Luis Villa, known as
Westcol
, is not just any
influencer
.
At 23 years old, he has 2.2 million followers on Instagram, 1.4 million on Twitch, 652,000 on YouTube and 554,000 on Twitter.
The pandemic, confinement and the decision to show his video game games on social networks made him go from a life of deprivation in the impoverished neighborhoods of Medellín to enjoying luxury cars and stadiums that fill up to see him.
And now, at the peak of his fame, he has become an example of how influencers
also
have limits.
His violence against the trans and homosexual population has clashed with the Constitutional Court, which has ordered him to disseminate content about the damage caused by discrimination and to attend a training course on human rights for LGBTI people.
The sentence, known last Friday, refers to the violence of a video that Westcol published on YouTube in September 2022. First of all, the
influencer
incited hatred against the homosexual population by explaining what he would do if a son brought a partner from same gender to your house.
“If he likes being fucked in the ass so much, I'll make another 17 holes for him to be fucked there.
(...) Oh, daddy, I'll shoot him dead, guy, don't let him come here and screw up my life.
(...) Let them do their faggots, but away from me,” he remarked.
Then he attacked transsexuals.
“Now, if my son comes out as trans, [it is] very different what my reaction would be: obviously my reaction will be to support him... to support him against a wall, to stick a stick up his ass so that he can see that that is not good.” , He said.
The statements did not generate a major media stir until March 2023. Then, the
influencer
apologized in a video on Instagram in which he assured that he had learned to empathize with LGBTI people after receiving messages from his friends and family.
“Suppose there is a little friend who tries to come out of the closet every day.
It must be very frustrating not being able to express yourself (...) and then after that some guy comes along and makes a joke and throws it into the background,” he said.
However, he sought to justify himself by saying that for him and his followers “making dark and heavy jokes is very normal” and that he had grown up in a neighborhood in which the values that “other people have” were not instilled in him.
“I am a person who became famous out of nowhere and does not mince his words (…).
“I'm a little guy, don't give me so much importance,” he concluded.
The lawyer and activist José Francisco Montufar saw the video in those days and filed a protection action in which he requested that all Westcol accounts be closed.
The first instance dismissed the lawsuit because Montufar had allegedly not previously asked YouTube to remove the video, something that he had done and of which he later provided evidence.
The second court, meanwhile, considered that other judicial means were appropriate and not guardianship, which can only be used when there are no other legal mechanisms to protect a fundamental right.
The Constitutional Court, however, overturned the two previous rulings.
He also explained that it is not relevant that the video had been deleted at the end of 2023: the damage caused was too great and must be compensated.
The ruling reiterates the position of the high court that it must be considered that the LGBTI population has suffered historical marginalization in Colombia.
"We cannot lose sight of the fact that the notion of 'normality' to define the roles of the masculine and the feminine based on purely biological gender characteristics, resulted in the exclusion from society of homosexual and transgender people, whom “He has been subjected to multiple abuses,” the ruling reads.
“As a consequence of this marginality, the Court has recognized the need to apply reinforced protection to them from a constitutional point of view,” adds the argument, which mentions that the NGO Caribe Afirmativo counted 1,314 cases of discrimination in 2022 and especially emphasizes the vulnerability of the trans population.
Trans people demonstrate in a march led by the Trans Community Network, in Bogotá, in July 2022.NATHALIA ANGARITA
The high court also considered that Westcol's apology was inadequate.
The presiding judge, the liberal Juan Carlos Cortés, explained that they had been spread on a different social network than the discriminatory comments and that the
influencer
kept the original video on his YouTube channel for several more months - it was only deleted by decision of the social network during the judicial process.
Likewise, the justifications about “jokes and black humor” were re-victimizing.
“This is a reproduction of discriminatory stereotypes based on prejudices, which encourage hatred and violence against the LGBTIQ+ population,” the ruling reads.
