New law, old tactic
Anti-terrorism bill is the subject of debate between civil society representatives and legal experts
If the anti-terrorism bill (Bill 2016/2015) is approved by Congress and signed into law by the president, the old tactic of criminalizing social movements and organizations, the effects of which are still with us, will advance even more aggressively. This is the conclusion of the experts and activists who participated in the Conectas Culture Dialogue on Monday, September 14, in São Paulo.
“We already have numerous mechanisms that severely criminalize social movements and organizations. But this law will be a weapon in the hands of those who want to put an end once and for all to these initiatives,” said Judge Alberto Alonso Muñoz of AJD (Association of Judges for Democracy).
Citing one article of the bill, Muñoz explained that any organization that attempts to pressure public authorities into taking a decision will fall under the jurisdiction of the new law. According to the judge, the text of the bill allows demonstrations and other political protests to be classified as crimes of terrorism. “The bill was not created to criminalize social movements, but if approved it will immediately be used for this purpose,” he stressed.
Besides violating the right to protest, the bill has the added downside of increasing minimum sentences to eight years in prison, said Lisa Gunn of Greenpeace.
The environmentalist also drew attention to the fact that the only paragraph of the law that is supposedly intended to protect civil society from being unjustly punished does not recognize those who defend “new” rights. “What happens when you are fighting for a right that has not yet been recognized?” she questioned.
For Agnes Caroline of MTST (Homeless Workers Movement), the movements that will be affected by the new terrorism law are those that already suffer under democracy. Caroline also stated that the fact that the text is ambiguous and imprecise gives more power and legitimacy to the judges and the police, who have historically operated with a conservative and discriminatory mindset.
See the full debate:
