STF judges rule that prevents military from criticizing superiors

The virtual trial of the Claim of Non-compliance with a Fundamental Precept (ADPF) 475, which analyzes the constitutionality of article 166 of the Military Penal Code (CPM) which prevents criticism of superiors in the military service, begins this Friday (31). The norm serves for military personnel of the Armed Forces and military police of the states. The Social Liberal Party (PSL) maintains in the process that the device violates the fundamental right to freedom of expression. The case’s rapporteur is Minister Dias Toffoli.

>> Be part of the channel Life and Citizenship on Telegram

Article 166 of the CPM establishes detention, from two months to one year, if the military publicly criticizes the act of his superior or matter related to military discipline, or any government resolution.

As the Federal Constitution (CF) is from 1988 and the CPM from 1969, the party sees a conflict of rules since article 5 of the CF guarantees, in items IV, IX and XIV, freedom of expression, access to information and source secrecy; and in Article 220, the free expression of thought. In the initial petition, the PSL asks the STF to urgently declare article 166 unconstitutional, since “numerous military personnel are being indicted”. In the document, the PSL cites the case of military personnel from Minas Gerais who would have been “persecuted for expressing opinions about the payment of their salaries” on social networks, and also for “commenting that the governor (…) is being investigated by the STJ” .

The PSL asserts that the military should have the right to express themselves and their opinion on public safety, just as a doctor talks about health, without suffering any type of persecution. “Various members of the Military Police and Fire Department are punished for their posts, with sanctions ranging from reprimands to arrests,” he says.

For the party, the CPM must be urgently reformed. “It is recorded that the CPM is outdated, edited at a time when democracy did not prevail, being a direct reflection of authoritarianism, which is why it should be reviewed by the Legislative Power, to guarantee protection to police officers and military firefighters, creating a more humane environment and fair, eradicating any inequality”.

measure in states

The discussion about the freedom of expression of the military and other security agents has grown in recent years. Last year, a current norm also imposed a series of rules regarding the performance on social networks of the authorities of the General Command of the Military Police of the State of São Paulo (PMESP). The measure restricted and made the production of videos about the day-to-day activities of police officers unfeasible, in addition to reinforcing the ban on political-partisan demonstrations by agents.

At the time, then-federal deputy Guilherme Derrite (PP-SP) and now Secretary of Public Security of São Paulo, said that the generic ban on any and all posts related to the Military Police, regardless of the nature of the content, even if it is not critical the act of a hierarchical superior or verse on military discipline, represents an attempt at control or censorship by the General Command of the São Paulo police.

“The Military Police, under the pretext of protecting the institution, ended up leveling all police officers, all posts below, as if the majority made posts that denigrated the image of the institution, which we know is not true,” said Derrite.