Harming others does not justify censorship. Brazilians get to answer and to be made whole via legal means. Article 5, term V. They don't get to preempt or preve

Harming others does not justify censorship. Brazilians get to answer and to be made whole via legal means. Article 5, term V. They don't get to preempt or prevent the speech. You cited term X which says people's intimacy, private life, honor and image are inviolable. Looks like you didn't finish reading it though. Right after those words is written the following: > the right to be indemnified for the material or moral damage secondary to their violation is guaranteed It basically says you're entitled to a payday if someone damages your privacy or reputation. Nowhere does it say that censorship is warranted. The constitution goes out of its way to explicitly mention that censorship is prohibited multiple times and in multiple places. > The expression of intellectual, artistic, scientific and communication activity is free, independently of censorship or license > Any and all censorship of political, ideological or artistic nature is prohibited