The national secretary of , , endorsed this Wednesday (5) the criticisms of government members against the text by deputy Danilo Forte (União Brasil-CE) that .
As the Panel showed, Forte presented a . The movement provoked contrary reactions from allies of President Lula (PT), such as the minister (Institutional Relations), who rejected the equation of factions with terrorist groups.
Sarrubbo aligns himself with the speech and assesses that the equivalence makes no sense. “The factions here do not have any political or religious bias, due to ethnicity, that is, they do not fit into the concept of terrorism, not only here in Brazil, but in terms of the world”, he states.
He says that the initiative also does not contribute to the fight against criminal factions and assesses that the measure could leave Brazil vulnerable in relation to its sovereignty.
“We always work with international cooperation. And for that we don’t need to declare our factions terrorists”, he says. “This only serves, in fact, to leave us vulnerable in relation to foreign countries and even international organizations, which can take measures against terrorism, financial embargoes and so on”, he highlights.
Sarrubbo defends that the government’s project be voted on alone and as a priority. “Our project deals with criminal types and precautionary measures”, he says.
“He [o projeto] It doesn’t talk about terrorism, it’s a project that was worked on a lot with civil society, with professionals from the security forces, the internal debate here within the ministry”, he states. “Of course, we always have the expectation that Congress can improve any type of project, including the one we sent. But I don’t know if just thinking about a project that talks about terrorism is the best way.”
The secretary also commented on the installation of . For him, the commission can focus on ways that can improve the fight against factions and militias.
“The only thing I ask and hope is that they always work with evidence, how can we achieve greater efficiency in combating organized crime”, he says. “May they mainly escape this political polarization, this ideological debate. Because public security does not admit ideological debate”, he states.
LINK PRESENT: Did you like this text? Subscribers can access seven free accesses from any link per day. Just click the blue F below.
