One hundred experts write to European Commission warning EU legislation risks censoring global speech

  • Letter calls on Commission to consult free speech experts as part of review into censorial Digital Services Act (DSA)
  • Letter from free speech experts, which was coordinated by ADF International, comes after US Ambassador to EU and Google recently expressed concerns that DSA risks censoring American online speech

BRUSSELS (9 October 2025) – More than 100 free speech experts from around the world today wrote to the European Commission warning that an EU law risks censoring global speech online.

In a letter to the European Commission, the 113 experts, including a former VP of Yahoo Europe, a former US Senator, and politicians, academics, lawyers and journalists from around the globe, called on the Commission to consult free speech experts as part of its review into the EU’s Digital Services Act (DSA), which will take place by 17 November.

The letter, which was coordinated by free speech legal advocacy organisation ADF International, states: “[The DSA] constructs a pan-European censorship infrastructure with loosely defined boundaries and the potential to suppress legitimate democratic discourse…

“The wide definition of illegal content allows the most speech-restrictive provisions of one single EU country to be imposed as a standard across the entire Union, and potentially worldwide, effectively importing the lowest common denominator of expression.”

The letter added: “The broad definition of ‘illegal content’ in the DSA, combined with existing jurisprudence of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) opens the door to worldwide takedowns.”

Signatories include ADF International Executive Director Paul Coleman, President, CEO, and Chief Counsel of Alliance Defending Freedom Kristen Waggoner, former Vice President of Yahoo Europe Jean-Marc Potdevin, former US Senator and former US Ambassador-At-Large for International Religious Freedom Sam Brownback, Founder and General Secretary of the Free Speech Union Toby Young, former President of the American Civil Liberties Union Nadine Strossen, award-winning journalist and author Michael Shellenberger and Research Fellow at the Hoover Institution Ayaan Hirsi Ali.

Cross-party Members of the European Parliament (MEPs) also signed the letter, including ECR MEP Stephen Bartulica, EPP MEP Branko Grims, and Patriots MEP Virginie Joron, as well as McCormick Professor of Jurisprudence at Princeton University Robert P George, American philosopher and author Peter Boghossian, child protection advocate Chris Elston aka Billboard Chris and other experts from the UK, Europe, Latin America and the United States.

Read the full letter, see the full list of signatories and sign the public version of the letter here.

Opaque review process into DSA

The letter expresses concern over the European Commission’s opaque review process into the DSA and calls on the Commission to: “Conduct a comprehensive and inclusive consultation with independent experts in freedom of expression, constitutional law, and digital rights, ahead of the November review, inviting public comments.

“Publicly disclose the list of NGOs, civil society actors, and partner entities engaged in the review process, including the criteria and methodology used for their selection.

“Ensure that the review includes a rigorous legal analysis of the DSA’s compatibility with fundamental rights protections, especially under Article 11 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the EU, Article 10 of the ECHR, and Article 19 of the ICCPR.”

Concerns from US Ambassador to the EU

The experts’ letter to the European Commission comes after the US Ambassador to the EU Andrew Puzder last week expressed concern that the DSA risks censoring American citizens, and follows Google warning the DSA threatens American speech.

Ambassador Puzder last week said: “No President of either party, and I can tell you President Trump in particular, is going to tolerate a foreign government restricting the First Amendment fundamental free speech, free expression rights of American citizens, to an extent that the United States government can’t even regulate those rights.

“So we need to come to an understanding as to what’s happening with the Digital Services Act.”

Ambassador Puzder has also reportedly said the United States will make formal submissions under the European Commission’s review of its digital legislation.

The letter’s warning about the threat of global DSA censorship reinforces Ambassador Puzder’s and Google’s concerns.

 

Dr Adina Portaru, Brussels-based Senior Counsel, Europe for ADF International said:

“The European Commission claims the DSA will not censor speech and will merely create a safer online environment. In this letter, one hundred free speech experts vehemently disagree.