A specific injury
Manuel Páez, professor of Constitutional Law at the Externado University, points out that the ruling is novel because of the emphasis it places on the damage caused to the complainant and not only to the community as a whole.
“He recognizes that a 'reduction of empathy' for LGBTI people can result in the man, as an activist, being a victim of attacks and injuries,” he points out by video call.
That is important, according to Páez, because it makes it easier to demand compensation and counteract the objections that Colombian judges and other countries usually make about the absence of “a specific injury” in hate speech lawsuits.
“The ruling recognizes the specific damage that a general demonstration can cause to a specific person,” he adds.
Assistant Magistrate Diego Younes, who works with Cortés and participated in drafting the sentence, agrees that the case is important “because, starting from the rights of one person, it vindicates the rights of an entire community.”
He also comments that the Court has previous rulings on the limits of freedom of expression on social networks, but that it had not known until now "a case with similar speech and dissemination of such magnitude."
On the other hand, he clarifies that the court could not go so far as to satisfy the plaintiff's claim to close all Westcol accounts.
“It would be a kind of veto, which would be equivalent to prior censorship, prohibited by the Constitution,” he explains in writing.
Another central aspect is the recognition of the obligations that
influencers
have , according to Iván Jiménez, professor of Labor Law at the Javeriana University.
“Their responsibilities towards their public are not very different from those of the media, which have learned to live with requests for rectifications or corrections.
Influencers
also quickly reach the masses and must be subject to control,” the expert emphasizes in a video call
.
“The underlying message is: 'You want all the good things about social media, but you also have to take responsibility.'”
Wilson Castañeda, director of the NGO Caribe Affirmativo, thinks something similar.
“We have already had many rulings on protections for the LGBTI population in shopping centers or in traditional communication (radio, television or written press), but this time the Court gets involved in social networks and that makes perfect sense... there is an increase in violence on these platforms that ridicules the lives of LGBTI people and puts them at risk,” he says.
Likewise, Castañeda welcomes an
influencer
taking a course from the Ministry of Justice that can be similar to those already taken by employees of educational institutions and security in shopping centers.
However, he clarifies that “there are still no tools that allow us to measure how much the actions of those involved are changing.”
Westcol, for its part, has yet to comply with any of the ruling's orders — disseminate the ruling, publish anti-discrimination content and attend the course.
He limited himself to commenting last Friday that he had not yet been notified of the judicial decision and that he had only heard what the media reported, with which he has had recurring confrontations - several journalists have received threats from him or his followers in the media. last months-.
“I don't know if that's true or a lie because the newspapers and news programs have always talked a lot of shit about me.
They have invented too many things: they say that I am a misogynist, an abuser, a sexist, that I launder money,” he declared.
“I fixed this a while ago.
“I came out, spoke and asked for forgiveness because I understood that I had done something wrong,” he said.
Some of his followers, on his part, reacted violently and threatened journalists who covered the sentencing.
Claim to Youtube
The experts consulted agree in pointing out the importance of the Constitutional Court's claim to YouTube to guarantee “timely processing of complaints about hate speech or any other speech prohibited by constitutional and international regulations.”
Professor Manuel Páez believes that several questions arise about what this implies in Colombia's relationship with platforms that are difficult to regulate and monitor around the world.
“The message is that in Colombia your rights are protected even when they are violated by a North American company.
But what are they going to do now?
Is the Court going to become the YouTube police? ”He remarks.
Assistant Magistrate Diego Younes recognizes that it is a difficult issue and qualifies the impact of the high court's request.
He assures that this is a specific claim because in this case there was a violation of the company's own policies, which did not respond for months to the complainant's request to remove the video.
“This is not about control over the content of the platforms, but in this case the speech that is the subject of the action coincides with one of the community rules that allow the elimination of content,” he explains.
Subscribe here
to the EL PAÍS newsletter about Colombia and
here to the WhatsApp channel
, and receive all the key information on current events in the country.