Access to justice in the digital Age: Our contributions to the IACHR

The Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (IACHR) conducted a public questionnaire titled: “Women’s Access to Justice in Cases of Violence and Discrimination: A study of the situation in the Americas and the Caribbean”. This initiative, led and systematized by the regional organization Derechos Digitales, covered cases from Bolivia, Paraguay and Peru. In Paraguay, TEDIC was responsible for the systematization of national cases, contributing insights and findings on the relationship between technology and gender in access to justice.

Access to justice for victims of gender-based violence facilitated by technology

The situation in Latin America regarding access to justice and the attention given to cases of gender-based violence—especially those facilitated by technology—reveals both progress and persistent challenges. In countries such as Peru and Paraguay, a variety of institutional pathways exist through which victims can file complaints and activate protection measures in the administrative, criminal, civil and constitutional spheres. This multiplicity of pathways, which in theory should broaden the possibilities for agile and gender-sensitive justice, stands in stark contrast to the case of Bolivia, where the criminal justice system remains the primary—and in many cases, the only—available route to address this type of violence.

However, the existence of multiple mechanisms does not guarantee their effectiveness or real accessibility. In practice, many of these pathways prove hostile, confusing and nresponsive to the needs of women and gender-diverse individuals seeking protection. The lack of clear, accessible and standardized information about available procedures constitutes a significant barrier, especially in contexts where there are no sustained information campaigns or materials in inclusive formats or in indigenous languages.

This problem is clearly reflected in Paraguay, where documented cases show that certain courts require a prior police report in order to proceed with protection measures, despite the fact that current regulations do not mandate this. Similar situations are seen in other countries in the region, such as Brazil, where high levels of underreporting of non-consensual disclosure of intimate images persist, partly due to institutional obstacles and the justice system’s lack of preparedness to address these cases from a comprehensive perspective.

Access to justice and comprehensive support for victims

While the analyzed countries have made progress in implementing judicial resources and support services for victims of violence, the existing capacity remains insufficient to provide adequate and specialized responses. In Peru, for example, there is a significant disparity between the Public Defender’s Office for victims and the Criminal Defense for accused individuals, resulting in unequal access to justice. In addition, only a portion of the personnel has specific training in technology-facilitated gender-based violence, limiting the understanding and comprehensive approach to these cases.

In Brazil, although the Maria da Penha Law provides for access to support services for victims of gender-based violence, it does not explicitly address technology-facilitated violence, thus leaving many affected individuals in a vulnerable situation and at the mercy of institutional discretion.

In contrast, Mexico City has been highlighted as an example of good practice with the implementation of the Olimpia Law, which incorporates comprehensive support mechanisms for victims of digital violence. However, even with these types of normative advancements, it is essential that support services not only exist on paper, but are effectively accessible, specialized and sensitive to the diverse realities of the victims. Otherwise, they run the risk of becoming empty formalities, incapable of responding to the urgency and complexity of the violence they seek to address.

Protection measures and barriers to reporting

Although the legislation in many countries provides for the possibility of requesting protection measures through non-criminal channels, in practice, these measures are often generic, with arbitrary deadlines and no clear criteria for their renewal. This fragility becomes even more evident in cases of technology-facilitated gender-based violence, where the absence of specialized protocols prevents agile and effective responses, such as the immediate removal of intimate content shared without consent.

Added to this are the multiple barriers victims face: lack of knowledge about their rights, limited access to information on available mechanisms, fear of reprisals and a widespread perception that the judicial system is slow, revictimizing and unreliable. In this context, many affected individuals turn to remedies such as constitutional protection, which, while it may offer swift responses, does not address the structural causes or guarantee comprehensive reparation.

These obstacles are exacerbated by the limited understanding many judicial system operators have of digital and technological dynamics, resulting in processes that are often insensitive, slow, and ineffective in adequately protecting and providing reparation to victims.

