Court victory defending freedom of expression and public oversight of prison conditions

San Juan, P.R. - A judge from the Court of First Instance (TPI) in Ponce dismissed a claim for a preliminary injunction and declaratory judgment filed by Carolina Catering Corp. against Defensoría de los Derechos Carcelarios, Inc. (DDC)—a significant victory recognizing the fundamental right to freedom of speech and the press, the ACLU of Puerto Rico announced on Wednesday.

"Freedom of the press and freedom of speech do not exist solely to protect comfortable speech or speech that generates no controversy. They exist precisely to ensure that people can speak out, question, and scrutinize matters affecting the public interest without facing the threat of being silenced by a court order," stated attorney Fermín Arraiza Navas, Legal Director of the ACLU of Puerto Rico, the organization representing DDC. "We welcome this decision, which reaffirms a principle indispensable to any democratic society," he added.

In a Partial Judgment issued on October 5, Judge Hamed Santaella Carlo concluded that the injunctive relief sought by Carolina Catering ran counter to constitutional protections and warned of the chilling effect such an order could have on media outlets, the press, and the general public.

The dispute arose after DDC published allegations on social media regarding the food service provided to incarcerated individuals in Puerto Rico's correctional facilities. On July 15, Carolina Catering—a company contracted by the Department of Correction and Rehabilitation (DCR) to provide food services in prisons—filed a lawsuit alleging defamation, damages, and other claims against DDC and its president, Dallie Cruz Ruiz. Cruz Ruiz is represented by the Legal Aid Clinic of the Inter American University of Puerto Rico School of Law.

“Silencing those who document or report potential irregularities in prisons would have consequences extending far beyond any single publication, as it would hinder the country’s ability to know what occurs inside our correctional institutions,” stated Rafael Rodríguez Rivera, Director of the Clinic. “Prisons are not a business. How we treat the incarcerated population speaks volumes about our level of societal development, and that treatment—whether by the State or its contractors—is subject to public oversight,” he said.

In addition to seeking at least one million dollars in economic and reputational damages, Carolina Catering asked the Court to order a halt to the publication and dissemination of the contested content, its removal from digital platforms, and the issuance of a public retraction.

The ACLU of Puerto Rico appeared on behalf of DDC and moved to dismiss that second cause of action. DDC’s defense argued that the requested remedies constituted a form of prior restraint incompatible with constitutional protections for freedom of speech. They further argued that imposing such measures would have consequences extending beyond the immediate parties to the case—specifically regarding the ability to report on and scrutinize the conditions faced by incarcerated individuals, a highly vulnerable population.

Food and living conditions within correctional institutions are matters of significant public interest. In its motion, the ACLU specifically highlighted that the nutrition of incarcerated individuals concerns a particularly vulnerable population and noted that publishing reports on public matters can help ensure that situations requiring correction are addressed.

The Court held that there is a public interest in protecting the right of citizens to express their opinions without facing threats to their liberty for exercising that right. Furthermore, it warned that allowing prior restraint could create a “chilling effect” on the media, the press, and the general public.

For the ACLU of Puerto Rico, this protection is especially important when scrutinizing institutions that are closed to everyday public oversight. Individuals deprived of their liberty rely heavily on family members, human rights organizations, journalists, and other external voices to bring their complaints regarding food, healthcare, safety, and confinement conditions to public attention.

The Court further determined that Carolina Catering has an adequate legal remedy available to continue litigating its claims through standard damages proceedings. According to the ruling, the damages claimed by the company do not justify the extraordinary remedies requested. Consequently, it dismissed the cause of action for a preliminary injunction and declaratory judgment. The litigation will now proceed via ordinary judicial proceedings.

You can view the case documents and updates at this link.