Online Threats: The Case That Set a Global Precedent to Protect Human Rights Defenders from Digital Attacks – Cejil

Meta’s Oversight Board Sets New Standards to Combat Digital Violence Against Human Rights Defenders

15 December 2025 | By Nadia Ferrari

Introduction

In a landmark case originating in Peru, Meta’s Oversight Board recognized the severity of coded online threats and established new rules to address digital violence targeting human rights defenders globally. This decision aligns with the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), particularly SDG 16, which promotes peaceful and inclusive societies and access to justice for all.

Case Overview and Context

1. In May 2025, Meta’s Oversight Board overturned Facebook’s initial decision to keep online a post threatening a prominent Peruvian human rights defender.
2. The post featured an artificially manipulated image showing the defender’s face covered in blood, dismissed by Facebook as a “political metaphor” without considering the broader context.
3. The post was published by a leader of an extremist group known for physical and digital attacks, highlighting the intersection of online harassment and real-world violence.

CEJIL’s Intervention and Legal Framework

• CEJIL filed a complaint emphasizing that the post constituted a coded threat in an environment where online harassment frequently escalates into physical violence.
• After expert review, the Oversight Board unanimously confirmed the post as a coded threat and mandated its removal.
• This precedent not only protects defenders in Peru but sets global standards requiring technology platforms to exercise greater diligence in protecting human rights defenders worldwide, supporting SDG 16’s goal of promoting justice and strong institutions.

The Voice of the Protagonist: Jennie Dador

Jennie Dador, a human rights defender and survivor of digital attacks, shared her experiences of sustained harassment campaigns in Peru. These include tactics such as terruqueo, doxxing, and smear campaigns used to intimidate defenders. Her testimony underscores the urgent need for protective measures in digital spaces.

CEJIL’s Strategic Role in the Complaint

• Following Facebook’s refusal to remove the threatening post, CEJIL utilized the platform’s internal appeals before escalating the case to Meta’s Oversight Board.
• The complaint incorporated Peru’s political context, increasing violence against defenders, and the responsibility of platforms to mitigate risk amplification.
• Patricia Cruz, CEJIL’s legal expert, highlighted the innovative use of strategic human rights litigation through non-traditional mechanisms to confront digital violence.

Utilization of the Esperanza Protocol

CEJIL referenced the Esperanza Protocol, a guideline grounded in international human rights law designed to assist governments and justice actors in responding effectively to threats against human rights defenders. This aligns with SDG 16 targets to ensure responsive institutions and promote the rule of law.

Technical Takeaways and Policy Recommendations

1. The Oversight Board ordered the removal of the threatening post and recommended Meta update its Community Standards to explicitly prohibit coded threats.
2. Annual assessments of risk management practices were advised, with special focus on content targeting human rights defenders.
3. Agneris Sampieri, Latin America Policy Analyst at Access Now, discussed the implications for future cases involving violence and veiled threats in high-risk contexts.

Impact on Democracy and Digital Safety

This case exemplifies how independent oversight combined with civil society advocacy can transform platform policies and enhance the safety of human rights defenders. Protecting digital environments is crucial for defending democracy and upholding SDG 16’s vision of inclusive societies.

Practical Guide for Reporting Threats on Social Media Platforms

CEJIL developed a practical guide to improve responses to digital threats and abuses on platforms such as Facebook, Instagram, and Threads. The guide emphasizes the importance of:

• Reporting violent or threatening content to halt its circulation.
• Documenting risk patterns to hold platforms accountable for human rights due diligence.
• Utilizing national and international protection mechanisms alongside platform tools.

This initiative supports SDG 16 by empowering defenders and civil society to foster safer digital spaces essential for public debate and community organizing.

1. Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) Addressed or Connected

1. SDG 16: Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions
   • The article focuses on protecting human rights defenders from digital and physical violence, which aligns with SDG 16’s aim to promote peaceful and inclusive societies, provide access to justice for all, and build effective, accountable institutions.
2. SDG 5: Gender Equality
   • The article highlights digital threats and harassment against human rights defenders, including women like Jennie Dador, emphasizing the need to protect women from violence and discrimination.
3. SDG 9: Industry, Innovation and Infrastructure
   • The role of technology platforms such as Meta (Facebook, Instagram, Threads) and the use of artificial intelligence in content manipulation are discussed, linking to SDG 9’s focus on building resilient infrastructure and fostering innovation.
4. SDG 10: Reduced Inequalities
   • The article addresses the protection of marginalized groups (human rights defenders) from threats and harassment, contributing to reducing inequalities.

2. Specific Targets Under Those SDGs Identified

1. SDG 16: Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions
   • Target 16.10: Ensure public access to information and protect fundamental freedoms, in accordance with national legislation and international agreements.
   • Target 16.3: Promote the rule of law at the national and international levels and ensure equal access to justice for all.
   • Target 16.6: Develop effective, accountable and transparent institutions at all levels.
2. SDG 5: Gender Equality
   • Target 5.2: Eliminate all forms of violence against all women and girls in public and private spheres, including trafficking and sexual and other types of exploitation.
3. SDG 9: Industry, Innovation and Infrastructure
   • Target 9.c: Significantly increase access to information and communications technology and strive to provide universal and affordable access to the Internet in least developed countries.
4. SDG 10: Reduced Inequalities
   • Target 10.3: Ensure equal opportunity and reduce inequalities of outcome, including by eliminating discriminatory laws, policies and practices.

3. Indicators Mentioned or Implied to Measure Progress

1. Indicator for Target 16.10:
   • Number of verified cases of threats or violence against human rights defenders reported and addressed by platforms and institutions.
   • Existence and enforcement of policies by technology platforms (e.g., Meta’s updated Community Standards prohibiting coded threats).
2. Indicator for Target 16.3:
   • Number of cases of digital violence against human rights defenders successfully litigated or resolved through oversight mechanisms.
3. Indicator for Target 5.2:
   • Reports and documentation of digital and physical violence against women human rights defenders.
4. Indicator for Target 9.c:
   • Implementation of digital tools and guidelines (such as CEJIL’s practical guide) to report and manage online threats.
   • Annual assessments by platforms on managing risks related to digital violence.
5. Indicator for Target 10.3:
   • Number of policies and protocols (e.g., Esperanza Protocol) adopted to protect marginalized groups from digital violence and harassment.

4. Table: SDGs, Targets and Indicators

Source: cejil.org