Legal recognition, transparent data and the role of civil society

One of the main challenges in Latin America is the lack of specific legal recognition of technology-facilitated gender-based violence. This legal gap leads to statistical invisibility: without clear categorization, cases are recorded under broad and generic categories, making it difficult to identify, monitor and analyze them in a differentiated manner. This situation hinders the design of evidence-based public policies and limits the state’s ability to implement appropriate responses.

Added to this is the lack of standardized indicators and the opacity of data provision by digital platforms, which restricts the capacity of both states and civil society to monitor the phenomenon, demand accountability and build coordinated responses.

In this scenario, the role of civil society is fundamental. Feminist organizations and collectives have taken on the task of filling information gaps through qualitative methodologies—such as focus groups—that not only offer closer support to victims but also generate valuable input for political advocacy and the development of more sensitive legal frameworks.

Effective integration between these citizen initiatives and state institutions is key to transforming the approach to gender-based violence in the region. Punitive responses are not enough: it is urgent to move towards a comprehensive care model that guarantees real reparation, effective protection and full access to justice.

Only through an articulated approach—combining the expansion of access pathways to justice, the training of judicial operators, the implementation of protection measures The need for evidence-based public policies on TFGBVThe need for evidence-based public policies on TFGBVThe need for evidence-based public policies on TFGBVThe need for evidence-based public policies on TFGBVadapted to the digital environment and the systematic collection of data from an inclusive and situated perspective—will it be possible to overcome the structural barriers that prevent women and LGBTIQA+ individuals from accessing effective justice in the digital age.

The need for evidence-based public policies on TFGBV

The absence of standardized indicators in national surveys and in criminal and administrative statistics hinders a clear and comparative understanding of TFGBV in the region. Despite the existence of partial records on other forms of gender-based violence, few countries systematically collect and disaggregate data, which limits the ability to measure the problem and guide evidence-based prevention strategies. In addition, technology companies do not publish transparent gender-disaggregated information on complaints on their platforms, which severely limits the ability to monitor, hold accountable and evaluate the effectiveness of content moderation mechanisms. This opacity contributes to a lack of accountability and the invisibility of the specific experiences of women and people from historically marginalized communities, such as Indigenous peoples, Afro-descendants, persons with disabilities and members of the LGBTQIA+ community.

Another significant challenge is the deficit in appropriate methodologies and the low level of institutionalized monitoring of TFGBV. The available statistics are often fragmented and discontinuous, and in many cases, they are produced by civil society organizations instead of the State. For example, in Paraguay, TEDIC’s research has demonstrated that the quantitative instruments employed by public institutions often presuppose that respondents have prior knowledge about technology-facilitated violence, leading to the underrepresentation of cases. In Peru, the collection of information on this phenomenon is fragmented and disjointed, as illustrated by the shortcomings of the “No to Virtual Harassment” platform. For a time, it served as the only official channel for collecting statistics on TFGBV, but it lacked clear guidance and institutional support. Currently, there is no national survey or integrated database to assess the prevalence of this form of violence.

In the face of state inaction or inadequacy, the role of civil society has become essential in generating data, providing guidance, and supporting victims. In Bolivia, for example, Fundación InternetBolivia.org, through its S.O.S. Digital Center, is the only source that systematically collects data on TFGBV and publishes periodic reports on online gender-based political violence. Similarly, in Paraguay, TEDIC conducts monitoring, supports strategic litigation and produces research that complements the limited official information.

To reverse this scenario, it is crucial to legally recognize TFGBV as a specific form of gender-based violence, enabling its proper registration, visibility, and institutional response. Likewise, it is necessary to include questions about TFGBV in national victimization surveys and official databases, using both quantitative and qualitative approaches that do not rely on victims’ prior knowledge.

Furthermore, the institutionalization of public, transparent, and inter-institutional monitoring systems is recommended. These systems should incorporate a gender and intersectional approach in data collection and strengthen collaboration with civil society organizations, recognizing their experience in supporting victims and generating valuable knowledge for the design, implementation and evaluation of public policies in this area.

