Controversy in Misiones over anti-cybercrime law that could affect free speech

The ruling party managed to pass it in the legislature Mission creating a prosecutor’s office specialized in digital crimes and the opposition believes that it is a screen to install a gag on the missionary society.

The initiative voted yesterday in the House of Representatives establishes the introduction of a special prosecutor’s office, which will be in charge of the power investigate and monitor crimes committed through computer means. They will become the target of cyber prosecution human trafficking, child abduction, child pornography, pedophilia, drug and arms trafficking and terrorism.

The opinion of the Commission on General Legislation and Justice of the Unicameral Legislature took into account two projects presented by members of the Frente Renovador de la Concordia (FRC). This is the one by Carlos Rovira and the one prepared by Rafael Pereyra Pigerl and José Pastori. He also considered the initiative prepared in this regard by the radical Lilia Torresová.

The opposition sharply questioned the scope of Articles 6 and 7 of the sanctioned text. In the first, the specialized public prosecutor is given the power to order the “immediate seizure and reservation of mobile, computer, electronic or any other devices based on reasonable suspicion that they have been used to pre-plan, carry out, conceal or cover up a crime for the purpose of its analysis, safekeeping and collection evidentiary material.”

The norm placed criminal acts in this scope grooming, child pornography, breach of privacy, restricted access to computer data and fraud by digital means. In addition, human trafficking, pedophilia and child abduction to secure evidence and cooperate with jurisdiction, whether provincial or federal. But also will include insults, defamation, public intimidation and incitement to violenceas described in the national criminal code, where the means used to carry out these typical acts are electronic, computer or generative artificial intelligence platforms to create fake news (“fake news”) about individuals or public or private institutions and are disseminated through computer, digital or any other medium.

Suspicion centers on the fact that protests by the police, teachers, health workers and other government officials which kept the missionary government in suspense at mid-year were coordinated and disseminated through digital platforms and social networks. The controversy was so extensive that President Javier Milei himself repeated it. This morning, the president republished a publication from a user who questioned the sanctions of the rule in Misiones.

The project to amend the province’s procedural rules took into account existing legislation in other districts and even other countries.

At Thursday’s meeting, he was represented by Anazul Centeno (FRC) as a reporting member of the commission’s office. During his speech, he emphasized that this type of crime goes beyond the jurisdiction and pointed to a sore spot, citing as an example the case of possession and distribution of child abuse materials against former opposition MP Germán Kiczek. This criminal trial arose out of an international investigation that required the cooperation of several judicial authorities.

As for the controversial articles, Centeno ruled out that the specialized prosecutor in charge of the unit could “just go investigate.” “Prosecutors have a legal obligation to sufficiently justify their interventions, and they will always be subject to jurisdictional control. There will always be a judge who will review these measures,” he emphasized.

“This law is very clear, it does not pursue a false purpose, nor does it abridge any constitutional right or freedom of expression. “We are making progress on key procedural tools with appropriate mechanisms to prosecute these crimes,” he stressed. He then concluded: “Everything that is approved is allowed by the judge on the principle of probation, we order and put the whole process under the control of a specialized public prosecutor. Far from giving someone unlimited powers, what it does is set limits,” he concluded.

Torres, the author of one of the basic texts, claimed that the disputed articles “denature all the goodness of others”. “We understand that this is a regulation that can be used as a tool to silence critical voices and limit freedom of expression,” he assessed. “The most serious thing is that this law does not have and does not have the consensus of society,” said the radical lawmaker. “The criticism received is that, as written, it violates the right to free speech and may cause unexpected direct and indirect censorship,” he added.

“‘Fake news’ or fake news are not crimes classified by the criminal code,” he emphasized, reminding that “public and private institutions are not the bearers of the right to honor like natural persons. It is difficult for them to defend themselves against insults and slander,” he contrasted. He later recalled that these two crimes are private and require a complaint from the affected person. “The approved wording will have the application body interpret and regulate in an arbitrary manner, damaging something sensitive to society, such as the right to speech and opinion,” he noted.

Analia Labandoczka (PRO) expressed that her bloc does not support the rule. “Although we agree with the noble postulates of the initiative, we cannot agree that the end justifies the means. “This project violates constitutional principles such as freedom of speech, the right to private property, violates federal jurisdiction, and gives the attorney general powers contrary to the rule of law,” he said.

Meanwhile, Ariel Pianesi (UCR) also supported the fight against new crimes that arise in the digital age. Like his counterpart on the bench and PRO legislator, he questioned the powers granted to the prosecutor in the area of ​​cybercrime and the risks to freedom of expression. “This project has generated so much noise because it really does make noise, so much so that they put a ‘gag law’ on it. There is a restriction on expression and that can be extremely dangerous,” he mentioned.

Renovators Pereyra, Pigerl and Pastori closed the debate and questioned the opposition and its arguments. The vote ended with 28 votes in favor and 10 against, but disputes continued outside the venue, on social networks.

“The worst feature of totalitarianism, and the one that really opens the door to judicial persecution, is the criminalization of opponents. That is the purpose of the Gag Act, which promotes recovery. If you don’t come with me, I’ll put you in jail. Another loss for missionaries,” former national lawmaker Alfredo Schiavoni shot in his account on X.