{"id":35212,"date":"2022-01-03T13:36:12","date_gmt":"2022-01-03T13:36:12","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/conectas.org\/?post_type=litigiopt&#038;p=35212"},"modified":"2022-04-06T12:49:02","modified_gmt":"2022-04-06T12:49:02","slug":"adi-6841-the-virtualization-of-criminal-justice-debated-in-the-supreme-court","status":"publish","type":"litigiopt","link":"https:\/\/conectas.org\/en\/litigiopt\/adi-6841-the-virtualization-of-criminal-justice-debated-in-the-supreme-court\/","title":{"rendered":"ADI 6841: the virtualization of criminal justice debated in the Supreme Court"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"tts_content_wrapper_1\" ><p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">In April 2021, the National Congress overturned the passages vetoed by President Jair Bolsonaro in the so-called \u201canti-crime\u201d package, a 2019 bill that made a series of changes to public security legislation.&nbsp;<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">One of the passages that lawmakers reinserted into the text of the bill approved by Congress concerns the requirement for detainees to be presented before a judge within 24 hours of their arrest. The president\u2019s veto would have enabled pre-trial custody hearings to be held by video conference.<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">The overturning of this veto came in response to demands from civil society organizations that work to combat torture. In 2020, for example, several organizations staged the campaign #TorturaN\u00e3oSeV\u00eapelaTV (#YouCantSeeTortureOnTV) against remote hearings.&nbsp;<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Besides the \u201canti-crime\u201d package, the CNJ (National Justice Council) also decided, in November 2020, that custody hearings could be held by video conference. The decision was justified by the Council as a preventative measure during the Covid-19 pandemic.&nbsp;<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Established in 2015, the custody hearing is a procedure that must occur within 24 hours after an arrest, the main purpose of which is to assess the legality of the detention and whether the person in custody has been subjected to acts of torture or other types of degrading treatment during the police contact.&nbsp;<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">In response to the vote by the National Congress, the AMB (Association of Brazilian Judges) took the case to the Supreme Court through ADI (Direct Action of Unconstitutionality) No. 6841, which challenges the decision of the Lower House of Congress and the Senate to overturn of the presidential veto. As such, the organization is defending the possibility of remote custody hearings.&nbsp;<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">In the case, Supreme Court Justice Nunes Marques granted an injunction in June 2021 dispensing with the need for state governments to hold in-person custody hearings. After Justice Gilmar Mendes requested the case be heard by an in-person session of the Court, the judgment of the injunction granted by Justice Nunes Marques was suspended.&nbsp;<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">The organizations Conectas, IDDD, Pro Bono Institute, ITTC, GAJOP and National Decarceration Agenda together petitioned to be admitted in ADI 6841 as amicus curiae. They argue that one of the essential purposes of custody hearings is to \u201cinvestigate high-handedness committed by agents of the State during arrests\u201d, which requires that the detained persons be physically present.<\/span><\/p>\n<hr>\n<ul>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><b>Case: <\/b><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">ADI 6841<\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><b>Court:&nbsp;<\/b><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Supreme Court<\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><b>Status:&nbsp;<\/b><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Removal of virtual judgment and pending inclusion again on the court\u2019s schedule<\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><b>Procedure:<\/b>\n<ul>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\">05\/04\/2021 \u2013 Initial Petition by AMB (Association of Brazilian Judges)<\/li>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\">06\/28\/2021 \u2013 Injunction partially granted by the rapporteur of the case, Justice Nunes Marques<\/li>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\">Inclusion on the list of cases to be heard in an extraordinary virtual session from 06\/30\/2021 to 07\/01\/2021.