Contribution on technology-facilitated gender-based violence (TFGBV) in Paraguay

In Paraguay, Law No. 5777/16, known as the “Comprehensive Law for the Protection of Women against all forms of violence” introduces the concept of “telematic violence,” defined as violence carried out through technological means with the aim of affecting women’s integrity, dignity, privacy and safety. However, this legal approach is largely limited to the non-consensual dissemination of intimate images, neglecting a more comprehensive response to technology-facilitated gender-based violence.

This limitation results in significant challenges for victims trying to access justice. In practice, women must go to the Justice of the Peace Courts¹ to file complaints, which presents multiple obstacles. Among them is the undue requirement to present a police report as a prerequisite, despite the fact that the law does not mandate it, adding to bureaucratic delays and increasing victims’ exposure to risk. Furthermore, the restricted operating hours—often ending at 1:00 PM—mean that complaints submitted outside this timeframe cannot be processed, leaving many women without a timely response. Additionally, delays in service and in the issuance of police documents further hinder judicial proceedings and negatively impact victim protection.

Regarding the non-consensual dissemination of intimate images, a 2021 research by TEDIC showed that victims predominantly choose to resort to a constitutional amparo (a legal action for the protection of constitutional rights) rather than follow traditional criminal routes. This preference stems from the speed and effectiveness of amparo in halting the circulation of the material, which is crucial in cases of online violence. The study findings identified the need to strengthen inter-institutional coordination and to specifically train legal professionals to understand and adequately address technology-facilitated violence.

The analysis of rulings revealed a recurring pattern: most victims opt for the constitutional remedy of constitutional amparo instead of pursuing criminal, administrative or civil remedies. This is because the protection offers a quick response to halt the circulation of the material, while traditional processes are perceived as slow, costly and ineffective. Moreover, most of the actions provided by the penal code are private in terms of legal action. At the same time, systemic barriers that hinder access to justice persist, such as social stigma, revictimization and the lack of swift institutional responses. These factors create a scenario in which victims face additional obstacles to obtaining effective protection.

There is also a clear lack of knowledge about how Law 5777/16 is applied, which contributes to this situation. As a result, people often turn mainly to the legal remedy of constitutional amparo without considering other available legal tools. Moreover, the lack of accurate records on these cases prevents an assessment of the real extent of the problem and the effectiveness of institutional responses. Improving data collection and analysis systems, along with training legal operators, is key to advancing towards an approach that prioritizes the rights of victims and offers mechanisms tailored to their needs. To address these deficiencies, it is recommended to review the measures granted and ensure that they are suitable for the reality of each victim.

Additionally, it is imperative to review and adapt protection measures, as in practice these often have an arbitrary duration—frequently 90 days—and are not renewed according to the real needs of the victim, leaving a gap in long-term protection. Finally, the importance of increasing awareness and dissemination about the application of the law is emphasized, so that victims know all the legal instruments available and can access them effectively, thus avoiding revictimization and ensuring a more comprehensive judicial response aligned with the reality of digital violence.

Advances and challenges in the administration of justice in TFGBV cases

In Paraguay, the justice system’s response to gender-based violence—including technology-facilitated forms—has seen important institutional progress, but still faces structural challenges, particularly the improper and punitive application of Law 5777/16. This legal framework, which is meant to protect victims, is often applied in ways that go against its intended purpose and lacks specific procedural guidelines for technology-facilitated gender-based violence, resulting in inconsistent judicial responses that vary depending on the victim’s profile.

Belén Whittingslow case: A milestone in the fight against TFGBV

One of the most emblematic cases is that of Belén Whittingslow, which clearly illustrates the shortcomings of the system. Since 2013, Belén suffered systematic sexual harassment via WhatsApp by her teacher, Cristian Kriskovich, with evidence of over 1,600 messages and images. In 2021, TEDIC and CEJIL filed a petition before the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (IACHR) denouncing the lack ofaccess to justice, gender discrimination and serious procedural irregularities.