“The US Ambassador to the EU and Google recently expressed concern that the DSA threatens American online speech. This letter from experts reinforces these concerns and warns that the legislation threatens to impose an online censorship regime not just in the EU, but across the whole world.

“The Commission must urgently engage with these concerns in their review of the DSA, and act to ensure freedom of expression is protected online.”

 

French MEP and signatory of the letter Virginie Joron said:

“The French digital regulator ARCOM told me they believe the DSA allows them to censor any post anywhere in the world using the DSA. That means even an American citizen posting in Alabama could potentially have their online post taken down, even if the publication would be legal in the US.

“This already happened in 2023 after the Annecy terror attack in a playground in the South of France where a migrant from Syria stabbed four babies and toddlers. A reaction from a US citizen was taken down, as described in the report from the US Congress.”

As well as warning about the possibility of global takedown orders under the DSA, the letter also quotes the US House Judiciary Committee in highlighting another way the EU legislation risks censoring global online speech: “Because many social media platforms generally maintain one set of content moderation policies that they apply globally, restrictive censorship laws like the DSA may set de facto global censorship standards.”

Read more about the DSA here.

Images for free use in print or online in relation to this story only

(From left to right: Dr Adina Portaru, Brussels-based Senior Counsel, Europe for ADF International; French MEP Virginie Joron)

UN Expert Calls for Global Ban on Surrogacy in Landmark Report: “There is No International Human Right to Have a Child” 

  • Ahead of her report presentation to the UN General Assembly, UN Special Rapporteur on Violence Against Women and Girls, Reem Alsalem, condemns surrogacy at high-level UN event, stating the practice commodifies women and children. 
  • ADF International co-presents at event hosted by Italian government; applauds the call to ban the practice globally. 

NEW YORK CITY (8 October 2025) – Today, the United Nations Special Rapporteur on Violence Against Women and Girls, Reem Alsalem, formally spoke out against the practice of surrogacy at a UN General Assembly event. She stated, “[Surrogacy] is clearly responsible for inflicting large-scale violence, abuse, and exploitation on women and children.” Alsalem is set to present her latest report on Oct. 10 before the UN General Assembly. In it, she calls for a global ban on all forms of surrogacy, warning that the practice is “characterized by exploitation and violence against women and children, including girls.”  

The report calls on States to adopt a legally binding international instrument prohibiting all forms of surrogacy and urges immediate action to criminalize the commissioning of children and its facilitation by surrogacy agencies and clinics, ban its advertisement, protect women already engaged in surrogacy arrangements through legal support and psychosocial services, and ensure that children’s rights to identity, care, and protection are upheld. 

“[Surrogacy] is clearly responsible for inflicting large-scale violence, abuse, and exploitation on women and children.”

- Reem Alsalem, UN Special Rapporteur on Violence Against Women and Girls

Hosted by the Government of Italy, the event comes amid growing international momentum to ban surrogacy. In 2024, Italy became the first country to ban surrogacy both within and outside its borders. Last month, Slovakia adopted a constitutional amendment banning the practice.  

“Surrogacy should not be prohibited only domestically, but it should also be addressed internationally,” said Eugenia Rocella, Italian Minister for Family, Natality, and Equal Opportunities. “The Italian Government is convinced that… existing international treaties on the protection of women and children’s rights should be updated to explicitly include surrogacy as a practice of undermining dignity and entailing exploitation.” 

The report details how surrogacy intentionally separates children from their mothers, severing natural maternal bonds and undermining their rights to identity, care, and protection from violence. It also emphasizes that even “altruistic” surrogacy arrangements harm both women and children by treating human life as a product. 

“An inherent concern in surrogacy lies in the contractual programming of separation between a woman and the child that she carries, which risks treating the child as a passive object of an agreement between adults or as a commodity,” the report states. ADF International, who participated in welcomes the report as a landmark moment for the global movement to end surrogacy. At the event ahead of the presentation, the legal organization highlighted the need for immediate action from states to ban surrogacy. 