<\/li>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\">06\/29\/21 \u2013 Request by Conectas for admission as amicus curiae<\/li>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\">06\/30\/2021 \u2013 Start of the Virtual Judgment<\/li>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\">07\/01\/2021 \u2013 Following a request by Justice Gilmar Mendes for the matter to be heard by an in-person session, the case is removed from the virtual session<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/div><div class=\"tts__custom-position_bottom_fixed\" ><\/div>","protected":false},"featured_media":31733,"menu_order":0,"template":"","meta":{"ngg_post_thumbnail":0},"temaltigio":[12276],"categoria_litigio":[],"class_list":["post-35212","litigiopt","type-litigiopt","status-publish","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","temaltigio-confronting-institutional-violence"],"acf":{"subtitle-pt":"Anti-torture organizations have called on the Supreme Court to uphold the congressional veto guaranteeing that pre-trial custody hearings are held in-person.","links_para_referencia":false,"noticias":{"noticia1":{"ID":28574,"post_author":"2","post_date":"2021-03-09 15:22:41","post_date_gmt":"2021-03-09 15:22:41","post_content":"Brazil was the target of a complaint in the UN on the morning of Tuesday, March 9, during the 46th Session of the Human Rights Council in Geneva. Organizations raised concerns over pre-trial custody hearings being held by video conference, which have been permitted since November 2020 following <span style=\"color: #0000ff;\"><a style=\"color: #0000ff;\" href=\"https:\/\/conectas.org\/en\/news\/justice-council-mulls-holding-custody-hearings-by-video-conference\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener noreferrer\"><strong>a decision by the National Justice Council (CNJ)<\/strong>.<\/a><\/span>\r\n\r\n\u201cCustody hearings, which since 2015 have been playing an important role in combating torture, are being replaced in some states in the country by a video call made from inside the police station or detention center without the presence of the defense,\u201d they said.\r\n<ul>\r\n \t<li><a href=\"https:\/\/conectas.org\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/03\/Discurso-tortura-Conselho-DH-ONU-1.docx\"> See the complaint in full here<\/a><\/li>\r\n<\/ul>\r\nThe statement made by Conectas, in partnership with the international Association for the Prevention of Torture and the local organizations Criminal Justice Network and National Decarceration Agenda, occurred during the interactive dialogue with the UN rapporteur on torture.\r\n\r\nIn their statement, the organizations also drew attention to the dismantling of the mechanisms to combat and prevent torture and mistreatment in Brazil.\r\n\r\n\u201cThe federal government has carried out a systematic attack on the National System to Combat and Prevent Torture, through efforts to dismantle the working capacity of the National Mechanism, undermining the work of its experts, weakening the participation of civil society in the National Committee and also appointing military personnel to government representation,\u201d they said.\r\n\r\nIn response, the Brazilian State declared that it recognizes its obligation to effectively combat and prevent torture. \u201cThe recent decision to allow custody hearings by video conference is an exception during the Covid-19 pandemic. It is not the rule. Hearings by video conference are only permitted when it is not possible to hold them in person within 24 hours,\u201d it said.\r\n<h3>Complaint in the IACHR<\/h3>\r\nIn January, more than 60 Brazilian organizations sent an<a href=\"https:\/\/conectas.org\/noticias\/organizacoes-denunciam-a-comissao-interamericana-aprovacao-de-audiencias-de-custodia-por-videoconferencia-no-brasil\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener noreferrer\"> <strong>urgent appeal<\/strong> <strong>to the IACHR<\/strong><\/a> (Inter-American Commission on Human Rights) claiming that virtual hearings prevent the identification of torture against people arrested by the police.","post_title":"Custody hearings by video conference fail to combat torture","post_excerpt":"In a complaint at the UN, organizations cite setback in public policies and mechanisms to combat and prevent mistreatment in Brazil","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"custody-hearings-by-video-conference-fail-to-combat-torture","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2021-04-01 12:03:26","post_modified_gmt":"2021-04-01 12:03:26","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"https:\/\/conectas.org\/?post_type=noticia&#038;p=28574","menu_order":1344,"post_type":"noticia","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},"noticia2":{"ID":30817,"post_author":"26","post_date":"2021-04-20 15:00:17","post_date_gmt":"2021-04-20 15:00:17","post_content":"<span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">In a session of the National Congress held on the evening of Monday, April 19, the Federal Senate overturned the vetoes by President Jair Bolsonaro to the so-called \u201canti-crime\u201d package, a 2019 bill that made a series of changes to public security legislation.