Police oversight has gone awry in São Paulo, says Gabriel Sampaio
Two years after the start of Operation Shield, Conectas director highlights failures in police oversight and impunity amid rising lethality in São Paulo
In July 2025, it will be two years since the start of Operation Shield in the Baixada Santista. This action exposed the violent nature of public security policy in São Paulo and sparked panic in the municipalities of the region. Since then, residents of peripheral communities have been experiencing operations marked by a lack of transparency, abuse, home invasions, intimidation and summary executions.
Data published recently in the 2024 Brazilian Public Security Yearbook point to the gravity of the situation. In Santos and São Vicente, 66.1% of violent deaths were at the hands of the police, the highest rates in the state and among the highest in Brazil. These operations, which include the most lethal Military Police actions since the Carandiru massacre in 1992, are still leaving a trail of violence without accountability.
Although there are constant reports of human rights violations, the state authorities remain focused on military-style interventions and the indiscriminate use of force, hindering access to justice and bypassing accountability for the officers involved.
Read more
In partnership with local movements and organizations, Conectas has been monitoring the operations, reporting violations both nationally and internationally and calling for independent investigations. Ongoing police lethality and the lack of concrete responses underscore the urgent need to break away from security models based on armed confrontation and highlight the need for external oversight of the police and policies that prioritize rights and equality.
We spoke with the lawyer Gabriel Sampaio, Director of Litigation and Advocacy at Conectas, about the challenges of police lethality in São Paulo. He is leading reporting and advocacy efforts regarding police violence in Operation Shield and other operations and he shared his views on the steps needed to break the cycle of violence in the state.
Conectas: Over the past two years of Operations Shield and Summer, how do you see the increase in police lethality in the state of São Paulo and the current public security policies adopted by the government?
GS: The increase in police lethality in São Paulo and in repeated cases of human rights violations are a direct consequence of public security policy that has, from the outset, undermined policies for controlling police work and has reinforced the politicization of the use of force. Even before the two Operations, Conectas and other organizations in the field of human rights, together with the previous administration of the Police Ombudsman’s Office and the Public Defender’s Human Rights Unit, had warned that the proposals led by the current governor and Secretary of Public Security would lead to negative results. We have had to adopt concrete measures to prevent further setbacks, such as the body camera policy itself, as well as reporting to the various international human rights bodies.
Conectas: How do you see the stance of the Public Prosecutor’s Office in keeping so many investigations involving military police officers during Operation Shield archived, including cases where officers who were initially convicted of killings were later acquitted? What impact does this stance (or lack thereof) have on efforts to combat police impunity?
GS: The Public Prosecutor’s Office’s conduct has fallen short of our expectations, which reinforces criticisms previously levelled at it, at the time of the May Crimes (2006). Unfortunately, the institution has produced no results regarding external control of police work, either in terms of prevention or accountability. Cases dismissed on the grounds of self-defense should be reviewed, particularly because, in our view, recognition of grounds for exclusion of criminal liability, especially for police operations with indications of human rights violations, should not be granted so early on. Nor should this occur without the scrutiny of legal proceedings and the presentation of evidence before the justice system, subject to the guarantees of the basic protocols for evidence collection. Given this scenario, there is a need to demand that the institution provide a more effective response and more robust, results-driven institutional policy for external oversight of police work.
Conectas: Has there been any actual progress in seeking justice and reparation for the victims and the families affected by Operation Shield, during this period? As a lawyer at Conectas, what tangible results could you highlight from your dialogue and work with the families?
GS: In terms of progress, we can highlight the work carried out by the São Paulo State Public Defender’s Office, led by the Human Rights Unit, which reinforces the role of Rede Apoia. This initiative should be bolstered, and its scope widened.
Conectas: How have international courts and tribunals, such as the Inter-American Court of Human Rights and other international bodies, assessed the increase in police lethality in São Paulo? Are there any recent recommendations, warnings, or sanctions that you deem relevant to this situation?
GS: Yes, there was a statement by the IACHR about the operations. The Commission condemned the killing of 16 people during an Operation Shield police action in the Baixada Santista. They called for a thorough investigation, accountability for those involved and a security policy reform. They expressed concern over police violence and racial discrimination.
We have also submitted and updated reports and information that also include the UN system. It is worth noting that the country, and particularly the state of São Paulo have been the focus of recent rulings within the Inter-American system which are related to the recent cases of lethality – both at the level of the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights and at the Inter-American Court, with the condemnation of the state in the Castelinho case.
Conectas: Could the use of technology like body cams have prevented some of the deaths or made it easier to hold officers accountable? What is stopping this tool from being more widely rolled out?
GS: Definitely. Studies have proven the efficacy of the use of body cameras for these purposes. Body cameras are essential tools for reducing police lethality. They help prevent criminal practices, including by the police, averting deaths and providing reliable evidence – both in cases of violence committed by the police officers and against them. It is clear that attacks on the body camera policy, attempts to undermine it and the lack of more effective monitoring have limited its potential to achieve greater impact in prevention and accountability. It is worth stressing that the change in the recording method, moving away from continuous recording, may also have affected the program’s results. What is preventing these tools from being more widely rolled out is the lack of political commitment on the part of the Public Security Secretariat and the state government regarding the program’s objectives, a stance mirrored in the Public Prosecutor’s Office’s, which also fails to prioritize effectiveness in controlling police lethality.
