Fear of the STF and election hangover demobilize the population

The escalation of authoritarianism by the Federal Supreme Court (STF), which began with the fake news inquiry, boosted during the 2022 electoral race and exacerbated after the acts of January 8, is having the effect of demobilizing the people and reducing the amount of street demonstrations. Even in the face of the dissatisfaction of a large part of the population with the new Executive and the controversy generated in public opinion by Bill 2.630/2020, the Bill of Fake News, there are still few signs of popular reaction outside the digital realm.

The fear of being arrested for expressing opinions – typical of dictatorial regimes – is one of the reasons why many Brazilians have avoided protesting in the streets. It is still uncertain, moreover, that the STF will not be able to rescue a January decision that prohibited protests in the country to justify reprimands for possible demonstrations that occur in the future.

For lawyer and professor Cândido Alexandrino, master in Constitutional Law from the University of Fortaleza (Unifor), the fear of exercising the right to demonstrate is a sign of the corrosion of democracy.

“It is not credible that democracy in Brazil prohibits demonstrations. The people on the street, as Ulysses Guimarães said, are the example to be followed. People want to demonstrate and are not able to. They are afraid. They succeeded, with the distortion of the law , in decisions and judgments, banning demonstrations and frightening everyone. Who wants to take a risk?”, he comments. “look like [alguns membros do Judiciário] to have won the supreme right to search people, investigate them and punish them, without any legal basis. We live in a state of exception that seems to be constitutional, but the actions of some STF ministers are against the Brazilian Constitution”.

For Lucas Berlanza, president of the Liberal Institute, this fear is compounded by the disappointment of a large part of the people with the inauguration of an Executive aligned with the Supreme Court’s ideas on control of expression. “The succession of frustrations caused discouragement and demobilization. After everything that happened, with society watching Lula’s election, the increase in power of the STF, there is a feeling of impotence”, he says.

Federal deputy Marcel van Hattem (Novo-RS) was one of those responsible for calling one of the only significant street demonstrations against PL 2,630 – in Porto Alegre, with around 5,000 participants, on the 1st –, and has highlighted in his networks the importance of the return of popular pressure. He agrees that the fear of the STF made the protests subside.

“It reduced because people are afraid – which was one of the objectives of Alexandre de Moraes and the government itself when making these completely unfair arrests of people who, however much they were, in my opinion, protesting in the wrong place, in front of from the barracks, have their right to demonstrate guaranteed by the Constitution”, he says.

For Van Hattem, we “no longer live in a full democracy”. “We are living in a state of exception. When you cannot express your opinion because the powerful consider that your opinion is undemocratic, when he makes that assessment, we no longer live in a democracy. In democracy, it is the people who control power and not the power that controls the people”.

Berlanza points to the fragmentation of the right in recent years as another reason why it is more difficult to unite for protests, even when the agenda is consensual, as in the case of opposition to the Fake News Bill. “Nobody wants to go along. A liberal says: ‘Oh, if I go to a demonstration, Bolsonaristas will be there, and I’m fighting with them every day. I’ll be on the side of the zap aunt who says Bolsonaro is a myth and that I’m a communist. I don’t want to side with that person’. Or, on the other side: ‘Oh, I’m not going to join those MBL people; they’re Fabians, communists or something like that. We can’t be in the street together’. The internal tensions of the right demobilized the right’s possibility of articulation during these last few years. Along with that, there was an accumulation of frustrations”, he observes.

For him, “these fights cannot be stronger than the [necessidade de protestar contra a] destruction of Brazilian representative democracy”. “This has to be a unifying factor to face this problem. We don’t need everyone to join hands, but to face a problem the size of what we are facing, I think everyone had to forget about these things and go to the streets”, he says.

Signs that protests will return begin to emerge

In Van Hattem’s opinion, given the seriousness of the situation of freedom of expression in Brazil, the lack of mobilization will not last long. For him, the revolt against authoritarianism is getting bigger than the fear of reprisal.

“People are already, as we noticed in Porto Alegre, changing their minds about the fear of taking to the streets. As much as there is fear, the courage has been greater to face it. And I see that, soon, we will have millions of people on the streets again. The situation as it is today is unsustainable”, says the deputy.

Bold statements by members of the Executive and Judiciary about the Legislature – such as the recent speech by the Minister of Justice and Public Security, Flávio Dino, that regulation of networks would happen with or without Congress – are, for Van Hattem, an affront to the will of the people, which is represented in Parliament.

“In other times, the minister would be committing sincerity, because what he said should lead either to his resignation or, if he had dignity, to his resignation. Brazilian institutional that such a speech by the minister serves to frighten the National Congress. And nothing happens to him. On the contrary, he hopes to emerge stronger from such an arm wrestling match. And that is why I understand that the people need to manifest themselves even more strongly , as he already did on the networks with the PL da Censura. It was thanks to popular mobilization that he was removed from the agenda. And the people need to continue this movement online and on the streets too”, comments the deputy.

Berlanza also believes that popular pressure is essential to reverse the trend towards authoritarianism. “The STF is out of control, and we don’t see a reaction from the republican powers that should be responsible for this task, especially the Legislative Power. But I think the game can turn, especially if we have the courage and conditions to articulate manifestations of the dimension necessary to put pressure on this Legislature. Today there is none. That great absentee that are street demonstrations need to be back on the agenda. If the destruction of the division of powers, bypassing the representative system, the Legislative and freedom of speech expression, if that doesn’t justify the need for street demonstrations, I don’t know what does”, he says.

According to him, the seriousness of the situation, especially after all the controversy with the Fake News PL, has motivated more political forces to openly consider the possibility of street demonstrations. “If, on the one hand, the authoritarianism of the Supreme Court generates fear and causes concern in leaders, on the other hand, it awakens the impetus for combat and the will in some to use this resource again [das manifestações de rua]. Given the gravity of what is happening, sooner or later – preferably sooner – this resource is going to need to be utilized,” he says.

Jurist recommends precautionary measure against potential STF backlash

Cândido Alexandrino recommends that organizers of any protests take a precautionary measure to reduce the chance of retaliation: ask for authorization in court before scheduling the event.

“My suggestion, as a precaution and self-preservation, given the insecurity promoted by the STF, is to request a preventive habeas corpus. It would be comical if it weren’t tragic.full time‘, within the ‘Enquiry of the End of the World’ – which never ends, it scrutinizes everything and everyone can investigate – it is undoubtedly pertinent to seek protective measures, especially when the protest, until then a free expression of thought, has a political,” he says.

Alexandrino emphasizes, however, that under normal circumstances – in a real democracy – this would not be necessary, since Article 5, item XVI, of the Constitution states that “everyone can meet (…) in places open to the public , regardless of authorization, (…) only prior notice to the competent authority is required”. “The Constitution is clear: you don’t depend on anyone’s authorization to meet, you just need to communicate to the authority”, says the jurist.