Colombian Court Orders Meta to Revise Instagram Policies

Colombia's Constitutional Court has recently delivered a landmark decision that could have far-reaching implications for social media users and platforms across the world. On Friday, the court ruled that Meta, the company that owns Instagram, Facebook, and WhatsApp, must revise its privacy policies and rules because it violated the freedom of expression of a well-known adult content creator. This decision comes after Meta closed the Instagram account of Esperanza Gomez, one of Colombia’s most famous porn actresses.

The ruling has sparked discussions about how social media platforms enforce their policies, the rights of content creators, and the responsibility of big tech companies in respecting freedom of expression.

Stay informed with the latest news. Follow DXB News Network on WhatsApp Channel 

Who is Esperanza Gomez?

Esperanza Gomez is one of Colombia’s most recognized adult content performers. She has built a large following online, with more than 5 million followers on Instagram. Her work involves posting photographs and videos as part of her professional career in the adult entertainment industry.

According to Gomez, posting pictures in her underwear or other professional content is part of her job. She argued that Meta’s decision to close her account directly affected her ability to earn a living. Furthermore, she claimed that the company did not provide a clear explanation for why her account was shut down.

Meta’s Reason for Closing the Account

Meta, the parent company of Instagram, stated that Gomez’s account was removed because she violated its rules regarding nudity and sexual content. Social media platforms like Instagram have strict community guidelines that restrict content showing nudity or sexual services.

However, the issue arose because the rules were not applied consistently. The court noted that many other Instagram accounts shared content similar to Gomez’s but remained active on the platform. This inconsistent application of rules raised questions about fairness and impartiality.

The Court’s Ruling

The Constitutional Court of Colombia called Meta’s actions “arbitrary” and stated that the closure of Gomez’s account “illegitimately restricted her freedom of expression.” The court emphasized that social media platforms, despite being private companies, must respect users’ fundamental rights, including freedom of speech.

In its ruling, the court highlighted the following points:

1. Inconsistent Policy Enforcement: The court observed that Meta did not apply its rules equally. While Gomez’s account was removed, other accounts with similar content continued to operate, which showed inconsistency in policy enforcement.

2. Lack of Transparency: Users were not clearly informed about how they could challenge moderation decisions. Gomez was left without guidance on how to appeal or explain her case, which the court saw as a violation of user rights.

3. Need for Policy Revision: Meta was ordered to review and adjust Instagram’s terms of use and privacy policies. The court stressed that users must clearly understand how to contest decisions that affect their accounts.

Interestingly, the ruling did not specify what penalties Meta would face if it failed to comply. Instead, it focused on ensuring that Instagram’s policies are clear, fair, and transparent.

Why This Case Matters

This case is significant for several reasons. First, it addresses the balance between a private company’s right to enforce rules and a user’s right to freedom of expression. Social media platforms operate globally and often enforce rules based on automated systems, which can sometimes lead to unfair or inconsistent decisions.

Second, this ruling underscores the growing power of courts in South America to influence social media operations. By holding Meta accountable, the Colombian court has sent a message that even large tech companies must respect legal rights and ensure fairness in content moderation.

Lastly, it highlights the challenges adult content creators face online. Many creators rely on platforms like Instagram for their livelihood, and sudden account closures can significantly impact their income and professional reputation.

Comparison with Other South American Courts

Colombia is not the first South American country to take legal action against big tech companies over user rights. In June 2025, Brazil’s Supreme Court issued a ruling that social media companies are directly responsible for illegal content on their platforms, including hate speech. The court ordered social media companies to remove such content immediately, holding them accountable for failure to act.

These rulings indicate a broader trend in the region where courts are increasingly asserting the importance of protecting individual rights on digital platforms.

Meta’s Response

As of now, Meta has not provided a public response to the court’s decision. Typically, tech companies may take time to review rulings and determine how to adjust their policies. It is likely that Meta will analyze the court’s instructions carefully to avoid future legal challenges.

What This Means for Instagram Users

For Instagram users, the ruling could lead to several positive changes:

• Clear Guidelines: Users will be able to see exactly what is allowed and what is not, reducing confusion about rules and restrictions.

• Appeal Mechanisms: People will have clearer options to challenge account suspensions or removals.

• Fair Treatment: Consistency in enforcing policies may improve, ensuring similar accounts are treated equally.

Expert Opinions

Legal experts say this ruling could become a reference point for future cases involving social media and freedom of expression. They note that while platforms are private companies, they hold enormous influence over public communication. Courts may increasingly expect them to operate transparently and fairly.

Colombia’s Constitutional Court ruling against Meta is a landmark decision that highlights the tension between social media regulation and freedom of expression. By protecting the rights of Esperanza Gomez, the court has sent a clear message that users’ rights cannot be ignored, even by global tech giants.

While Meta has yet to respond, the ruling sets a precedent for how platforms must handle account closures and policy enforcement. Users can expect more clarity, transparency, and fairness in the way social media platforms moderate content in the future.

As social media continues to shape communication and work opportunities, decisions like this one are likely to influence similar cases worldwide. For content creators, the ruling is a reminder of the importance of legal protections and the growing recognition of their rights in the digital age.