“Surrogacy rests on a system of violence that dehumanizes women and children alike. States need to develop a coordinated international response to end the grave human rights violations inherent in this practice,” said Giorgio Mazzoli, Director of UN Advocacy at ADF International. “We commend the Special Rapporteur for exposing the harms of this exploitative industry and urge governments around the world to united in ending surrogacy in all its forms at all levels, including through the adoption of a UN treaty banning the practice globally.” 

The organization was among the promoters of a civil society letter in support of the Special Rapporteur’s report, signed by over 180 NGOs, further emphasizing the call on States to globally ban surrogacy.  

Background

The UN expert report describes the global surrogacy industry as a rapidly growing market, valued at $14.4 billion in 2023 and projected to reach $96.6 billion by 2033. Despite its lucrative nature, the overwhelming majority of profits go to agencies and brokers, while surrogate mothers bear the brunt of serious physical, emotional, and financial risks. 

 Women undergoing surrogacy face increased rates of pregnancy complications, depression, and post-traumatic stress disorder. Many are subjected to coercion, exploitation, and invasive medical procedures, and even “altruistic” arrangements often involve separating children from their mothers, commodifying women’s reproductive capacities, and prioritizing the desires of adults over the rights of the child. 

ADF International remains committed to protecting the dignity of human life and safeguarding women and children from exploitation. The organization advocates for legal protections to end surrogacy and prevent the commodification of human life. 

Images for free use in print or online in relation to this story only

Glasgow Grandmother arrested AGAIN for offering conversations in abortion “buffer zone”

  • Christian grandmother arrested a second time; criminally charged for holding a sign reading “Coercion is a crime, here to talk, only if you want” within 200m of a hospital
  • Rose Docherty, aged 75, left without chair for two hours in a police cell – despite having two hip replacements 

GLASGOW (27 September 2025) – 75-year-old grandmother Rose Docherty has been arrested a second time and criminally charged for holding a sign within 200m of the Queen Elizabeth University Hospital, reading: 

“Coercion is a crime, here to talk, only if you want.” 

In Scotland, “buffer zones” are enforced within 200m of every hospital, forbidding harassment, intimidation, and “influencing” of anyone seeking to access abortion services.  

“I should not be treated as a criminal for inviting people to chat with me – lending a listening ear."

- Rose Docherty

Despite only having stood silently offering consensual conversation and not having approached any individual, Docherty has been charged with breaching the “buffer zone.” 

Reacting to her arrest, Rose Docherty said: 

“Everybody has the right to engage in consensual conversation. I held my sign with love and compassion, inviting anyone who wants to chat, to do so – and stood peacefully, not approaching anyone.  

“I should not be treated as a criminal for inviting people to chat with me – lending a listening ear. Conversation is not forbidden on the streets of Glasgow. And yet, this is the second time I have been arrested for doing just that.” 

In August, Scottish authorities dropped their case against Docherty for holding the same sign in the same place after a global outcry against the 75-year-old grandmother’s arrest, including concerns raised in an online post by the U.S. State Department. 

After her arrest this week, Docherty was held in custody for several hours. She was refused a chair to sit on in her cell, despite making it known that she had a double hip replacement. 

Docherty has been charged and released on bail. Stringent bail conditions prevent her from attending an area marked out to be wider than the initial “buffer zone” area, in a move the legal team at ADF International call “disproportionate”.  

Legal Counsel for ADF International, Lorcan Price commented: 

“It’s deeply concerning that Scottish policing resources are being ploughed into arresting and prosecuting a peaceful grandmother offering to speak to people in public, rather than focusing on the problems caused by real crime in Glasgow. 

“This is not a case about harassment, intimidation or violent protest – this is simply a grandmother, who held a sign offering to speak to anyone who would like to engage.” 

The law’s architect, Gillian Mackay MSP, admitted on BBC Scotland earlier this year that the vague prohibitions in the buffer zones law could criminalise someone for praying visibly from a window in their home within the zone, “depending on who’s passing by the window.” 

