In this powerful episode of Culture Conversations, Prof. Dr. Christiaan Alting von Geusau joins Paul Coleman (Executive Director, ADF International) to explore conscience as a deeply personal—and profoundly legal—moral compass.
Continue reading
Brussels (21 May 2025) – Experts this morning warned about the threats of an EU online censorship law, in a first-of-its-kind, cross-party convening at the European Parliament.
The well-attended conference, which was co-hosted by ADF International, and Members of the European Parliament (MEPs) Stephen Bartulica and Virginie Joron, was entitled “The Digital Services Act and Threats to Freedom of Expression”.
The event followed the Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, & Labour, a bureau within the US State Department, expressing concern about the censorial impact of the Digital Services Act (DSA).
At the event, which was attended by MEPs and staffers from across the political spectrum, think-tankers, journalists and others, Ms Joron warned that although the DSA was meant to create a “safe online environment”, it has “morphed into a tool that risks undermining our fundamental freedoms”.
She added: “What was sold as the Digital Services Act is increasingly functioning as a Digital Surveillance Act. The European Commission, alongside some parliamentarians, has seized upon the DSA as a political tool to control speech, particularly targeting platforms like X, Facebook, and Telegram.
“The DSA was meant to protect our digital space, not to control it… The DSA, once a shield for our rights, risks becoming a Trojan horse for surveillance and control.”
Mr Coleman, an international human rights lawyer specialising in free speech and Executive Director of ADF International, a Christian legal organisation that defends freedom of expression, told the conference: “Free speech is again under threat on this continent in a way it hasn’t been since the nightmare of Europe’s authoritarian regimes just a few decades ago.
“The internet is the frontline of this assault on free speech in Europe—particularly through the Digital Services Act.”
He added that “serious questions can and should be raised” about whether the DSA is compatible with “binding obligations to protect freedom of expression”.
He commented from his position of legal expertise that it was his “strong view” that “it is not”.
In his speech, Mr Bartulica warned that “hate speech”, which politicians want to use the DSA to “address”, is “impossible to define” as a legal concept.
He said quoting Christian Scripture could even be considered “hate speech” by those in power.
Mr Coleman mentioned the case of Finnish parliamentarian Päivi Räsänen, which is supported by ADF International, in his speech, as a “harrowing example of what censorship under the DSA could look like in practice”.
He said: “Six years ago, Päivi posted a picture of a Bible verse and expressed her Christian views on sexuality on X. She was criminally prosecuted for alleged ‘hate speech’ and has been unanimously acquitted in two trials.
“But the state prosecutor has appealed the case again. And shockingly, her case—in which she faces trial for posting online—is now pending before Finland’s Supreme Court.
“Now, under the DSA, deeply problematic national laws restricting speech—like the “hate speech” legislation used to prosecute Päivi —could be broadly applied across the EU by this simple principle: If it’s considered illegal in one place, it could be in every place.”
Mr Bartulica also said that in the EU “we have regulated or controlled speech and not free speech”.
He added: “We don’t have to reinvent the wheel—we’ve seen where mass censorship leads. Under communism and other totalitarian regimes, it’s not a pretty picture.
“There’s a totalitarian impulse in many of these people in Brussels, who are just waiting to censor speech they don’t like.”
JD Vance opposes Europe’s censorial ruling class
Also speaking at the event was American journalist and bestselling author Rod Dreher.
Mr Dreher, who is a friend of US Vice President JD Vance, said that following the Vice President’s speech in Munich, that people had asked him if VP Vance hates Europe.
He said: “Of course” the VP does not hate Europe—he loves it enough to speak the truth about its censorship crisis.
But Mr Dreher did say the VP opposes Europe’s censorial ruling class.
Mr Dreher observed that “elites would prefer to suppress discussion of discontent and its sources”—smearing such discussion as “hate speech”—rather than acknowledge the serious problems plaguing their societies.
Drawing on the wisdom of Soviet dissidents, he recommended that in the face of “soft totalitarianism” in the West today that people “refuse to participate in any event where one cannot speak the truth… Prepare to suffer for the truth”.
How to oppose the DSA
In his speech, Mr Coleman also gave concrete ways in which the DSA can be opposed.
He said: “It is thankfully the case that freedom of expression is guaranteed in Article 11 of the EU Charter, Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights and Article 19 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.
