Summary: Meta’s Oversight Board has overturned Facebook’s decision to leave up a post targeting a Peruvian human rights defender, ruling that the content constituted a veiled threat. The case underscores how digital platforms’ choices can either safeguard or endanger defenders working in fragile democracies.
Earlier this year, the Oversight Board reviewed a Facebook post published by the leader of La Resistencia, an extremist group in Peru known for disinformation and harassment campaigns. The post depicted a prominent human rights defender with blood on her face, accompanied by accusations that NGOs were “inciting violence” and misusing foreign funds.
Facebook initially allowed the post to remain online, interpreting the imagery as metaphorical “political commentary.” Civil society groups, including the Center for Justice and International Law (CEJIL), appealed, warning that the content was a coded threat in a volatile environment where online attacks often escalate into physical violence.
The Board ultimately ruled that the post should have been removed, stressing that context is critical: who publishes the material, the political dynamics at play, and how imagery functions in societies where threats against defenders are common and rarely punished.
Peru’s democratic institutions have come under strain, with human rights defenders facing intensifying harassment from militant groups and restrictive legislation. Extremist tactics such as terruqueo—false accusations of terrorism—are routinely deployed to discredit civil society. In this climate, the Board’s decision highlights the dangers of platform inaction, which can embolden aggressors and silence dissent.
The ruling sets a precedent by urging Meta to update its Community Standards to explicitly prohibit coded threats and to conduct annual reviews of how such content is handled. It also affirms the importance of independent oversight, backed by civil society, in shaping platform accountability.
This case illustrates that online threats carry real-world consequences. By centering context and enforcing accountability, independent oversight can help protect human rights defenders from digital harms that too often spill into physical danger.
