Senate begins debate on "Anti-Meme Law"; opposition accuses disguised censorship and Morena defends the initiative

The full Senate of the Republic began the debate and discussion of the bill reforming the Federal Industrial Property Law, known as the "anti-meme law." The opposition stressed that it will vote against it, considering that although the proposal was softened, the government's intention to censor critics and opponents still remains in Article 403 bis. Senator Alejandra Barrales, of Movimiento Ciudadano, denounced that the law is censorship disguised as copyright defense. "We have pointed out that, once again, we see the government and its legislative majority acting under this modus operandi. Proposing a noble cause, such as — and it is undoubtedly — the fight against piracy, so that, along the way of this proposal, of this reform, they can continue taking control, this time of freedom of expression. And in Movimiento Ciudadano, since we learned the content of this reform, we pointed to Article 403 bis of this proposal, of the industrial property law. We warned that precisely this would carry risks, because its wording implies putting freedom of expression at risk." "We have clearly said no. We have expressed our firm rejection of punishing with up to five years in prison and fines of up to one million pesos those who use the institutional graphics of governments for purposes of criticism, parody, and all these figures we know today through social media," she added. She said that in Mexico, there is currently a clear dispute over control of the discourse and of what is said on social media and in the digital space. "In reality, what the majority wants, what Morena specifically wants, is to take control of what is said, of what is commented on, of what is seen and heard online," she accused. When presenting the bill, Senator Manuel Huerta Ladrón de Guevara, president of the First Legislative Studies Commission, asserted that there is no intention of imposing censorship on memes, parodies, or other forms of political criticism, although he acknowledged the need to make it clear that the aim is to combat piracy and the fraudulent reproduction of institutional logos to commit fraud. He recalled that in committee, Article 403 bis was modified to specify the conduct and link it to the commercial-scale use of institutional identity to induce error or deception about the official origin of a communication, document, platform, or service, with the intention of committing an unlawful act, and the penalty provided was also reduced in this regard compared to the original proposal. "This is a relevant clarification that we will have to make, because it falls to the public prosecutor to prove the elements of the crime in each case, fully respecting the presumption of innocence, the right to defense, and due process. This balance is fundamental: neither impunity for those who make piracy and counterfeiting an economic activity, nor arbitrariness against citizens," he specified. "Let it be clear that criticism, satire, and public debate belong to a democracy, but impersonating an institution to deceive is another thing, and laws must have sufficient precision to distinguish one from the other. And updating our legislation to confront these behaviors does not mean diminishing people's rights," affirmed Huerta Ladrón de Guevara. The coordinator of the PRI senators, Manuel Añorve Baños, denounced the criminalization of political criticism in this initiative and pointed out that the fundamental question is very simple: "Who is going to decide when a parody stops being a parody and became an attempt to deceive? Who will determine when a political cartoon, a critical video, or a satirical piece crossed that line? In criminal matters there can be no gray areas, much less when freedom of expression, freedom of the press, and our democracy are at stake," he emphasized. For the PAN, Senator María de Jesús Díaz Marmolejo stressed that this bill seeks to impose three to seven years in prison and fines of one thousand to ten thousand units of measure and update on anyone who uses, reproduces, imitates, or incorporates institutional graphic identity, electronic domains, or any official sign belonging to public institutions. "From now on, we will be told which conduct must be carried out on a commercial scale and with the purpose of inducing error or deception. However, these expressions are not sufficient to eliminate the risk of arbitrary application. The criminal offense uses broad concepts, such as graphic identity, imitating any other official sign, and commercial scale, but it does not expressly exclude parody, satire, political cartoons, memes, journalistic work, artistic creation, academic research, or expressions of public interest. "When a person's freedom can depend on the interpretation of an investigating authority, we are not facing a sufficient guarantee. In criminal matters, the principle of exactness must be strictly respected. Prohibited conduct must be defined in absolute clarity, especially when a penalty of up to seven years in prison is intended to be imposed. It is not enough for those promoting the reform to assure that only fraud will be pursued. This limitation must appear clearly in the law. Rights are not protected through good intentions, but through precise norms that prevent abuse," she warned. You may be interested in: Chávez, Clouthier, and Abelina, among those left behind on the road to 2027; linked to scandals or not competitive enough, says expert. Morena launches call for those aspiring to a federal deputy seat; process concludes on October 2. Maru Campos goes against the Court's ruling; Morena litigated and was granted that narcocandidates stay, she says. em/apr