Twenty-three activists involved in Brazil’s 2013 protests were sentenced to seven years in prison on July 17th. Many organizations, including the Federal Psychology Council (CPF), have publically denounced the trials as infringing on the right to public assembly. The sentence is a troubling indication of Brazil’s politically motivated court system.
Mariana Simões, reporter with the Brazilian investigative journalism organization Agência Pública, speaks to one of the women sentenced this July. They discuss the trial, the sentence, and its implication for Brazil’s democracy.
Read the original interview in Portuguese.
After four years of investigations and trials, 23 protestors who participated in the June 2013 “Jornadas” in Rio de Janeiro were sentenced to seven years in prison for criminal conspiracy and the corruption of minors. The sentence, signed by the judge Flávio Itabaiana of the 27th Central Criminal Court cites charges including assault, resisting arrest, bodily injury, and the possession of explosives.
“I was in shock. I froze. I literally froze,” says lawyer Eloisa Samy about the decision. She is one of the 20 protestors sentenced to seven years in prison. Another three were sentenced to five years and ten months in prison. All have the right to appeal.
Eloisa Samy provided legal support during the protests that swept the streets of Rio, giving advice to those who suffered violations of their legal rights. She was included in the trial because of testimonies from Maurício Alves da Silva, a Brazilian policeman and member of the National Public Security Force, who infiltrated activist circles in order to pass information to the National Integrated Command and Control Center (CICC).
The lawyer spoke to Agência Pública about the sentence and explains why she sees various irregularities in the judicial process. She believes that a political agenda underlies the prosecution of the 23 activists: to suppress the movement demanding ex-president Lula da Silva’s freedom. “This is the message: activism isn’t worth it. Don’t mobilize because, if you do, we’re going to put you on trial and lock you up” she says.
Just two weeks away from her 50th birthday, Eloisa Samy faces the verdict and says she will appeal.
Mariana Simões: How did you feel when you heard about the sentence?
Eloisa Samy: I was in shock. I literally froze. Because I’m not young anymore, I’m two weeks away from turning 50 and have arthritis. So I started to feel this horrible pain in my shoulder that spread to my entire arm. But I survived 2013 and 2014. I overcame that series of events. I’ll also survive 2018.
Simões: As a lawyer, what do you make of the trial itself? Were you expecting this result?
Samy: All of us were sure about the guilty verdict. There was no doubt about it. But there wasn’t any individualized sentencing. It was seven years for everyone. Only three people got a sentence of five years and of ten months. He [judge Flávio Itabaiana] viewed everyone the same light. He didn’t consider extenuating circumstances in some cases or a shorter sentence in others. He didn’t consider anything at all. He put everyone in the same seven-year boat.
Simões: What are your next steps?
Samy: My lawyers will appeal. I spoke to my lawyer yesterday, right after hearing the sentence. He told me that there are various legal errors in the decision. And we’ll wait. The sentence isn’t definitive. The important thing now to wait for the appeal and the second decision. We still have habeas corpus for me in the Federal Supreme Court. It’s in the hands of Minister Gilmar Mendes.
Simões: But was the trial carried out correctly?
Samy: No, it wasn’t correct. For example, there was an addition to the charges once the defense had already prepared, which included the crime of corruption of minors. And there was no specific notice that we should defend ourselves against that accusation. By corruption of minors I mean: we were protesting in a group of thousands of people in which there were also minors. They grabbed two underage people to fabricate the charge of corruption of minors. It’s such an absurd trial. As I’ve said from the beginning, it’s Kafkaesque
Simões: In what sense?
Samy: In the absurdities of how it’s played out. I even got ahold of my prison admittance sheet recently, from when I was put in jail, and my original charge wasn’t for gang conspiracy or the corruption of minors. No. What it said was “crime against immaterial property.” When I was put in jail, along with everyone else in 2014, we were arrested for pirating software. Yes, for pirating software. That was our initial charge.
This trial has not been transparent. It repeatedly violated the principle of due process. We have been waiting almost four years for a sentence. They’ve grossly exceeded the reasonable duration of a trial. Why did the sentencing happen now? He [the judge] had time. He’s had the audios in his office this entire time. They’ve been with him since 2015. That’s three and a half years. And our last court appearance was in December 2014.
Simões: Do you think there is some sort of political reason for the sentencing taking place now?