<\/span>\r\n\r\n<span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">In the Lower House of Congress, the vetoes to the \u201canti-crime\u201d package were voted in March. The decision of the Senate, therefore, was pending.<\/span>\r\n\r\n<span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">One of the passages that senators reinserted into the text of the bill approved by Congress concerns the requirement for detainees to be presented before a judge within 24 hours of their arrest. The president\u2019s veto would have enabled these custody hearings to be held by video conference.<\/span>\r\n\r\n<span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">The overturning of the vetoes comes in response to demands from civil society organizations that work to combat torture. Since last year, several organizations have promoted the campaign <\/span><i><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">#TorturaN\u00e3oSeV\u00eapelaTV<\/span><\/i><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> (#YouCantSeeTortureOnTV) against remote hearings.<\/span>\r\n<h3><b>Read more:<\/b><\/h3>\r\n<ul>\r\n \t<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"color: #0000ff;\"><a style=\"color: #0000ff;\" href=\"https:\/\/conectas.org\/en\/news\/custody-hearings-by-video-conference-fail-to-combat-torture\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener noreferrer\"><b>Custody hearings by video conference fail to combat torture<\/b><\/a><\/span><\/li>\r\n \t<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"color: #0000ff;\"><a style=\"color: #0000ff;\" href=\"https:\/\/conectas.org\/en\/news\/lower-house-of-congress-approves-anti-crime-bill-without-exemption-from-illegality-clause\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener noreferrer\"><b>Lower House of Congress approves \u201canti-crime\u201d bill without exemption from illegality<\/b><\/a><\/span><\/li>\r\n<\/ul>\r\n<span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">According to Carolina Diniz, an advisor for the program to combat institutional violence at Conectas, custody hearings are an essential tool for identifying illegal detention and also for identifying abusive use of force by police officers.<\/span>\r\n\r\n<span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">\u201cCustody hearings have been held by video conference at police stations, often in the presence of the very same officers who may have committed the mistreatment,\u201d explained Diniz. \u201cIn addition to the physical distance preventing the judge from identifying signs of torture, the victim may feel intimidated to make a complaint,\u201d she added.<\/span>\r\n\r\n<span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">According to Diniz, efforts should now focus on reversing the decision made by the CNJ (National Justice Council) in November 2020 that permitted, on an exceptional basis, custody hearings to be held by video conference during the Covid-19 pandemic.<\/span>\r\n\r\n<span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">\u201cThe investment in the implementation of custody hearings by video conference could be spent on appropriate health measures to protect against Covid-19 without jeopardizing the essential function of identifying illegal detention and signs of torture. Custody hearings should be considered an essential activity,\u201d concluded Diniz.<\/span>\r\n<h3><b>Watch the video of the #TorturaN\u00e3oSeV\u00eaPelaTV campaign\u00a0<\/b><\/h3>\r\nhttps:\/\/youtu.be\/gfIuYww9YTA\r\n<h2><b>\u201cAnti-crime\u201d Package<\/b><\/h2>\r\n<span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">The bill that became known as the \u201cAnti-Crime\u201d Package consisted of a series of amendments to criminal and procedural law presented by the then Minister of Justice, S\u00e9rgio Moro, in 2019. The bill proposed a series of setbacks in criminal rights and guarantees that would worsen the prison chaos and police violence without tackling the structural problems that affect public security in the country.<\/span>\r\n\r\n<span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Among the most controversial aspects were \u201cexemption from illegality\u201d, which would exempt police officers from liability for crimes committed in the line of duty; the \u201cplea bargain\u201d, which would enable prison sentences to be enforced after agreements between defendants and the Public Prosecutor\u2019s Office; and the legal designation of \u201chabitual offender\u201d, which would restrict the right to a fair trial and make it harder to release people who are considered \u2013 not particularly objectively \u2013 to be \u201ccareer criminals\u201d. After strong mobilization from civil society in the Lower House of Congress, the most controversial passages were removed from the original text and the regulations for custody hearings and guarantee judges were included.