Chairs
Rafael Rubio Núñez: rafa.rubio@der.ucm.es
Catalina Botero Marino: cboteromarino@gmail.com
Flávia Piovesan: flaviapiovesan@terra.com.br
Erik Tuchtfeld: tuchtfeld@mpil.de
Fernanda Rodríguez González: f.rodriguez.g@outlook.com
Bruno Stoppa: bv2910@gmail.com

SPEAKERS

Andres	Calderon
Jose Mario	Achoy Sánchez
Leandro	Léo Rebelo
Patrícia	Perrone Campos Mello
Tamara	Álvarez Robles

The irruption of new technologies represents both enormous benefits and substantial risks for contemporary democratic systems. Social networks, whilst widening debate and including traditionally excluded voices, have also created the foundations for the dissemination of disinformation designed to deceive the population and affect their political preferences, which has a negative impact on the integrity of elections. This threat has been recognised as existential for democracy, which currently faces a regulatory deficit and normative insufficiency to address it effectively.

This workshop invites the presentation of abstracts for an academic dialogue centred on how electoral disinformation is being confronted from the perspective of comparative public law in Europe and Latin America. We seek to analyse and contrast the legal responses that diverse legal and institutional cultures have developed to resolve similar structural problems. The comparison between the legal traditions of both regions—the European, which has advanced in directives and norms, and the Latin American, which explores a ‘hybrid’ path influenced by both Europe and the United States—is fundamental to our analysis.

The objective is to identify common patterns, differences, and similarities in judicial and normative responses, evaluating how cultural, historical, and contextual factors influence them. Ultimately, we aspire to develop propositive conclusions regarding a possible trans-regional regime of response to electoral disinformation that strengthens democratic resilience.

Proposals addressing, inter alia, the following thematic axes will be accepted:

• a) Transformative Digital Constitutionalism: Analysis of how constitutional values are transferred to the digital sphere to protect democracy and political rights against disinformation.
• b) Comparative Judicial Responses: Studies of landmark judgments from constitutional and electoral courts in Europe (e.g., Germany, Spain, Italy, Romania) and Latin America (e.g., Brazil, Mexico, Colombia), as well as Regional Human Rights Courts.
• c) Normative Frameworks and Platform Regulation: Comparative analyses of existing regulatory frameworks, such as the Digital Services Act (DSA) in the EU and the Marco Civil da Internet in Brazil, and their effects in the fight against disinformation.
• d) Regional Standards and their Application: Research on the use of Inter-American and European democratic standards in national judicial decisions and regulations to guarantee free and fair elections.
• e) Transversal Themes: Contributions exploring the intersection of disinformation with the use of Artificial Intelligence in electoral campaigns, content moderation, and the protection of personal data.

Authors are suggested to employ a contextualised functionalist analysis methodology to evaluate how different legal systems resolve common challenges.