aminu, who is currently on death row for a blasphemy conviction after sharing song lyrics on the messaging platform WhatsApp.
While the consequences may vary, what these cases have in common is the dark underlying thread of totalitarian repression. Governments are weaponizing the law to stamp out speech that fails to comport with their “approved” worldview. It is imperative that we shine a spotlight on the repressive regimes under which you can be deprived of your most basic human rights for what you say online. Without free speech there can be no freedom, and everyone should be free to voice their opinions without fear of punishment.