<\/span>","post_title":"Congress reinstates mandatory in-person custody hearings","post_excerpt":"One of the passages that senators reinserted into the text of the bill approved by Congress concerns the requirement for detainees to be presented before a judge within 24 hours of their arrest.","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","post_password":"","post_name":"congress-reinstates-mandatory-in-person-custody-hearings","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2021-04-23 15:34:28","post_modified_gmt":"2021-04-23 15:34:28","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"https:\/\/conectas.org\/?post_type=noticia&#038;p=30817","menu_order":50,"post_type":"noticia","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},"noticia3":{"ID":31827,"post_author":"26","post_date":"2021-05-17 17:24:26","post_date_gmt":"2021-05-17 17:24:26","post_content":"<span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Arrested and charged with drug trafficking, Rafael* arrived at the Barra Funda Courthouse, in the West Side of the city of S\u00e3o Paulo, to have the chance to be heard in a pre-trial custody hearing by a judge, a prosecutor and a public defender. Handcuffed, he was read the formal charges for the crime he had allegedly committed, but he also had a chance to speak: besides pleading innocent, he accused the military police officer who arrested him of assault. While the word of the officer was enough to incriminate him, the word of the alleged victim of assault was worthless.<\/span>\r\n\r\n<span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">The account described above is identified as \u201ccase no. 13\u201d in the recently published report \u201cLabyrinthine Investigations: the course of inquiries into reports of police violence made at custody hearings\u201d, produced by Conectas in partnership with IDDD (Defense of the Right to a Defense Institute).<\/span><b>\u00a0\u201cWe wanted to understand the course and the outcome of reports of police violence. And what we found was a structure, with restrictions and delays, that serves to shield police officers from any investigation<\/b><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">,\u201d said Carolina Diniz, an advisor for the program to combat institutional violence at Conectas who was involved in the study.<\/span>\r\n\r\n<span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">The qualitative report analyzed 53 complaints of assault made against military police officers at custody hearings held in S\u00e3o Paulo in two distinct periods. First, in 2015; then, between 2017 and 2018, when Law 13,491 transferred cases of police violence reported at custody hearings to the Military Justice system.<\/span>\r\n\r\n<span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">In the first period of analysis, from 2015, all the cases were investigated and 52% were shelved after the initial assessment. In the second period of analysis (2017 and 2018), two cases were shelved prematurely and 30 were investigated, but 86% were shelved without opening a Preliminary Investigation or a Military Police Inquiry.<\/span>\r\n\r\n<img class=\"size-full wp-image-31648 aligncenter\" src=\"https:\/\/conectas.org\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/05\/INFOGRAFICOS-Relatorio_tortura_blindada_II_Conectas_miolo-ALT64-3-e1621254535131.jpg\" alt=\"\" width=\"700\" height=\"290\" \/>\r\n\r\n<span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">The case presented at the start of this article is emblematic. The complaint against the Military Police observed a complex bureaucratic mechanism that silenced the victim and served only to protect the crimes committed by officers. The investigation against the police officer ended up being shelved at the request of the Public Prosecutor\u2019s Office and the officer received no punishment. The case against the alleged drug dealer followed a very different path, with a technical investigation, interviews of witnesses and even the gathering of video evidence. Eventually, it was discovered that the evidence had been planted by the police officer.<\/span>\r\n\r\n<span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">While overwhelming, the numbers do not reveal everything. The main merit of the study lies in dissecting the structure of the divagations that end up perpetuating impunity in the face of complaints of police violence. And the errors start in the early stages of the process, when it is crucial to gather proof and evidence that will support the complaint in the future.<\/span>\r\n\r\n<span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Custody hearings, when detainees are presented before a judge within 24 hours of their arrest, are an important legal mechanism adopted by Brazil in 2015 and provided for in the American Convention on Human Rights and the Brazilian Code of Criminal Procedure since the end of 2019. They were established to determine the legality of the pre-trial detention and to identify signs of torture and mistreatment by officers.