U.S. Vice President J.D. Vance highlighted this law as a particular matter for concern in his Munich Security Conference speech in February of this year. 

Images for free use in print or online in relation to this story only

Pictured: Rose Docherty, Lorcan Price (ADF International)

Nigerian State Lawyer Threatens to Publicly Execute Young Man for Sending a Song on WhatsApp  

  • After more than five years’ imprisonment, a first hearing for Yahaya Sharif-Aminu’s WhatsApp blasphemy case was held at the Nigerian Supreme Court; State lawyer declares “we will execute him publicly”

  • ADF International is supporting Yahaya in his fight for justice and the repeal of Nigeria’s blasphemy laws.

ABUJA (26 September 2025) – Yesterday, the Supreme Court of Nigeria held its first hearing in the case of Yahaya Sharif-Aminu, a young Sufi musician sentenced to death in 2020 in Kano State, Nigeria, for allegedly sharing song lyrics on WhatsApp deemed blasphemous. This marks the first step in his appeal before the country’s highest court, more than five years after his imprisonment. The Supreme Court permitted Sharif-Aminu’s appeal to move forward. 

Directly following the hearing, Lamido Abba Sorondinki, counsel for the Kano State government, spoke explicitly about the state’s intention to publicly execute Sharif-Aminu, should the Supreme Court rule in Kano State’s favor: “This applicant made blasphemous statements against the Holy Prophet, which the government of Kano State will not condone. If the Supreme Court upholds the lower court’s decision, we will execute him publicly.” This chilling statement underscores the extreme severity of northern Nigeria’s blasphemy laws, which continue to threaten the lives of religious minorities and silence free expression. 

“The Supreme Court of Nigeria has before it a matter of literal life or death. Absolutely no one should face the death penalty for peacefully sharing song lyrics. In a severe violation of his fundamental human rights, Yahaya has languished in prison for more than five years for a peaceful WhatsApp message"

- Sean Nelson, Legal Counsel for ADF International

“The Supreme Court of Nigeria has before it a matter of literal life or death. Absolutely no one should face the death penalty for peacefully sharing song lyrics. In a severe violation of his fundamental human rights, Yahaya has languished in prison for more than five years for a peaceful WhatsApp message,” said Sean Nelson, Legal Counsel for ADF International. “Yesterday’s Supreme Court hearing is the next step in earning justice for him and protecting his right to free expression and religious freedom, and in turn, that of every person in Nigeria. This case goes beyond one young man. It is about whether millions of Nigerians can live free from fear under unjust blasphemy laws.”  

“For far too long, blasphemy laws have wrongfully been used to persecute and harm religious minorities. It is time for the court to make a decision that upholds the right to religious freedom in Nigeria,” said Kola Alapinni, Nigerian Human Rights Lawyer and lead counsel for Yahaya Sharif-Aminu. 

Background 

In March 2020, Yahaya-Sharif Aminu, a Sufi Muslim from Kano State, shared song lyrics on WhatsApp that some considered blasphemous. Local authorities arrested him, while a mob burned his home to the ground. On 10 August 2020, a Sharia court convicted him of blasphemy and sentenced him to death by hanging.  

In January 2021, the court overturned the conviction, citing serious procedural flaws, including the lack of legal representation during his original trial. However, the High Court ordered a retrial, in which Sharif-Aminu would face the same death penalty blasphemy law. After an appellate court upheld the retrial order in 2022, Yahaya Sharif-Aminu appealed to the Supreme Court of Nigeria.  

Sharif-Aminu has remained in prison for over five years and is currently awaiting justice from the Supreme Court.  Sharif-Aminu, in his appeal, is now asking the court not only to free him, but also to declare Kano State’s death penalty blasphemy law unconstitutional, arguing that it violates Nigeria’s own constitution and international commitments to protect freedom of religion and expression. 

