Columbia Global Freedom of Expression is pleased to announce the publication of the paper “How do women experience the exercise of their right to freedom of expression? Some answers from Court rulings”, authored by Alejandra Negrete Morayta and Estefanía Mullally. The paper is part of the Special Collection of the Case Law on Freedom of Expression, a series of publications that examine key jurisprudential developments reflected in the Global Freedom of Expression Case Law Database.

The study offers a descriptive analysis of how courts around the world have addressed restrictions and attacks affecting women’s exercise of freedom of expression. Drawing on a selected set of judicial decisions from national, regional, and international jurisdictions, the paper identifies recurring patterns in judicial reasoning, emerging legal approaches, and persistent gaps in the protection of women’s freedom of expression.

The study is based on the analysis of 51 decisions adopted by national and international courts, international human rights bodies, and quasi-judicial mechanisms. These decisions span 28 countries across multiple regions, including Latin America, North America, Europe, Africa, Asia, and the Middle East and North Africa. The analysis is complemented by interviews with journalists and human rights defenders who have experienced firsthand the challenges women face when exercising their freedom of expression.

The analysis highlights the structural barriers women face when exercising their freedom of expression in societies shaped by gender-based discrimination and patriarchal practices. It examines reprisals and forms of persecution directed at women who report abuse, defend rights, or advance feminist positions, including the use of legal mechanisms as tools of silencing.

The paper also explores structural processes of exclusion that limit women’s participation in the public sphere, particularly affecting journalists, politicians, and human rights defenders, as well as the criminalization of protest with gender-differentiated impacts. In addition, the study addresses digital violence, including harassment, surveillance, and abusive online practices that seek to deter women from participating in public debate. The paper further examines tensions surrounding women’s religious expression, personal autonomy, and state regulation, as well as the judicial and legal mechanisms—including SLAPPs—used to restrict public participation.

Finally, the article underscores the importance of the right of access to information as a necessary condition for women’s autonomy and the effective exercise of their rights. It highlights how the denial or obstruction of information related to human rights issues can produce disproportionate impacts on women and reinforce inequalities.

By offering a systematic overview of jurisprudence across jurisdictions, the paper contributes to a deeper understanding of how courts have addressed gender-based restrictions on expression and identifies areas where legal protections remain insufficient. It forms part of the broader effort of Columbia Global Freedom of Expression to strengthen global knowledge about the legal standards that protect the free flow of information and expression, from a gender perspective.

The paper is available in English here.