<\/span>\r\n\r\n<span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">The first opportunity for the victim of violence to report what happened is at the police station, where the accused is taken immediately after being detained so the arrest report can be drawn up. But the environment is not at all favorable. The accused is normally handcuffed, not accompanied by a lawyer, and in the presence of the alleged aggressors. From there, they proceed to the custody hearing, which in an ideal world would be the perfect time to tell the judge about the abuse, in the presence of a public or private attorney and a member of the Public Prosecutor\u2019s Office. In practice, however, the study shows that attorneys are solemnly ignored when they ask the victim to talk about the aggression, while the judge and the prosecutor seem to be working together so the detainee is limited to the role of the accused.<\/span>\r\n\r\n<b>\u201cBrazilian judges are from a white social elite and they have very little empathy towards the people who are the usual occupants of the prison system: poor, young, black men. This lack of empathy, coupled with the authoritarian and punitive legal culture, contaminates these procedures,\u201d <\/b><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">said Hugo Leonardo, a criminal lawyer and president of IDDD.<\/span>\r\n\r\n<span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">According to Vivian Peres da Silva, projects consultant at IDDD who participated in the institute\u2019s research on custody hearings, one of the points that stood out when they were gathering information for the study was the lack of clarity by judges regarding the protocols for investigating reports of violence. \u201cWhat I saw here in S\u00e3o Paulo is that the questions that are asked are not clear, objective. \u2018Was there any problem with the police?\u2019, or \u2018Are there any complaints about the police?\u2019 Some detainees go through the hearing without even realizing that those questions were about police violence,\u201d she said.<\/span>\r\n\r\n<span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">The third chance the victim has to be heard is during the physical examination, conducted by a medical expert in the Forensic Medical Institute\u2019s facilities inside the courthouse. All in vain. Just like the judge, the medical examiners, if they do anything at all, make a perfunctory note of the complaints of torture and mistreatment \u2013 normally a few lines in a three to five page report. It is another missed opportunity. And probably the last, since after that, in almost all the cases studied, the victims are never again asked about the allegations they have made.<\/span>\r\n\r\n<span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">\u201cWhat struck me the most was the deletion of the reports of torture over the course of the process,\u201d said Nina Capello, a researcher involved in the study. \u201cIn theory, the allegations made in the custody hearing should be followed up with an investigation of other evidence, a more careful look at the details of the case and a focus on accompanying the victim of torture. So it surprised me to see that the longer the process lasted, the more the person\u2019s original claims are lost.\u201d<\/span>\r\n\r\n<span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">This institutional gag occurs because complaints against military police officers \u2013 accused of being the perpetrators or accomplices to the aggression in 72% of the cases \u2013 proceed through a complex legal system that looks like it was carefully designed not to work.\u00a0<\/span><b>\u201cThe institutions work to justify the conduct of the police officers, to avoid investigation and punishment,\u201d <\/b><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">said Adilson Paes de Souza, a retired Military Police Lieutenant Colonel in S\u00e3o Paulo who has a PhD from the Institute of Psychology of the University of S\u00e3o Paulo (USP).<\/span>\r\n\r\n&nbsp;\r\n\r\n<b>Military Justice<\/b><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">\r\n<\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Until 2017, complaints against military police officers were investigated by the Military Justice and the Civilian Justice systems. Following the change in jurisdiction made by Law No. 13,492, complaints against the military have been investigated exclusively by the Military Justice system. As a rule, crimes by military police officers are investigated in a preliminary inquiry, a procedure with no legal basis overseen by an officer from the same battalion, which partly explains the high rate of impunity in the cases studied.<\/span>\r\n\r\n<span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Even when an inquiry is opened by the civil or military police to investigate a complaint, the only people heard in most cases are the accused police officers and the witnesses they choose themselves. According to the report, in their internal investigations, the officers call people who accuse the military police of aggression \u201ccomplainers\u201d, \u201caccused\u201d and \u201coffenders\u201d. People who are never treated as victims, but as suspects.