The governor of, (), turns to the past when expressing support for amnesty to those involved in the scammers of January 8, 2023, flag of former president (), defendant on the charges of attempted coup.
In a Bolsonarist protest earlier this month on Paulista Avenue, in São Paulo, he compared the amnesty to a known political remedy and pressed the president of (Republicans-PB) to vote on the subject, enumerating some historical episodes in which the forgiveness had been granted.
A survey by the Senate Agency in the Congress collection shows that the amnesty’s resource has been used 80 times over time, including times such as Independence, Chibata Revolt and the End of the Estado Novo.
The recurring employment of forgiveness as a political exit, experts say, is linked to the difficulty that the population has to face crises and punish who is due, in a pacification trend.
“An amnesty would now show that it is possible to try a blow and nothing happens,” says Paulo Ramirez, professor of social sciences at ESPM (School of Propaganda and Marketing). “Impunity is a message that a blow against democracy can occur without consequences.”
In Ramirez’s view, the tendency to forgiveness is linked the author employs the word cordiality, whose Latin etymological origin goes back to what is proper to the heart, to criticize the Brazilian behavioral trait of masking everyday violence, always with a charismatic and affectionate attitude.
No wonder the expert says the redemocratization process was conservative. Although the Amnesty Law, promulgated in 1979 under the João Batista Figueiredo government, made it possible to return political exiles to the country, forgiveness extended to military who tortured and killed – and they were never punished.
The cordiality, which manifests itself in a conciliatory stance, lies in the ambiguity of this law. “Redemocratization swept under the carpet all humanitarian crimes of the dictatorship, and even parties of the military regime began to act in full democracy,” says Ramiro.
In this respect, the proposal of the Bolsonarist base in the House is quite different. In it, there is no ambiguity, because it benefits a single social group. In contrast, Argentina condemned more than 1,000 people for crimes committed in the last 1976 dictatorship, as shown three years ago, in the film “Argentina: 1985”, by director Santiago Miter.
The history of amnesty in Brazil began on September 7, 1822. Emperor Dom Pedro 1st forgiven all who had opinions contrary to independence, except for those who were already arrested. Likewise, the measure imposed a single restriction: who continued against independence would be punished.
Decades later, the Old Republic would be marked by social subsidies, most of them resolved with the conciliatory pact.
At this time, jurist Rui Barbosa, fulfilling terms as a senator, emerged as an amnesty defender and theorist. He presented, for example, the proposal of forgiveness to those who were involved in the vaccine revolt, marked by the popular reaction against the health policy of former President Rodrigues Alves. Barbosa also acted for forgiveness to the sailors of the Chibata revolt.
“Amnesty is but the oblivion of the absolute past. Neither history, nor law, nor politics admit it except as a preparatory to a new order of things,” said the jurist.
Led by João Cândido Felisberto, Black Admiral, the Chibata Revolt was motivated by physical punishment against Navy officers, even after slavery.
The forgiveness granted by former President Hermes da Fonseca masks violence: the group of rebels was arrested and many of them killed. Felisberto was admitted to a asylum.
Four decades later, Getúlio Vargas would employ forgiveness in the service of his continuing claims. .
Vargas was deposed in October 1945 by a military movement, led by generals who were part of his government. For researcher Maria Clara Spada de Castro, from UFRRJ, (Federal Rural University of Rio de Janeiro), each amnesty has a distinct political meaning, depending on the historical moment.
Although it recognizes the conciliatory tendency, the researcher recalls that it would not be the first time army officers would be punished if there is no amnesty to those accused of being among the January 8 attacks.
After all, the 1924 Paulista Revolt brought together members of the so -called Tenentism who wanted to testify then -President Artur Bernardes, because they were dissatisfied with the direction of the government. The expert states that, at the time, part of the military was convicted and punished by the revolt. “Most punished were low, because the most powerful managed to escape,” says Castro.
In the researcher’s view, what remains in Brazilian history is the difficulty of establishing limits between the military and the democratically instituted powers. “We have never really managed to solve the military issue in the country,” says Castro. “These limits were not well delimited, and the 1979 amnesty law hindered us a lot in this regard.”
