Ideological discourses gain strength in the actions of the Public Ministry

Ideological discourses and identity agendas are gaining more and more strength in the actions of the Public Ministry in Brazil. Concepts such as “structural racism”, “environmental racism”, “hate speech”, among other cultural jargon woke and contemporary anti-freedom of expression movements have been mentioned in several of the agency’s recommendations, actions and documents.

In November, the Federal Public Ministry (MPF) released a booklet on racism in police activity in Brazil, abusing the use of concepts loaded with ideology, calling penitentiaries “contemporary slave quarters” and suggesting that the Bolsonaro government’s anti-crime package legalized ” the ongoing genocide in the outskirts and favelas”.

Also in November, the MPF was in favor of the rules of the Federal Psychology Council (CEP) that prevent the influence of religious beliefs in the exercise of the profession of psychologist. The MPF’s opinion was in response to a Direct Action of Unconstitutionality (ADI) presented by the Novo party and the Brazilian Institute of Law and Religion (IBDR) against norms that prohibit the association of religious concepts with psychological methods.

Another emblematic case that occurred this year was the public civil action filed to request the cancellation of three radio concessions granted to Jovem Pan. Prosecutors accused the broadcaster of promoting “large-scale misinformation” about the electoral system, with “the potential to incite violence and the rupture of the democratic order”. The news broadcast by Jovem Pan, according to prosecutors, would have legitimized the invasion of the Três Poderes buildings in Brasília on January 8, 2023.

In September, comedian Léo Lins became a defendant in a criminal case after a complaint from the Public Ministry to the Court was based on the so-called “anti-jokes law”, sanctioned by President Lula (PT) in January. The law defines jokes about groups considered as minorities as a crime of racism.

Also in September, the MPF asked the National Council for the Rights of Children and Adolescents (Conanda) to adopt measures to prevent the “abuse of religious power” in elections for Guardianship Councils, after a wave initiated via social networks of conservative candidates for these bodies.

Ideologization of the MP is growing, but it goes back decades

For jurist Márcio Chila, author of “Globalism and judicial activism: Public Ministry, agent of social subversion” (2020), the trend of ideologization of the MP is not new, but it is growing.

The MP, according to him, was one of the first public bodies to suffer the ideologization that penetrated all types of government bodies in recent decades. Significant changes began to occur in the MP as early as the 1960s, when Marxist and left-leaning ideas arrived at the body with the influence of European jurists who came to Brazil.

During the Constituent Assembly, according to Chila, groups of leftist prosecutors in São Paulo helped shape the new face of the Public Ministry throughout Brazil. These groups had great influence on the Constituent Assembly, which resulted in a constitutional text with loopholes for a more active role for the MP in ideological issues.

In the 1970s, says Chila, a tendency to loosen the penitentiary system and drug laws was already noticeable. After the Constitution, when the Public Ministry acquired new powers and more financial resources, political activism in the body increased. The MP began to challenge political decisions based on arguments from modernizing schools of Law – according to the jurist, even before the Judiciary joined this bandwagon.

As Chila explains, in the 1990s the MP followed the global trend in Law towards “legal sociologism”, in which sociology plays a more prominent role in the interpretation and application of laws.

“The Public Ministry began to defend the agenda of neo-Marxism. It starts there with the environment, but soon extends to all types of issues. Today the list is endless: homeless, landless, quilombolas, indigenous peoples, empowerment feminine, gender ideology…”, he comments.

Determining this turnaround are the Functional Studies and Improvement Centers (CEAFs) present in the MPs of all states, which provide training to the body’s new employees. “When a prosecutor arrives at the Public Prosecutor’s Office, the first classes he receives are at CEAF. And CEAF’s agenda has been entirely the same for a long time: ’empowerment’ of women, gender issues, all the time. Prosecutors are obliged to take these courses”, he reports. “If you’re more conservative and don’t agree with this, you’ve probably already fallen behind in the contest.”

Given this, for prosecutors who do not share the dominant ideologies in the MP and are joining the body, Chila sees a challenging panorama. Previously, according to him, it was possible to avoid prosecutors who dealt with ideologically sensitive issues. Nowadays, however, these issues are permeating all areas of the MP.

“In the Public Prosecutor’s Office there has always been the principle of autonomy and independence of the prosecutor, which means the following: if you are a prosecutor, you are not obliged to agree with everyone’s idea, as long as what you are writing, putting on paper in your opinion, is based on the law, on some doctrine – in short, as long as it is legal. Even if it is not a majority, if it is your position, that’s fine. Up front, you may be defeated, and the court will notify you, but the your position is guaranteed”, explains the jurist.

“But recently a movement has emerged to say the following: this independence is over. There is another principle, previously somewhat peripheral, that is being placed ahead of everyone: that of the unity of the Public Ministry. If the Public Ministry establishes a position, the prosecutor cannot disagree. A prosecutor cannot give an opinion contrary to the institution’s guidelines. And today there are guidelines for everything”, explains Chila.

Until a few years ago, according to the expert, members of the MP who were averse to ideologization believed that it was possible to create an internal movement within the body to try to change this situation. That has changed.

“We could try to elect an attorney general with more conservative views, encourage associations to promote discussions on the subject and question the Public Ministry’s guidelines. However, this window of opportunity seems to have closed. Nowadays, change must come from outside, through parliamentarians, changes to the Constitution and the law, with the involvement of the press, with collective effort. Internally, it is extremely difficult to promote significant changes”, he laments.