<\/span>\r\n\r\n<span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">According to Souza, police work, which is stressful in nature, coupled with what he calls a \u201cpolice subculture\u201d, in which aggression is the sign of a good officer, are collective defense mechanisms. \u201cThe group feels threatened, shares in the suffering and sets its own rules to deal with this adverse situation. And so, a good cop is a cop who kills,\u201d he said.<\/span>\r\n\r\n<span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">The retired lieutenant colonel recognizes that custody hearings are a good opportunity for the safe reporting of cases of police violence, but only in theory. The problem, he says, is structural. \u201cThe existing doctrine in the Military Police is one of militarization and war against the enemy, and this also spills over into the Civil Police, the Public Prosecutor\u2019s Office and the Judiciary.\u00a0<\/span><b>When the judge ignores clear signs of torture that a detainee has suffered, the message is the following: this is the enemy, damn it, no standards and guarantees for him,\u201d <\/b><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">said Souza.<\/span>\r\n\r\n<span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">The report exposes a grim scenario, but it proposes solutions \u2013 most require only observance of the law. Among the main suggestions are the presence of a representative from the Public Defender\u2019s Office with the detainee as soon as they are taken to the police station, a breakdown of the questions from the judge on police violence asked at the custody hearing and the creation of exclusive teams at the Public Prosecutor\u2019s Office to deal with this type of crime, given that one of the responsibilities of this Office is external oversight of the police.<\/span>\r\n\r\n<span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">And, of course, the Military Police urgently has to stop investigating itself. \u201cHow likely is it that someone who was a victim of violence is going to say so inside a battalion to the officers themselves?\u201d asked IDDD\u2019s Hugo Leonardo. \u201cThis is a pathetic situation. It\u2019s not too much of a stretch to say it\u2019s a failure.\u201d<\/span>\r\n\r\n<span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">* Fictitious name given to the victim<\/span>","post_title":"Complaints of police violence at custody hearings are ignored, report shows","post_excerpt":"Arrested and charged with drug trafficking, Rafael* arrived at the Barra Funda Courthouse, in the West Side of the city of S\u00e3o Paulo, to have the chance to be heard in a pre-trial custody hearing by a judge, a prosecutor and a public defender.","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","post_password":"","post_name":"complaints-of-police-violence-at-custody-hearings-are-ignored-report-shows","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2021-05-24 20:18:18","post_modified_gmt":"2021-05-24 20:18:18","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"https:\/\/conectas.org\/?post_type=noticia&#038;p=31827","menu_order":88,"post_type":"noticia","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}}},"yoast":{"focuskw":"ADI 6841","title":"","metadesc":"Anti-torture organizations have called on the Supreme Court to uphold the congressional veto guaranteeing that pre-trial custody hearings are held in-person.","linkdex":"54","metakeywords":"","meta-robots-noindex":"","meta-robots-nofollow":"","meta-robots-adv":"","canonical":"","redirect":"","opengraph-title":"","opengraph-description":"","opengraph-image":"","twitter-title":"","twitter-description":"","twitter-image":""},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/conectas.org\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/litigiopt\/35212","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/conectas.org\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/litigiopt"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/conectas.org\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/litigiopt"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/conectas.org\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/31733"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/conectas.org\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=35212"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"temaltigio","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/conectas.org\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/temaltigio?post=35212"},{"taxonomy":"categoria_litigio","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/conectas.org\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categoria_litigio?post=35212"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}