“According to these and the jurisprudence of the ECHR, any limitations to free speech must be proportionate and necessary in a democratic society.
“And so, serious questions can and should be raised about whether the DSA is compatible with these binding obligations to protect freedom of expression.
“It is my strong view, as you may have guessed from this speech, that it is not. So, what can be done about this?
“Member states could initiate an action for annulment before the Court of Justice of the European Union. Through this, the whole or parts of the DSA could be declared inapplicable, if they are deemed to infringe on the EU Charter or Treaties.
“The same question, of considering whether the DSA is compatible with binding obligations to protect free speech, is key for the upcoming DSA review, in which the Commission must evaluate the act in view of other legal commitments.
“It is imperative that every opportunity is taken in the review, which must occur by mid-November this year, to raise concerns about the censorial impact of the DSA.
“This could be accomplished through written or oral questions to the European Commission and even by inviting Commissioner Henna Virkkunen to discuss the legislation in the European Parliament. After all, if the Commissioner is as in favour of freedom of expression as she claims to be, why would she refuse?
“It is vital to include representatives of civil society, tech companies and digital rights groups in such conversations, as they can share their invaluable expertise on this important issue.
“As elected representatives of your people, you are also in an excellent position to bring the public’s attention to the grave risks to free speech posed by the DSA.
“The truth is that every single European’s rights are jeopardised by this legislation. The more the public is aware of and speaks out about this, the more pressure the Commission will feel. And the more likely we are to defeat this law.”
Background
Today’s conference was the first of its kind in the European Parliament to focus on the threats to free speech posed by the DSA, to offer concrete answers on how to oppose them, and to discuss the fundamental importance of freedom of expression for societal flourishing, in that context.
The gathering of free speech experts adds to steadily building pressure on the DSA, following a letter reportedly sent to the European Commission last week by the US House Judiciary Committee, expressing concern over the legislation.
Henna Virkkunen, the Commission’s Executive Vice-President for Tech Sovereignty, Security and Democracy, also met with Congressman Jim Jordan, Chair of the House Judiciary Committee, in Washington DC last week.
In a post on X, she said: “Candid exchange with @Jim_Jordan [Chairman Jordan].”
She went on to claim in the post: “Freedom of speech is a fundamental right in the EU and is strongly protected by our digital rules. Happy to continue our good discussion.”
Earlier this month, the US Department of State Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor expressed concern over the censorial impact of the DSA.
The State Department bureau posted on X: “The Department of State is deeply concerned about efforts by governments to coerce American tech companies into targeting individuals for censorship. Freedom of expression must be protected – online and offline.
“Examples of this conduct are troublingly numerous. EU Commissioner Thierry Breton threatened X for hosting political speech.”
The post continued: “Türkiye fined Meta for refusing to restrict content about protests; and Australia required X to remove a post criticizing an individual for promoting gender ideology.
“Even when content may be objectionable, censorship undermines democracy, suppresses political opponents, and degrades public safety. The United States opposes efforts to undermine freedom of expression. As @SecRubio [Marco Rubio] said, our diplomacy will continue to place an emphasis on promoting fundamental freedoms.”
The Digital Services Act
EU politicians have stated their desire for the DSA to “address’ so-called “mis” and “disinformation” online—vague and subjective terms, which experts have warned can be used to justify censorship.
The regulation would provide an incentive to put pressure on tech companies, including American ones, to censor speech, rather than risk massive financial penalties for non-compliance.
There are additional concerns in the US about the DSA potentially having an extraterritorial impact and being used to censor speech inside America.
An attempt at using the regulation to censor speech in the US was seen last summer, when former Commissioner Thierry Breton warned Elon Musk to not breach the DSA ahead of his X interview with then-Presidential candidate Donald Trump.
Find more information on the DSA here.
Today, the World Health Assembly adopted the WHO Pandemic Agreement. The final treaty text drops earlier references to “misinformation” and “infodemic management,” safeguarding free expression.
Continue reading
BRUSSELS (19 May 2025) – Experts will convene at the European Parliament this Wednesday morning to warn about the threats of an EU online censorship law, in a first-of-its-kind, cross-party event.
The event, which is co-hosted by ADF International, is entitled “The Digital Services Act and Threats to Freedom of Expression”.
It follows the Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, & Labour, a bureau within the US State Department, expressing concern about the censorial impact of the Digital Services Act (DSA).