Blasphemy Laws in Nigeria

Nigeria’s blasphemy laws, particularly enforced in the country’s northern region, inflict severe punishments including the death penalty. International human rights groups have repeatedly called for their repeal. Yahaya’s case before the Supreme Court highlights the urgent need for reform to protect freedom of religion and belief. 

Yahaya’s Supreme Court appeal has the potential to overturn Northern Nigeria’s draconian Sharia-based blasphemy laws, thus enabling Christian converts, minority Muslims, and others, a greater chance to freely speak about their faith and be protected from the often-life-threatening violence that accompanies a blasphemy accusation. 

The European Parliament has already called for Yahaya’s release twice by adopting an urgency resolution in his case. It is rare for the European Parliament to raise the same case twice, demonstrating the gravity and importance of the situation facing Yahaya. The United Nations Working Group on Arbitrary Detention has similarly determined that Yahaya’s imprisonment is in violation of internationally-recognized human rights. Earlier this year, the regional West African treaty court, the ECOWAS Court, ruled that Nigeria’s blasphemy laws violate international law and the African Charter, calling for the blasphemy laws’ repeal. The ECOWAS Court based its decision in significant part on Yahaya Sharif-Aminu’s case. 

Images for free use in print or online in relation to this story only

Long-Awaited Hearing Scheduled for Case of Nigerian Prisoner Sentenced to Death for WhatsApp Message

  • Supreme Court of Nigeria will hold a hearing in the appeal of Yahaya-Sharif Aminu, a young musician previously sentenced to death by hanging for alleged blasphemy.
  • ADF International is supporting Sharif-Aminu’s legal defense in a case that could strike down northern Nigeria’s blasphemy laws and set a precedent for freedom of religion across the country and world. 

ABUJA (18 September 2025) – On September 25th, the first hearing in the case of Sufi Muslim Yahaya Sharif-Aminu will be held at the Supreme Court of Nigeria. A Sharia court previously sentenced him to death by hanging in 2020 after being accused of sharing allegedly “blasphemous” song lyrics on WhatsApp. Following an appeal, the Kano State High Court overturned his conviction and ordered a retrial, where he would face the same potential death penalty. ADF International is supporting Sharif-Aminu’s defense before the Supreme Court. The case holds the potential to overturn northern Nigeria’s draconian blasphemy laws.  

“No one should be punished, let alone face death, for peacefully sharing song lyrics,” said Kelsey Zorzi, Director of Advocacy for Global Religious Freedom at ADF International. “Yahaya has languished in prison for more than five years over nothing more than a WhatsApp message. This hearing is the next step to earning justice for him and protecting his right to free expression, and in turn, that of every person in Nigeria.”  

“Yahaya has languished in prison for more than five years over nothing more than a WhatsApp message.This hearing is the next step to earning justice for him and protecting his right to free expression, and in turn, that of every person in Nigeria."

- Kelsey Zorzi, Director of Advocacy for Global Religious Freedom at ADF International.

Background

In March 2020, Yahaya-Sharif Aminu, a Sufi Muslim from Kano State, shared song lyrics on WhatsApp that some considered blasphemous. Local authorities arrested him, while a mob burned his home to the ground. On 10 August 2020, a Sharia court convicted him of blasphemy and sentenced him to death by hanging. 

In January 2021, the court overturned the conviction, citing serious procedural flaws, including the lack of legal representation during his original trial. The High Court ordered a retrial, in which Sharif-Aminu would face the same death penalty blasphemy law. After an appellate court upheld the retrial order in 2022, Yahaya Sharif-Aminu appealed to the Supreme Court of Nigeria. 

“This case goes beyond one young man. It is about whether millions of Nigerians can live free from fear under unjust blasphemy laws,” said Sean Nelson, Legal Counsel for Global Religious Freedom at ADF International. “We pray that out of Yahaya’s case, we will ultimately see an end to these draconian blasphemy laws and improved protections for religious minorities, including Christians and others, in Nigeria.” 