The judicial process was criticized for:

• The actions of prosecutors who lacked a gender perspective, describing the events as “flirting or courtship,” ignoring the power imbalance of the perpetrator and the victim’s explicit refusal.
• The revictimization of Belén, who was also unjustly implicated in criminal proceedings over alleged irregularities unrelated to the harassment situation.
• The use of a biased analysis regarding consent, which reinforces stereotypes and makes it harder to hold the aggressor accountable.

This case, currently in the admissibility stage before the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (IACHR), sets an important precedent. It highlights how institutional bias and the lack of specific protocols for TFGBV enable impunity and secondary victimization.

Distortion in the implementation of Law 5777/16 by Justice of the Peace Courts

Research by TEDIC, in collaboration with CELE, has documented other cases where Law 5777/16 was misused to censor and control speech. Since 2023, several Justice of the Peace Courts have issued controversial rulings, particularly in cases where female public officials and the wives of politicians have alleged online violence stemming from publications by critical journalists. Examples include:

• The case of Mabel Portillo, censored for denouncing the municipal management of a mayor.
• The situation of Alfredo Guachiré, forced to remove an article about irregularities in the e State Company of Sanitary Services of Paraguay S.A (ESSAP)
• Restrictions imposed on publications by figures such as Christian Chena and Letizia Medina.

In these cases, judges have relied on subsection F of procedural law 1600/00 to order measures that, while intended to keep the aggressor away, have also been used to censor the exercise of freedom of expression, affecting journalists and critics. This practice raises concerns about the compatibility of such measures with constitutional and international principles.

Another positive example: the case of Menchi Barriocanal

In contrast to the cases of revictimization, the legal process undertaken by journalist Mercedes Barriocanal, known as Menchi, stands out.

In December 2022, after receiving attacks and the illegal dissemination of her telephone number on a Facebook page—an action classified as doxxing—Menchi reported the violation of Law 5777. Her lawyer provided evidence such as screenshots and telephone numbers, which led the Justice of the Peace Court to order:

• Protective measures against psychological and online violence.
• The prohibition of disseminating her personal data and that of her family.
• The referral of the case to the National Police and the Prosecutor’s Office to investigate those responsible.

The harassment began after Menchi strongly criticized the Chamber of Deputies’ decision to approve a bill repealing Law 6659, which impacted the educational system of Paraguay. The dissemination of her phone number was an act of doxxing, a form of TFGBV aimed at harassing and undermining the victim through the non-consensual publication of sensitive personal data. Following this incident, Menchi filed a private criminal complaint for “Violation of Privacy,” accusing Juan Vera—the person responsible for the disclosure—of infringing upon her rights. In May 2023, the court found Vera guilty and sentenced him to pay a fine.

In August 2024, the Supreme Court upheld this conviction, affirming the sentence and underscoring the importance of protecting privacy and personal rights against the non-consensual disclosure of private data. This case demonstrates a timely response by the Paraguayan state to TFGBV. Immediate measures were taken to protect the journalist and the necessary mechanisms were activated to investigate those responsible. This effective intervention highlighted the capacity of the judicial system to ensure the safety of victims of gender-based violence. However, the fact that the victim is a high-profile journalist means her case received significantly more public—and possibly institutional—attention.

As can be seen, victims of TFGBV face significant obstacles in accessing justice, with many cases dismissed simply because they occur exclusively in the digital realm, are not considered violent, or are assumed to lack psychological consequences, as was evident in the case of Belén Whittingslow. Moreover, the majority of legal actions are private, and the Justice of the Peace Courts, which constitute the weakest link in the judicial system, lack the adequate capacity to address cases of TFGBV. In some cases, they even favor political figures who avoid being investigated for corruption, which highlights the lack of focus and will of the State to effectively prevent gender-based violence.