The DSA is an EU regulation that requires online platforms, including US tech companies such as X and Meta, to remove “illegal content”, or risk facing massive financial penalties.
There are concerns it could introduce a “lowest common denominator” of censorship, as the most egregious anti-speech laws in any individual EU country could be applied across the region under the act.
Croatian Member of the European Parliament (MEP) Stephen Bartulica, who will speak at the event, said: “Pressure against the Digital Services Act is quickly building both inside and outside the European Parliament.
“Concern from the United States, including from their State Department and Congress, over the censorial impact of the DSA should not be ignored by the Commission—the US is a vital ally of Europe.
“This event will be a crucial part of continuing to build pressure on the DSA. Online censorship in Europe must be rejected. I believe in free speech, not regulated speech.”
Paul Coleman, Executive Director of ADF International, and an international human rights lawyer specialising in free speech, who will also speak at the event, said: “The DSA is one of the most serious threats to online free speech in the digital age.
“The move towards censorship in Europe through this framework is deeply concerning and must be challenged.
“We cannot accept a transatlantic divide on free speech, where the US recommits to the protection of this fundamental freedom, while Europe tramples on it. Freedom of expression must be protected and upheld across the globe.”
Another speaker at the event, French MEP Virginie Joron, said: “The DSA has become a tool that elites want to use to control the internet, in a desperate attempt to censor narratives that go against their narrative.
“This truth is becoming increasingly clear to the world. The new DSA regulation must not become a political tool.
“This event comes at an important moment and is a crucial step in the fight against the misapplication of this regulation.”
This week’s conference is being hosted by European Conservatives and Reformists (ECR) MEP Mr Bartulica, PfE MEP Ms Joron and ADF International, a Christian legal organisation, with expertise in international law, that defends free speech.
Pressure builds against Digital Services Act
The gathering of free speech experts will add to steadily building pressure on the DSA, following a letter reportedly sent to the European Commission last week by the US House Judiciary Committee, expressing concern over the legislation.
Henna Virkkunen, the Commission’s Executive Vice-President for Tech Sovereignty, Security and Democracy, also met with Congressman Jim Jordan, Chair of the House Judiciary Committee, in Washington DC last week.
In a post on X, she said: “Candid exchange with @Jim_Jordan [Chairman Jordan].”
She went on to claim in the post: “Freedom of speech is a fundamental right in the EU and is strongly protected by our digital rules. Happy to continue our good discussion.”
Earlier this month, the US Department of State Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor expressed concern over the censorial impact of the DSA.
The State Department bureau posted on X: “The Department of State is deeply concerned about efforts by governments to coerce American tech companies into targeting individuals for censorship. Freedom of expression must be protected – online and offline.
“Examples of this conduct are troublingly numerous. EU Commissioner Thierry Breton threatened X for hosting political speech.”
The post continued: “Türkiye fined Meta for refusing to restrict content about protests; and Australia required X to remove a post criticizing an individual for promoting gender ideology.
“Even when content may be objectionable, censorship undermines democracy, suppresses political opponents, and degrades public safety. The United States opposes efforts to undermine freedom of expression. As @SecRubio [Marco Rubio] said, our diplomacy will continue to place an emphasis on promoting fundamental freedoms.”
This Wednesday’s conference is the first of its kind in the European Parliament to focus on the threats to free speech posed by the DSA, offer concrete answers on how to oppose them, and discuss the fundamental importance of freedom of expression for societal flourishing, in that context.
Rod Dreher, an American journalist and bestselling author, will also speak at the event. His books include ‘The Benedict Option’, ‘Live Not By Lies’ and, most recently, ‘Living in Wonder’. He is also a Visiting Fellow at the Danube Institute think tank.
Email [email protected] to secure your place at this groundbreaking event.
The Digital Services Act
EU politicians have stated their desire for the DSA to “address’ so-called “mis” and “disinformation” online—vague and subjective terms, which experts have warned can be used to justify censorship.
The regulation would provide an incentive to and put pressure on tech companies, including American ones, to censor speech, rather than risk massive financial penalties for non-compliance.
There are additional concerns in the US about the DSA potentially having an extraterritorial impact and being used to censor speech inside America.
An attempt at using the regulation to censor speech in the US was seen last summer, when former Commissioner Thierry Breton warned Elon Musk to not breach the DSA ahead of his X interview with then-Presidential candidate Donald Trump.