Sharif-Aminu has remained in prison for over five years and is currently awaiting justice from the Supreme Court.  Sharif-Aminu, in his appeal, is now asking the court not only to free him, but also to declare Kano State’s death penalty blasphemy law unconstitutional, arguing that it violates Nigeria’s own constitution and international commitments to protect freedom of religion and expression. 

A ruling in Sharif-Aminu’s favor could set a precedent for the entire country, potentially rendering blasphemy laws unenforceable and protecting religious minorities from facing similar prosecutions in the future. A positive ruling would have a major effect around the world, as Nigeria is one of only seven countries in the world with a death penalty blasphemy law. 

“It is our hope that the Supreme Court will deliver justice to this young man,” said Kola Alapinni, international human rights lawyer and legal counsel for Yahaya Sharif-Aminu. “For far too long, blasphemy laws have wrongfully been used to persecute and harm religious minorities. It is time for the court to make a decision that upholds the right to religious freedom in Nigeria.” 

Global Calls for Sharif-Aminu's Release

Sharif-Aminu’s case has received international attention. In April 2023, the European Parliament issued a near-unanimous urgency resolution calling for the repeal of Nigeria’s blasphemy laws and the immediate release of Yahaya-Sharif Aminu.   

You are currently viewing a placeholder content from YouTube. To access the actual content, click the button below. Please note that doing so will share data with third-party providers.

More Information
Unblock content Accept required service and unblock content

In a rare second urgency resolution in February 2025, the Parliament reaffirmed its stance: it demanded his “immediate and unconditional release,” condemned the blasphemy law, and urged Nigeria to lead by example in abolishing blasphemy laws that threaten religious minorities  

The United Nations also weighed in on Sharif-Aminu’s imprisonment, publicly demanding his release in May 2024. In late 2024, the UN Working Group on Arbitrary Detention issued a thorough opinion finding Sharif-Aminu’s case in violation of multiple internationally-protected human rights and calling for his immediate release.  

Images for free use in print or online in relation to this story only

UN Expert: Vilification of Parents Protecting Children From Gender Transition is “Disturbing” 

Reem Alsalem, UN Special Rapporteur on Violence against Women and Girls
  • Reem Alsalem, UN Special Rapporteur on Violence Against Women & Girls, speaks up for parents who have been left “vilified, ostracised or even separated from their children” because of their concerns about child “transition”
     
  • UN Expert joined by detransitioner Chloe Cole, urging governments to empower parents to protect children from life-altering medical interventions

GENEVA (8 September 2025) – The UN Expert on Violence Against Women and Girls, Reem Alsalem, has issued a moving appeal to governments to end the vilification of parents who protect their children from “gender transition” procedures. 

Speaking via video, Alsalem warned against the “dangerous narrative” that children can make fully informed adult-level decisions about their health. “Parents and legal guardians must be part of these processes from the very beginning. Yet, in many countries, parents who do not want to endorse a ‘gender-affirmative’ approach to their children’s distress have too often been left unsupported at best, or vilified, ostracized, or even separated from their children. This is very disturbing…” she said.  

"...parents who do not want to endorse a ‘gender-affirmative’ approach to their children’s distress have too often been... vilified, ostracized, or even separated from their children."

- Reem Alsalem, UN Special Rapporteur on Violence Against Women & Girls

Addressing a panel coordinated by ADF International at the UN Human Rights Council in Geneva, Alsalem was joined by detransitioner and campaigner Chloe Cole, who urged global leaders to strengthen the role of parents and shield children from harmful medical interventions and ideological pressures. 

“I appeal to you: we must ensure these failures are never again repeated and that childhood is truly protected as the fragile and yet beautiful part of life that it is,” said Cole, who underwent gender transition procedures as a teenager before detransitioning. 

An Appeal to Empower Parents

Cole, a detransitioner and youth activist from California, described undergoing medical interventions – including puberty blockers and testosterone starting at age 13, and a double mastectomy at 15 – before her body and brain were fully developed. 

