Limits on repression
Court bans use of rubber bullets at protests and requires São Paulo state government to establish a protocol to regulate military police action
The São Paulo justice system banned yesterday, October 19, the use of less-lethal weapons, such as rubber bullets and tear gas, by the military police to break up protests.
The ruling also requires the São Paulo state government, within 30 days, to draft a protocol on police action that regulates the use of force, in order to guarantee the right to assembly and peaceful protest.
Furthermore, it sentences the São Paulo government to pay R$8 million in collective moral damages for the “disproportionate violence employed by the Military Police” in eight protests staged in 2013. The amount will be allocated to a state fund for the protection of human rights.
The ruling was made by Judge Valentino Aparecido de Andrade, of the 10th Public Finance Court, in a Public Civil Action filed by the São Paulo Public Defender’s Office on account of the disproportionate use of force by the police during the mass protests in June 2013. In the case, the Public Defender’s Office requested that the military police not use firearms or rubber bullets, that all officers wear visible identification, that clear conditions are established for issuing dispersal orders and that such orders are only given in extreme cases.
This is the second time that the court has ruled in favor of the Public Defender’s Office and the human rights organizations challenging the excessive use of force by military police at protests. In 2014, the same judge granted a preliminary injunction in the case that was later overturned by the São Paulo State Court of Appeals.
The ruling represents a turnaround in the case. Just one day before, on October 18, two appellate judges who were supposed to be considering the injunction instead voted for the suspension of the Public Civil Action, but a request for adjournment by the third appellate judge interrupted the judgement. This latest ruling annuls the examination of the injunction by the judges. However, it will be automatically submitted to the Court of Appeals for review.
In his ruling, Judge Andrade said he saw no incompatibility between the role of the military police to maintain order and publicly releasing protocols that place limits on the use of less-lethal weapons.
“The military police should obviously be prepared to respond to popular protests. But responding does necessarily mean dispersing. Responding should mean maintaining public order, but also working towards the goal of guaranteeing the right to assembly and to protest. Naturally the use of firearms or rubber bullets by the police results in ill-prepared police officers responding with too much violence,” said the judge.
According to Rafael Custódio, coordinator of the Justice program at Conectas, the ruling is historic and sends a clear message to the military police and the São Paulo state government: “The state security forces do not have carte blanche to violate rights.”
“The role of the military police at demonstrations is to preserve the constitutional right to assembly and to protest, isolating any excesses by demonstrators, but never dispersing the whole protest,” said Custódio. “Unfortunately, what we have observed has always been an arbitrary and disproportionate approach to the use of force to intimidate and to break up protests, always on the grounds of vandalism, but we all know that it is directed at one end of the political spectrum and not the other.”
“We hope that, based on this ruling, the state government will finally agree to engage in dialogue with society, presenting clear protocols on how the police should act and combating abuses. And that scenes of violence, such as journalists and demonstrators being blinded by the police, will become a thing of the past,” he added.
Conectas has been involved in the case as an amicus curiae since 2014, when it presented the judge with international standards on the use of force by the police, particularly in the context of public demonstrations.
>>> Click here to read the ruling in full
Chronology
08/05/13 – Conectas and the Citizenship and Human Rights Center of the São Paulo Public Defender’s Office submit to the São Paulo State Public Security Department a series of recommendations on how the police should act in demonstrations. No response was ever given.
04/22/14 – The São Paulo Public Defender’s Office files a Public Civil Action asking the courts to compel the State of São Paulo to adopt these recommendations. The case is pending in the 10th Public Finance Court.
07/17/14 – Conectas presents an amicus curiae brief with an overview of the main international standards that regulate police conduct and alleges that the state of São Paulo fails to comply with provisions of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (of the UN) and the American Convention on Human Rights (of the OAS).
10/24/14 – Judge Valentino Aparecido de Andrade, of the 10th Public Finance Court, grants a preliminary injunction.
11/05/14 – Responding to a request from the São Paulo State Public Finance Department, Appellate Judge Ronaldo Andrade suspends the injunction.
01/13/15 – Article 19 presents an amicus curiae brief supporting the initial request of the Public Defender’s Office.
04/12/16 – Appellate Judge Maurício Fiorito, the reporting judge in the case, requests an adjournment of the case.
10/18/16 – Appellate Judge Maurício Fiorito requests the suspension of the Public Civil Action, invalidating the judgement on whether to reject or accept the injunction.
10/19/2016 – Judge Valentino Aparecido de Andrade, of the 10th Public Finance Court, issues a ruling banning the use of less-lethal weapons by the military police to disperse protests, ordering the São Paulo state government to draft a protocol that regulates the use of force within 30 days and sentencing the state to pay R$8 million in collective moral damages.