Find more information on the DSA here.
Former Mexican congressman and presidential candidate Gabriel Quadri’s fight for free speech continues before the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights as ADF International submits a brief on the merits of his case.
Continue reading
SANTIAGO (16 May 2025) – In a landmark move, Chile’s Chamber of Deputies has adopted the findings of a Special Investigatory Commission calling for the immediate suspension of government programs that promote the medicalized transition of minors.
The Commission’s report was adopted on Thursday by the majority of the deputies present in the Chamber. It details systemic medical, legal, and ethical failings in the state’s handling of children and adolescents who experience gender-related distress.
““Chile has become the first country in Latin America to confront the harms of the gender-affirming model through a democratic process."
“Chile has become the first country in Latin America to confront the harms of the gender-affirming model through a democratic process. Congress has taken a courageous step in protecting children from the irreversible dangers of so-called ‘gender transition’,” said Tomás Henríquez, Director of Latin America Advocacy for ADF International.
“The Commission found that programs like PAIG – Crece con Orgullo and the Trans Health Program (PST) have operated as a pipeline to irreversible medical interventions, including puberty blockers and cross-sex hormones for children as young as ten, without scientific basis, regulatory oversight, or parental consent.”
The report highlights the following major findings:
The report states:
“It is clear that the current programs, under the guise of accompaniment, have operated as a gateway to irreversible medical and hormonal transition for children, without the necessary scientific, ethical, or legal safeguards.”
It further states:
“The therapeutic indication of these treatments in minors lacks adequate evidence and carries high risks. The principles of medicine—primum non nocere (first, do no harm)—have been disregarded.”
The report calls for:
It is widely expected that the Congress will now move to legislatively bar the use of puberty blockers, cross sex hormones, and so-called surgical transitioning for minors.
The report follows last year’s vote introducing an amendment to ban the use of public funds for “gender transitioning” of children. That amendment was later struck down by the Constitutional Court over separation of powers grounds, but this vote reveals a consolidated majority of lawmakers in favor of restricting “gender transition” for minors.
Henríquez added:
“This is a turning point—not only for Chile, but for the entire region, in the disavowal of the lie of gender ideology. Lawmakers have listened to the evidence, the science, and the voices of parents. The so-called gender-affirming model is collapsing globally, and Chile is now leading Latin America toward a more responsible and ethical approach to gender dysphoria in youth.”
The report mirrors international developments such as the UK’s Cass Review, which concluded that the so-called “gender-affirming approach” lacks an evidence base and places children at risk. It also follows the release of the US Department of Health and Human Services Gender Dysphoria Report in April.
ADF International has urged Chilean authorities to implement the Commission’s recommendations without delay and to ensure that all children receive compassionate, evidence-based psychological support without being steered toward dangerous life-altering medical procedures.
Images for free use in print or online in relation to this story only
PICTURED: Tomas Henriquez
In diesem Panel diskutieren Pater Karl Wallner (Missio Österreich), Anja Hoffmann (Observatory on Intolerance and Discrimination Against Christians), Kurt Igler (Open Doors Österreich) mit Sophia Kuby von ADF International.
Continue reading
Was bedeutet es, heute Christ zu sein? Warum schweigen Medien und Kirchen oft über das Leiden der Gläubigen?
Continue reading
MELBOURNE (5 May 2025) – As the Labour Party claim victory in Australia’s election, the U.S. State Department’s Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, & Labor has issued a warning to the government not to censor free speech on U.S. social media platforms.
Listed as an example of such “concerning” behaviour is the decision of the Australian eSafety Commissioner to require Musk’s 𝕏 to censor Canadian campaigner “Billboard Chris” (Chris Elston), who posted a criticism of gender ideology, and used biologically accurate pronouns to describe an Australian “transgender” activist, in a now “geo-blocked” post in 2024.
Elston is a public campaigner against puberty blockers being given to children.
“If our free speech can't be protected when we speak out against the greatest child abuse scandal in the world right now, when can it be?”
The State Department’s statement, released on social media, reads:
“The Department of State is deeply concerned about efforts by governments to coerce American tech companies into targeting individuals for censorship. Freedom of expression must be protected – online and offline.
