Nine women journalists from Colombia filed a tutela petition, asking for measures to be taken in order to protect them from the online sexist attacks they had been suffering, as a result of their work disseminating information of public interest or related to the actions of different political parties and actors. In May 2023, the Colombia Constitutional Court recognized the discrimination faced by journalists online, highlighting how women journalists suffer a differentiated impact, and stated that political actors must be held accountable for the use of violence as part of their activities.
Throughout the year 2020, nine women journalists, from different areas of Colombia, and from various affinities or editorial lines, suffered stigmatizing attacks, sexist messages, and delegitimization on social networks. Although these attacks took place in different forms and at different times, they always occurred after they had disseminated information of public interest or related to the actions of different political parties and actors, or even, as in the case of Ms. Zuluaga, after denouncing sexual harassment by a congressman during an interview. In addition, some of them had already been threatened years ago.
The discrediting messages and attacks against the journalists by different Colombian actors and political parties went viral and gave rise to stigmatizing and disqualifying messages that question their integrity as professionals, allude to their physical appearance, constitute veiled threats of death or aggression, or allude to their love, family and personal lives. These attacks created a hostile and intimidating environment that has led several of the journalists to decide to censor themselves, relocate internally, go into exile, temporarily close their accounts on social media, or stop publishing information through them.
On October 1, 2020, these nine women, represented by the Fundación para la Libertad de Prensa (FLIP) (Foundation for Press Freedom), filed a tutela petition. In the petition they explained that online attacks are a new environment where gender-related aggressions against women journalists are carried out, usually of a misogynistic nature and sexualized content. They indicated that, in some circumstances, this pattern comes from and benefits certain groups or political actors through strategies of disinformation, amplification, and intimidation. They presented the online aggressions of which they have been victims, after publishing their research or opinion independently, in order to evidence the pattern of violence, demonstrate that the attacks originate in the actions of political actors and groups, and to reveal that the systematic nature and continuity of this kind of violence is encouraged or tolerated by members and political parties or movements. For example, some of these messages describe women journalists as follows: “guerrilla women disguised as journalists”, “(…) mediocre journalist, her understanding and intellectual level are not good enough, most leftist women are like that, a little dumb”; “disgusting woman, disgusting mother”, “the only thing left is for her to take off her clothes (…)”, “it’s hard for her to smile and put on a nice face when she presents news”; “that gossipy, envious piece of”, or insults about their physical appearance with marked sexist content.
In the tutela writ, the journalists questioned the fact that the National Electoral Council (Consejo Nacional Electoral) had not adopted any measures to stop the violence, punish those responsible, and prevent it, thus failing in its duty to monitor the political parties. In addition, they criticized the fact that political parties and/or citizen movements have favored the aggressions, by encouraging or tolerating them. Finally, they indicated that the tutela seeks to avoid irreparable harm from happening, which they justified in the imminent and serious risk to their life, their physical and emotional integrity, and their freedom of expression and professional practice in the current situation of the country.
Initially, the Administrative Tribunal of Cundinamarca (Tribunal Administrativo de Cundinamarca) dismissed the petition, but when the Colombian Constitutional Court reviewed the decision, it decided to annul the first instance ruling and ordered the Tribunal to decide on the merits of the case. On May 26, 2022, the Administrative Tribunal of Cundinamarca issued its decision. The decision specifically 1) Recognizes that, in Colombia, there is a marked pattern of online violence, exercised in social networks, against women journalists and that it is a phenomenon that increasingly affects the privacy and safety of women journalists; the court recognized that this online violence is perpetrated through the “inappropriate and irresponsible use of social networks, especially in the exercise of political activity”; 2) Recognizes that online aggressions follow a pattern in which the comments of political leaders and figures are decisive in their amplification; 3) Clarifies the route to denounce acts of violence by political actors; 4) Establishes that the National Electoral Council and the Ethics Committees are competent to sanction political parties and movements and their affiliates, respectively, and must adopt a more proactive role in order to prevent and sanction the incitement of online violence in the exercise of political activity; and 5) Provides for several measures to prevent social networks of members and affiliates of political parties from becoming – under a false legitimization of the exercise of political activity – instruments of violence against women journalists.
On 17 May 2023, the Colombia Constitutional Court issued a landmark decision on this case. The Court recognized that violence against women journalists by political actors constitutes an affront to freedom of expression and that it has a negative impact on the public debate. The decision also recognized the severity and the patterns of discrimination against journalists online; highlighting how women journalists suffer a differentiated impact, which includes being attacked online with insults that have nothing to do with their work, but rather reflect prejudices and sexist/gendered stereotypes. Furthermore, the decision states that political actors must be held accountable for the use of violence as part of their activity, stating that they must fulfill their constitutional duties to respect freedom of expression and to protect the rights of women to live a life free from violence.
- Pacifista, El machismo contra periodistas en las redes (13 July 2021)
Amicus Brief filed by Espacio Público, Robert F. Kennedy Human Rights and Women’s Link Worldwide