“My mom and dad have always advocated fiercely for my safety and health, but were not empowered to fulfill their irreplaceable role as guardians of my well-being. On the contrary, their protective instincts were undermined by systems and professionals who claimed expertise but withheld the truth. They stood no chance when doctors gave them the false ultimatum of choosing between losing a daughter to suicide or having a living ‘son’,” Cole told State and UN representatives gathered at the Human Rights Council in Geneva. 

Cole’s testimony was featured as part of a UN Human Rights Council side event titled “Empowering Parents to Protect Children’s Health and Well-being,” co-hosted by the Permanent Mission of Hungary to the UN in Geneva and ADF International, with sponsorship from the Permanent Missions of The Gambia, Algeria, Argentina, Qatar, Vaunatu, and Uzbekistan; as well as Non-Governmental Organisations including Juristes pour l’Enfance, Asociacion la Familia Importa, Latter Day Saints Charities, the Center for Fundamental Rights, and The Heritage Foundation. 

Adding to the call, Giorgio Mazzoli, Director of UN Advocacy at ADF International, reminded participants that international law recognizes the family as the “fundamental group unit of society”:

“The family must not be viewed as a competitor to the State, nor parents as obstacles to children’s rights. They are the children’s first and best guardians—entrusted by nature and recognized by law.”

Mazzoli called on governments to implement policies that respect parental guidance in education, healthcare, and identity-related decisions, ensuring that children receive care in the context of loving, informed families. 

The panel also included Dr. Fanni Lajkó of Hungary’s Center for Fundamental Rights, who highlighted Hungary’s best practices for strengthening families, including reduced household costs, subsidized home loans, and generous child-raising allowances.  

Images for free use in print or online in relation to this story only

Pictured: Reem Alsalem; Chloe Cole; Giorgio Mazzoli

Brazilian Mother Denied Right to Homeschool Despite International Law 

Regiane Cichelero wants to homeschool her son.
    • Brazilian state court ruled against Regiane Cichelero, a mother who sought to homeschool her son. 
        
    • ADF International decries the decision as a violation of international human rights law protecting parental rights in education.
Regiane Cichelero wants to homeschool her son.

Santa Catarina, BRAZIL (September 4, 2025) — The highest court in the state of Santa Catarina denied the right of Brazilian mother Regiane Cichelero to homeschool her son, ruling that he must be enrolled in an officially accredited school. The decision also upholds financial penalties against her, totaling around $20,000 USD. Regiane will appeal the decision and bring the case to the highest court in the nation. 

“This decision is a disappointing setback for parental rights in Brazil. International human rights law is clear: parents have the right to choose the kind of education their children receive. By deciding that Regiane cannot homeschool her son, the court has not only failed her family but also undermined protections for all parents across Brazil"

- Julio Pohl, Legal Counsel for Latin America at ADF International

“This decision is a disappointing setback for parental rights in Brazil,” said Julio Pohl, legal counsel for Latin America at ADF International, which coordinated Cichelero’s legal defense. “International human rights law is clear: parents have the right to choose the kind of education their children receive. By deciding that Regiane cannot homeschool her son, the court has not only failed her family but also undermined protections for all parents across Brazil.” 

Cichelero began homeschooling her son in 2020 after schools closed during the COVID-19 pandemic. When schools reopened, she chose to continue home education, believing it to be the best way to provide quality instruction consistent with her family’s religious values. 

In response, local authorities fined her heavily and threatened to remove her son from her custody if she did not comply with state schooling mandates. With today’s ruling, the court has rejected her appeal and imposed compulsory school enrollment. 

Background

Over 70,000 children are currently homeschooled in Brazil. International human rights law protects the rights of parents to make choices concerning the type of education their children receive. 

Article 26.3 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights states that “parents have a prior right to choose the kind of education that shall be given to their children.” In addition, Article 13 of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights requires states to respect the right of parents “to choose for their children schools, other than those established by the public authorities, which conform to such minimum educational standards as may be laid down or approved by the State and to ensure the religious and moral education of their children in conformity with their own convictions.” 

