• Monthly
  • $25
  • $50
  • $100
  • $other
  • use PayPal

ONE WEEK TO DOUBLE YOUR DONATION!

A generous CounterPuncher has offered a $25,000 matching grant. So for this week only, whatever you can donate will be doubled up to $25,000! If you have the means, please donate! If you already have done so, thank you for your support. All contributions are tax-deductible.
FacebookTwitterRedditEmail

Curbing the Right to Protest in Brazil

Football, for the Brazilian, is as natural in flair and living as water for fish.  It shows: Brazil remains the most successful World Cup nation, winning five titles.  When it exits the competition, there are sighs of remorse and tears of desperation. When it wins, natural order is affirmed.  The story about the forthcoming tournament, to be hosted by Brazil, offers a very different picture.

Many matters have troubled the tournament from the beginning.  There are construction issues – the Arena de São Paulo Stadium remains incomplete.  “It’s not a good sign,” observed Marissa Payne of The Washington Post,[1] “when you give a news conference in front of what looks like plywood.”  One end of the stadium remains distinctly unfinished[2], with ugly scaffolding very much present, and a notable absence of roofing.  Brazilian clubs have been running ‘tests’ on the site, though only less than 40,000 could attend.  Nerves are fraying ahead of the opener between the host country and Croatia.

This, however, seems to pall in comparison given the bad atmosphere that lingers after the million strong protests in over 100 cities during the Confederations Cup last year.  Cities and streets were occupied. Violent clashes between the police and demonstrators ensued.

The protest book is filled with various grievances, but a few stand out.  The World Cup, in what is virtually without precedent, is being seen as an undue extravagance.  $4bn might well be invested on World Cup stadiums, but public services have been conspicuously left behind by the bookkeepers and accountants.

Infrastructure arguments have centred on efficiency for visitors, and urgency of completion, rather than such projects as housing and public transport.  Indeed, it was the latter that got protesters irate in the first place when they were promised a dramatic increase in the cost of fares.

Since then, the protest platform has broadened, directed against instances of chronic corruption, issues of healthcare and education, and an emphasis on cutting funding to the World Cup itself.  Like many such organizations of revolt, it has been characterised by inchoate strategies, seeking occupation and protest without firm direction.  Groups and agendas vary.  The support base was also affected in July last year when the more aggressive “Black Blocs” reaped the rewards of the protest by attacking banks and government buildings in the name of an anarchist, anti-capitalist credo.

Brazil’s President Dilma Rousseff[3] has been rather glib about the protests, preferring to focus on the infrastructure challenges posed by the World Cup.  Such is the price of democracy.  “Nobody does a (subway) in two years. Well, maybe China.”  The stress has been on reassurances about security, which will feature carved-up zones to enable better surveillance and population control.  Protests may well be factored into the “cost” of democracy, but the police have things covered.

Research by Article 19 for a report titled Brazil’s Own Goal: Protests, Police and the World Cup[4], shows something a touch more serious than mild banter over infrastructure and policing.  The right to protest is being clamped and clipped via policing and legislative channels.  Evidence of this was already beginning in July last year, when the Pope’s visit saw police ban banners that could “offend the integrity of the pontiff and the nation”.[5]

The law is being used as a blunt instrument against broader protests of all kinds.  The Ministry of Justice, in November, flagged the possibility of establishing “special courts” that would focus on “violators of order” with expediency during the World Cup.  Laws have followed, including such laws as Draft Law 728/2011, outlining crimes and violations directly related to the World Cup. The strikingly draconian feature of the law is the terrorism offence which will have specific application to protests carrying terms of imprisonment ranging from 15 to 30 years.

Other bills make it clear what shape the harsh line on law enforcement is taking.  Bill 5531/2013 targets those “threatening road transport safety”, an intended disincentive for those blocking transport.  PL 6307/2103 proposes an amendment to the Criminal Code that would fine and imprison those engaged in damaging private or public property “by the influence of the crowd in an uproar.” Vague amendments to the definition of terrorism are also on the books, a boon for authoritarians keen to stifle social movements.

Thomas Hughes[6], Executive Director of Article 19, suggests that the World Cup’s arrival has shone a rather stark light on state authoritarianism, a sad state given Brazil’s recent record on civic progress.  The formula of repression and violence is being used to target individual and collective freedom of expression. “Indeed, it seems that despite being led by President Dilma Roussef, who was herself tortured during the dictatorship, the state machinery still retains a military mindset, viewing even the most peaceful protest as a threat.”

On Wednesday night, 4,000 protesters[7], organised by the Homeless Workers Movement, marched in peaceful protest on the Arena, chanting for the provision of more low-income housing.  Strikes are being promised during the course of the tournament. (The latest[8] is already taking place – an open-ended strike by subway workers in São Paolo.)  Occupations of various office building are becoming a regular occurrence.