“Examples of this conduct are troublingly numerous. EU Commissioner Thierry Breton threatened X for hosting political speech; Türkiye fined Meta for refusing to restrict content about protests; and Australia required X to remove a post criticizing an individual for promoting gender ideology.
“Even when content may be objectionable, censorship undermines democracy, suppresses political opponents, and degrades public safety. The United States opposes efforts to undermine freedom of expression. As @SecRubio said, our diplomacy will continue to place an emphasis on promoting fundamental freedoms.”
Reacting to the news of the State Department’s intervention, Chris Elston (“Billboard Chris”) said:
“It’s tremendous to have the State Department support what we all know is true: free speech is a fundamental right, critical to a democratic society.
If our free speech can’t be protected when we speak out against the greatest child abuse scandal in the world right now, when can it be?”
Both 𝕏 and Billboard Chris, who was supported by ADF International and the Australian Human Rights Law Alliance, legally challenged the decision in Melbourne last month. The result is expected in the second half of this year.
The Australian eSafety Commissioner defended the decision to censor Elston’s post before a Tribunal in Melbourne last month by arguing that a post using the biologically accurate pronouns of a transgender activist was “likely …intended to have an effect of causing serious harm” and should therefore be subject to state-enforced censorship, in accordance with Australia’s Online Safety Act.
The post in question, which was subject to a “removal notice” at the hands of the eSafety Commissioner in April 2024, shared a Daily Mail article headlined “Kinky secrets of UN trans expert REVEALED: Australian activist plugs bondage, bestiality, nudism, drugs, and tax-funded sex-change ops – so why is he writing health advice for the world body?” and which included pictures posted on social media by transgender activist, and WHO expert panel appointee, Teddy Cook.
In February 2024, Canadian internet sensation and children’s safety campaigner “Billboard Chris” (Chris Elston), took to U.S. social media platform “X” to share the article, adding the comment:
“This woman (yes, she’s female) is part of a panel of 20 ‘experts’ hired by the @WHO to draft their policy on caring for ‘trans people.”
“People who belong in psychiatric wards are writing the guidelines for people who belong in psychiatric wards.”
The takedown order was legally challenged by Elon Musk’s platform “X”, and by Elston. ADF International and the Human Rights Law Alliance are supporting Elston’s legal case.
In his evidence, Elston told the Tribunal that while the first sentence of the tweet was a specific comment to the Daily Mail’s story on Teddy Cook, his second sentence was intended more broadly, to make a political comment about the ideological bias present amongst those in positions of power and influence when it comes to writing gender policy around the world.
Speaking on the witness stand, Elston added:
“It’s damaging to teach children they are born in the wrong body…children are beautiful just as they are. No drugs or scalpels needed.”
Asked further about why he chose to post on this matter, Elston explained: “Because the World Health Organisation has global influence. We should have evidence-based care.”
Freedom of political communication is protected as an implied right under the Australian Constitution.
Robert Clarke, Director of Advocacy for ADF International, which is backing Elston’s legal defence, said:
“The decision of Australian authorities to prevent Australian citizens from hearing and evaluating information about gender ideology is a patronizing affront to the principles of democracy.
“The confidence of the Australian eSafety commissioner to censor citizens of Canada on an American platform, shows the truly global nature of the free speech crisis.
“Speaking up for free speech is critical at this juncture, and we’re proud to be backing Billboard Chris as he does just that.”
Members of the public are invited to support Chris’s legal case here: https://adfinternational.org/campaign/support-billboard-chris
Images for free use in print or online in relation to this story only
Pictured: (1,2) “Billboard Chris” (Chris Elston)engaging in street activism; (3) Chris Elston with the ADF International team supporting his case; (4) Chris Elston with Lois McLatchie Miller (ADF International) in Sydney
Washington, D.C. (3 May 2025) – The U.S. State Department’s Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, & Labor has called out foreign governments who “coerce” U.S. social media platforms to censor users for speaking the truth.
Listed as an example of such “concerning” behaviour is the decision of the Australian eSafety Commissioner to require Musk’s 𝕏 to censor Canadian campaigner “Billboard Chris” (Chris Elston), who posted a criticism of gender ideology, and used biologically accurate pronouns to describe an Australian “transgender” activist, in a now “geo-blocked” post in 2024.
Elston is a public campaigner against puberty blockers being given to children.
“If our free speech can't be protected when we speak out against the greatest child abuse scandal in the world right now, when can it be?”