Institutional progress and good practices

Among the institutional advancements is the creation of the Inter-institutional Roundtable for the Prevention of Violence against Women (PREVIM). Composed of 17 public institutions and two civil society organizations (TEDIC and CDIA), and led by the Ministry of Women, this roundtable has been meeting periodically since 2018 to coordinate actions, evaluate progress, and develop public policies that prevent gender-based violence.

Additionally, MITIC and the Ministry of Women are implementing the Unified Reporting System for Violence Against Women, with contributions and ongoing monitoring also from the PREVIM Roundtable. This technological tool aims to connect Justice of the Peace Courts, police stations, prosecutor’s offices, and specialized services, ensuring rapid and coordinated responses that facilitate access to justice and prevent the revictimization of women.

Alternative non-punitive justice mechanisms

In Paraguay, various human rights organizations and networks have promoted non-punitive justice mechanisms aimed at strengthening the protection of victims, facilitating their access to justice and achieving comprehensive reparation. Among the main challenges and good practices observed, the following stand out:

Efforts by organizations and networks:

• Human Rights Coordinator of Paraguay: Composed of 39 networks and civil society organizations, CODEHUPY works in the defense and promotion of fundamental human rights, demanding that the State comply with the frameworks, commitments, and international legal instruments related to the human rights perspective. Regarding gender-based violence in general and TFGBV in particular, CODEHUPY has issued joint statements, conducted research, analyzed regulatory frameworks and published annual reports that compile and examine specific cases. In doing so, it highlights the weaknesses of democratic institutions and access to justice and urges the State to establish protection measures and effective legal avenues for victims.
• Documentation and Studies Center (CDE): An NGO with a specialized Women’s Area dedicated to the defense and promotion of women’s rights. Through concrete actions such as pronouncements and legislative and press monitoring, they systematize information on gender-based violence in Paraguay, denouncing the inadequacy of the legal and protection systems to guarantee and ensure the fulfillment of women’s rights.
• TEDIC: An NGO that works in the defense and promotion of human rights in digital contexts with a gender and intersectional approach. Consequently, it has developed a significant research and advocacy agenda—including strategic litigation, investigations, public awareness efforts,and training—on TFGBV, helping to highlight the importance of this growing and multifaceted issue in the country.
• Feminist Legal Clinic (CJF): composed of a team of legal professionals who provide legal guidance to women whose rights have been violated. Most of the cases they handle are related to some type of violence against women.
• Aireana and its Rohendu telephone hotline: focuses on the fight for the rights of LGBTQI+ people. Rohendu, in particular, is a free telephone hotline service for reporting cases of violence motivated by sexual orientation, gender identity and gender expression.
• Journalists’ Union of Paraguay (SPP) The SPP defends the rights and interests of journalists and press workers in Paraguay, promoting the safe exercise of the profession. Among the most recurrent reports of TFGBV are harassment, cyberbullying and threats via social media. In 2018, they submitted the case of Noelia Díaz Esquivel to the IACHR , after she received threats on social media for publicly speaking out about a femicide in Asunción.
• Network of Women Journalists and Communicators of Paraguay: an online group made up of 88 women journalists from across the country. This network seeks to transform discriminatory media coverage of violence against women and promote communication grounded in human rights, gender and feminist perspectives. To achieve this, they promote campaigns, issue statements, and engage in political advocacy.

Access to justice and appropriate responses to cases of TFGBV in Latin America remain an ongoing struggle. TEDIC will continue to advocate for justice and women’s rights through strategic litigation, research, public awareness and training on TFGBV, helping to highlight the importance of this growing and multifaceted issue both nationally and regionally.

This publication has been funded by the European Union. Its content is the sole responsibility of TEDIC and does not necessarily reflect the views of the European Union.

1 Los Juzgados de Paz son competentes para entender en los juicios cuyo monto o cuantía no supere los 300 jornales (equivalen a la fecha la suma de USD 3500), cuando el litigio tenga un valor superior a dicho monto será competente el Juzgado de Primera Instancia.