Samy: I think so. I think so because of an observation that the judge made during the trial. And it’s there for everyone to see. He said that it was an absurd scandal that the Occupy Cabral protests impeded then-governor Sérgio Cabral and his family from moving freely. And Cabral was sentenced to prison for 100 years! He is serving 100 years! For crimes that Occupy Cabral brought to light. Which was also one of the first to raise the question about [the disappearance of] Amarildo. The tenets of Occupy Cabral were “Out with Cabral” and “Where is Amarildo?”
Simões: Criminal conspiracy is one of the accusations lodged against you. How do you see that charge?
Samy: I don’t even recognize the majority of these people. They’ve already asked me, “do you have anyone’s phone number?” I don’t have anyone’s phone number. The majority of them [the 23 activists] wouldn’t be able to recognize me. It was only because of a few random interactions I had with Elisa [Quadros] from when she was involved in Occupy Câmara and from when we ran into each other at protests, which were totally chance meetings, that the judge was able to find me guilty of that crime.
In terms of the corruption of minors charge, I adopted one of the underage people cited in the trial, David Paixão. He was living on the streets in 2014. He was in a precarious situation. I had submitted a request for provisional custody, as he was 17 at the time. He lived with me for a year and a half. Today, he’s 22 years old. The judge did not consider any of this, even though it is extremely important. How could I be accused of the corruption of minors when I got a kid off the streets and adopted him?
Simões: And what about the police infiltrator who turned over the evidence against you?
Samy: I have 20 witnesses against his one testimony. I presented 20 witnesses to say that I did not go a single millimeter beyond my legal standing as a lawyer.
Simões: Why do you think that 23 activists were charged? Where did that number come from
Samy: That’s another thing I still don’t know. They grabbed a group of people and said, “look, these are who we’re going to call the leaders of the protests,” of a movement that didn’t have any leadership. The protests were completely spontaneous.
Simões: Do you think that these kinds of psychological scare tactics have repercussions today?
Samy: Yes, the tactics continue and you can see they’re sending a message. Why? Because of Lula. People want Lula out of jail. There are protests across Brazil. Social movements are trying to organize so that Lula will be freed and allowed to run for office. This is a message to those protesters, for those social movements: “look at who already went to jail. These are the people we’ve locked up.” I’m sure of it. This court decision came from the Brazilian Democratic Movement (MDB).
It’s not possible, that’s the clear message! At this point in July? Now it’s almost August, and official declarations of candidacy are just a few weeks away.
Simões: Did you expect the sentencing to happen at this moment?
Samy: None of us expected it.
Simões: Why do you think he [the judge] prolonged the sentencing so much?
Samy: The sentence was meant to come out at a specific time. It was meant to happen at this uncertain moment in which the left newly mobilized around Lula. This is the message: “activism isn’t worth it. Don’t mobilize, because if you do, we will take you to court and we will lock you up.”
Simões: Do you see this as unjust?
Samy: The Portuguese language needs to find a new form, some other way of expressing this other beyond calling it unjust. Because what has taken place in this trial is not simply injustice, it is tremendously capricious.
Simões: What is the difference between the political game that took place in 2013 and what’s at play now?
Samy: What’s at play now is our presidency. This is a power move.
Simões: But fear tactics and psychological pressure have been used to contain popular mobilizations since 2013. . .
Samy: Yes, they have. If it were just psychological pressure we’d be fine. They arrested us, put on trial, and now they’ve found us guilty. It’s a clear violation of the law.
At the time, they said that the protestors challenged democracy and the rule of law. For the love of god! Democracy is ours, not the State’s. Democracy belongs to the people. And it is the State that challenges democracy when it impedes our right to peaceful protest.
This court decision is the true affront to democracy and the rule of law. Not us.
The “Jornadas de Junho,” protestors in 2013 demanded health care and education. They asked for the right to land and housing. We were imprisoned for demanding the bare minimum. We were imprisoned because we tried to voice the principle of human dignity. I hope that social movements wake up to that. Or that social movements join together and stand up to say, “we exist and we will protest, we will not accept being silent.” If not, Brazil will turn to authoritarianism.
This interview was translated from the Portuguese by Lara Norgaard
Mariana Simões is a journalist with Agência Pública and manager of Casa Pública in Rio de Janeiro. She graduated in Liberal Arts from Sarah Lawrence College in New York. She has worked as a reporter for Business Insider and the United Nations. In 2013 she moved to Rio, where she acted as a production coordinator for EBC content. Her freelance work has been published in The New York Times, N+1, and Al Jazeera.