Reacting to the news of the State Department’s intervention, Chris Elston (“Billboard Chris”) said:
“It’s tremendous to have the State Department support what we all know is true: free speech is a fundamental right, critical to a democratic society.
If our free speech can’t be protected when we speak out against the greatest child abuse scandal in the world right now, when can it be?”
Both 𝕏 and Billboard Chris, who was supported by ADF International and the Australian Human Rights Law Alliance, legally challenged the decision in Melbourne last month. The result is expected in the second half of this year.
The State Department’s statement, released on social media, reads:
“The Department of State is deeply concerned about efforts by governments to coerce American tech companies into targeting individuals for censorship. Freedom of expression must be protected – online and offline.
“Examples of this conduct are troublingly numerous. EU Commissioner Thierry Breton threatened X for hosting political speech; Türkiye fined Meta for refusing to restrict content about protests; and Australia required X to remove a post criticizing an individual for promoting gender ideology.
“Even when content may be objectionable, censorship undermines democracy, suppresses political opponents, and degrades public safety. The United States opposes efforts to undermine freedom of expression. As @SecRubio said, our diplomacy will continue to place an emphasis on promoting fundamental freedoms.”
The Australian eSafety Commissioner defended the decision to censor Elston’s post before a Tribunal in Melbourne last month by arguing that a post using the biologically accurate pronouns of a transgender activist was “likely …intended to have an effect of causing serious harm” and should therefore be subject to state-enforced censorship, in accordance with Australia’s Online Safety Act.
The post in question, which was subject to a “removal notice” at the hands of the eSafety Commissioner in April 2024, shared a Daily Mail article headlined “Kinky secrets of UN trans expert REVEALED: Australian activist plugs bondage, bestiality, nudism, drugs, and tax-funded sex-change ops – so why is he writing health advice for the world body?” and which included pictures posted on social media by transgender activist, and WHO expert panel appointee, Teddy Cook.
In February 2024, Canadian internet sensation and children’s safety campaigner “Billboard Chris” (Chris Elston), took to U.S. social media platform “X” to share the article, adding the comment:
“This woman (yes, she’s female) is part of a panel of 20 ‘experts’ hired by the @WHO to draft their policy on caring for ‘trans people.”
“People who belong in psychiatric wards are writing the guidelines for people who belong in psychiatric wards.”
The takedown order was legally challenged by Elon Musk’s platform “X”, and by Elston. ADF International and the Human Rights Law Alliance are supporting Elston’s legal case.
In his evidence, Elston told the Tribunal that while the first sentence of the tweet was a specific comment to the Daily Mail’s story on Teddy Cook, his second sentence was intended more broadly, to make a political comment about the ideological bias present amongst those in positions of power and influence when it comes to writing gender policy around the world.
Speaking on the witness stand, Elston added:
“It’s damaging to teach children they are born in the wrong body…children are beautiful just as they are. No drugs or scalpels needed.”
Asked further about why he chose to post on this matter, Elston explained: “Because the World Health Organisation has global influence. We should have evidence-based care.”
Freedom of political communication is protected as an implied right under the Australian Constitution.
Robert Clarke, Director of Advocacy for ADF International, which is backing Elston’s legal defence, said:
“The decision of Australian authorities to prevent Australian citizens from hearing and evaluating information about gender ideology is a patronizing affront to the principles of democracy.
“The confidence of the Australian eSafety commissioner to censor citizens of Canada on an American platform, shows the truly global nature of the free speech crisis.
“Speaking up for free speech is critical at this juncture, and we’re proud to be backing Billboard Chris as he does just that.”
Members of the public are invited to support Chris’s legal case here: https://adfinternational.org/campaign/support-billboard-chris
Images for free use in print or online in relation to this story only
Pictured: “Billboard Chris” (Chris Elston); Chris Elston with the ADF International team supporting his case
You need to load content from reCAPTCHA to submit the form. Please note that doing so will share data with third-party providers.
More InformationYou are currently viewing a placeholder content from Facebook. To access the actual content, click the button below. Please note that doing so will share data with third-party providers.
More InformationYou need to load content from reCAPTCHA to submit the form. Please note that doing so will share data with third-party providers.
More InformationYou are currently viewing a placeholder content from X. To access the actual content, click the button below. Please note that doing so will share data with third-party providers.
More Information
