At a congressional hearing chaired by Rep. Chris Smith (R-NJ) today, two renowned journalists and a top tech executive shared extensive evidence of widespread censorship and persecution in Brazil used to stifle opposition to President Lula, raising alarming concerns over the future of democracy and rule of law in the largest country in Latin America.

            “Since late 2022, Brazilians have been subject to human rights violations committed by Brazilian officials on a large scale,” said Rep. Smith, the Chairman of the House Global Health, Global Human Rights, and International Organizations Subcommittee.

            “Friends don’t let friends commit human rights abuses,” said Smith. “The Government of Brazil has pursued Brazilian journalists and even people it considers to be political opponents in the United States. It has used Interpol Red Notices, social intimidation, threats of legal action and extradition, and according to one credible victim of its transnational repression, has sought to use the FBI as a carrier or conduit of its intimidation.”

            In addition to Rumble Chief Executive Officer (CEO) Chris Pavlovski, Smith’s hearing featured testimony from two renowned journalists, including Michael Shellenberger—who documents the systematic, far-reaching efforts of Supreme Court Justice Alexandre de Moraes to ban and punish political opponents of the Lula government—and prominent Brazilian journalist Paulo Figueiredo.

            “Today, Brazil is no longer a liberal democracy,” said Shellenberger. “It is an illiberal one where people fear speaking their minds for fear of punishment…The censorship in Brazil is the worst I have seen in any Western democracy.”

            Figueiredo shared his harrowing personal account of abuses by the Brazilian government, which locked him from all social network platforms—including YouTube and X (Twitter)—froze his assets, and subjected him to exorbitant fines.

            “On December 30, 2022, therefore 2 months after Lula's victorious election, I felt the full force of this repression,” said Figueiredo, who was on vacation with his family when he received a call from an acquaintance at a social media company. “She warned me that they had received an order from Alexandre de Moraes himself determining that my networks should be blocked for Brazilians within a maximum of two hours, under penalty of severe fines in case of non-compliance. And that all social network platforms had received the same order.”

            “I would disappear for my entire audience,” Figueiredo said. “This is the modern equivalent of being sent to a dungeon.”

            Rumble CEO Chris Pavlovski shared details surrounding the requests he received from the Brazilian government to remove individuals from the platform, even though they did not violate Rumble’s terms and conditions. Instead of complying with the government’s orders, Rumble chose to disable access for users in Brazil while challenging the legality of the demands.

            “Today it is Rumble, yesterday it was X, but tomorrow it could be the New York Times,” Pavlovski said. “The platform shouldn’t matter; the universal right to freedom of speech and expression—the core of Western democracy—is at stake. America needs to step up and take a leading role.”

            Smith, who chaired a historic hearing in 2006 on the complicity of Yahoo, Google, Microsoft, and Cisco in China’s regime of internet censorship and surveillance, noted how Elon Musk has now become a target of the Brazilian government for refusing to comply with what Musk said was “aggressive censorship” that “appears to violate the law and will of the people of Brazil.”

            “Confirming everything Paulo, and Michael Shellenberger have been saying about Brazil, Alexandre de Moraes added Musk to his ‘fake news’ investigation, and opened an inquiry on Musk for what he called an obstruction of justice,” Smith said.

            “Free speech and media freedom are becoming two of the most important human rights issues of our time,” said Smith. “Without freedoms of expression, we are unable to defend against any other human rights abuses.”

###