This promises to be a World Cup unlike any other, but that promise will say far more about state policy and protest than it will about football.  The price for Brazilian democracy may well be a cost it is unable to sustain.

Dr. Binoy Kampmark was a Commonwealth Scholar at Selwyn College, Cambridge.  He lectures at RMIT University, Melbourne. Email: bkampmark@gmail.com

Notes.


[1] http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/early-lead/wp/2014/06/02/sao-paulos-stadium-is-not-ready-at-all-for-the-world-cup/

[2] http://www1.skysports.com/football/news/11096/9334951/sao-paulo-world-cup-stadium-not-finished-sky-sports-news-geraint-hughes-reports-from-test-game

[8] http://time.com/2823698/sao-paulo-subway-workers-declare-open-ended-strike-days-from-world-cup/

More articles by:

Binoy Kampmark was a Commonwealth Scholar at Selwyn College, Cambridge. He lectures at RMIT University, Melbourne. Email: bkampmark@gmail.com

bernie-the-sandernistas-cover-344x550
October 21, 2019
Rev. William Alberts
Myopic Morality: The Rehabilitation of George W. Bush
Sheldon Richman
Let’s Make Sure the Nazis Killed in Vain
Horace G. Campbell
Chinese Revolution at 70: Twists and Turns, to What?
Jim Kavanagh
The Empire Steps Back
Ralph Nader
Where are the Influentials Who Find Trump Despicable?
Thomas Knapp
Excuses, Excuses: Now Hillary Clinton’s Attacking Her Own Party’s Candidates
stclair
Taking Next Steps Toward Nuclear Abolition
Brian Terrell
The United States Air Force at Incirlik, Our National “Black Eye”
Paul Bentley
A Plea for More Cynicism, Not Less: Election Day in Canada
Walter Clemens
No Limits to Evil?
Robert Koehler
The Collusion of Church and State
Kathy Kelly
Taking Next Steps Toward Nuclear Abolition
Charlie Simmons
How the Tax System Rewards Polluters
Chuck Collins
Who is Buying Seattle? The Perils of the Luxury Real Estate Boom
Weekend Edition
October 18, 2019
Friday - Sunday
Anthony DiMaggio
Trump as the “Anti-War” President: on Misinformation in American Political Discourse
Jeffrey St. Clair
Roaming Charges: Where’s the Beef With Billionaires?
Rob Urie
Capitalism and the Violence of Environmental Decline
Paul Street
Bernie in the Deep Shit: Dismal Dem Debate Reflections
Andrew Levine
What’s So Awful About Foreign Interference?
T.J. Coles
Boris Johnson’s Brexit “Betrayal”: Elect a Clown, Expect a Pie in Your Face
Joseph Natoli
Trump on the March
Ashley Smith
Stop the Normalization of Concentration Camps
Pete Dolack
The Fight to Overturn the Latest Corporate Coup at Pacifica Has Only Begun
Jeremy Kuzmarov
Russophobia at Democratic Party Debate
Chris Gilbert
Forward! A Week of Protest in Catalonia
Daniel Beaumont
Pressing Done Here: Syria, Iraq and “Informed Discussion”
Daniel Warner
Greta the Disturber
John Kendall Hawkins
Journey to the Unknown Interior of (You)
M. G. Piety
“Grim Positivism” vs. Truthiness in Biography
Christopher Fons – Conor McMullen
The Centrism of Elizabeth Warren
Nino Pagliccia
Peace Restored in Ecuador, But is trust?
Rebecca Gordon
Extorting Ukraine is Bad Enough But Trump Has Done Much Worse
Kathleen Wallace
Trump Can’t Survive Where the Bats and Moonlight Laugh
Clark T. Scott
Cross-eyed, Fanged and Horned
Eileen Appelbaum
The PR Campaign to Hide the Real Cause of those Sky-High Surprise Medical Bills
Olivia Alperstein
Nuclear Weapons are an Existential Threat
Colin Todhunter
Asia-Pacific Trade Deal: Trading Away Indian Agriculture?
Sarah Anderson
Where is “Line Worker Barbie”?
Brian Cloughley
Yearning to Breathe Free
Jill Richardson
Why are LGBTQ Rights Even a Debate?
Jesse Jackson
What I Learn While Having Lunch at Cook County Jail
Kathy Kelly
Death, Misery and Bloodshed in Yemen
Maximilian Werner
Leadership Lacking for Wolf Protection
Arshad Khan
The Turkish Gambit
Kollibri terre Sonnenblume
Rare Wildflower vs. Mining Company
FacebookTwitterRedditEmail