Following today’s decision, Cichelero said: “It is heartbreaking to be told that I cannot provide my son with the education I know is best for him. The state’s decision not only punishes me with heavy fines but also strip me of the ability to raise my child according to my convictions. No parent should have to fear punishment for choosing the best education for their child.” 

Images for free use in print or online in relation to this story only

European Legal Expert to U.S. Congress: “Protect Free Speech from European Censorship”

    • International free speech expert warns U.S. lawmakers that Europe’s Digital Services Act (DSA) threatens American free speech and risks establishing a worldwide online censorship regime.
    • ADF International is committed to challenging violations of free speech resulting from the DSA and building critical momentum to repeal or substantially reform this censorial framework.

WASHINGTON, D.C. – In a testimony before Congress, Lorcán Price, Legal Counsel with ADF International and an Irish barrister, warned that Europe’s Digital Services Act (DSA) threatens free speech far beyond the EU. Speaking before the House Judiciary Committee, chaired by Rep. Jim Jordan (R-OH), he said the law could force large online platforms to censor peaceful expression, putting free speech at risk in America and worldwide.

“What is happening in Europe is as Vice President Vance said in Munich, a ‘serious retreat from a fundamental value’- free speech,” Price said in his testimony. “It’s a sign that our European political elite has lost control of the narrative, and the Digital Services Act is part of a system of censorship in an increasing, desperate attempt to control narratives and suppress growing public discontent.”

“What is happening in Europe is as Vice President Vance said in Munich, a ‘serious retreat from a fundamental value’ - free speech. It’s a sign that our European political elite has lost control of the narrative, and the Digital Services Act is part of a system of censorship in an increasing, desperate attempt to control narratives and suppress growing public discontent."

- Lorcán Price, Legal Counsel with ADF International

The hearing comes at a critical moment as concern grows over free speech in Europe and recent pushback from the Trump administration against European online censorship. One year ago, while campaigning for president, Trump himself was threatened with censorship under the DSA leading up to an X interview with Elon Musk.

The hearing at the U.S. Congress takes place just months before the European Commission’s first DSA review in November 2025, yet the almost no details on the process or who will be involved.

In his testimony, Price warned that without oversight, the DSA’s broad powers could become entrenched and exported worldwide, influencing how tech companies control speech far beyond Europe.

Price warned that Europe’s growing offenses against free speech could easily enter the US under the DSA’s provisions. He cited a string of censorship attempts in Europe, including the case of Paivi Rasanen, a Finnish Parliamentarian who has endured over six years of prosecution for tweeting a Bible verse. MP Nigel Farage also testified at the hearing.

“Under the DSA, what happens in Europe won’t stay in Europe,” Price said. “The internet is global. If American policymakers don’t push back against the DSA model, the same speech restrictions now emerging in Europe will be imported here.”

What is the Digital Services Act?

The European Union’s Digital Services Act (DSA) was passed in 2022 and came into full effect in 2025, introducing sweeping regulations on online platforms. While presented as a framework for online safety, it gives the European Commission, the EU’s top executive arm, broad power to oversee what content remains online on very large platforms.

On July 1, 2025, the DSA’s “Code of Conduct on Disinformation” went into effect. The code requires platforms to monitor content and swiftly remove anything deemed as “disinformation” under EU law. The law also relies on “trusted flaggers,” including NGOs and regulators, while the Commission maintains oversight of the entire system. Platforms can face fines of up to 6% of their global revenue if they fail to comply, creating strong incentives for broad preemptive censorship of users.

Although the DSA is an EU law, its reach is global. Because these large online platforms operate worldwide, anyone, anywhere, faces the risk of having their content blocked or removed to comply with the DSA. This includes Americans, whose online posts could be censored even if protected under U.S. constitutional law.

ADF International has been at the forefront of sounding the alarm about this sweeping legislation, pushing back against online censorship and defending the fundamental right to free expression.

Images for free use in print or online in relation to this story only.