Federal intervention in public safety in the Federal District comes to an end today (31). After 24 days at the head of the district security forces, the executive secretary of the Ministry of Justice and Public Security appointed federal intervenor, Ricardo Cappelli, makes a positive assessment of the actions taken to, in his words, re-establish discipline and hierarchy in the sector . In a brief interview with Agência Brasil and Rádio Nacional, vehicles of Empresa Brasil de Comunicação (EBC), Cappelli comments on some of the main conclusions of the report he delivered to the Federal Supreme Court (STF) last Friday (27), when he highlighted that the delivery of the document was not “an arrival point, but a “starting point” to support the continuity of investigations into the attacks on the Planalto Palace, the National Congress and the headquarters of the Federal Supreme Court (STF), which occurred on January 8. Cappelli once again highlighted what he classified as “operational flaws” in the security scheme set up and said that the camp set up in front of the Army Headquarters, in Brasília, had become an “incubator of plans against Brazilian democracy.” EBC: Much has been speculated about the military’s relationship with the events that occurred on January 8. We would like you to talk about how you evaluate the relationship between the inter relationship with the military during this period, in particular with the Military Police and the Armed Forces. Were these institutions committed to the work? Ricardo Cappelli: I had a very short relationship with the Army on the 8th and also on the 9th. It was a very productive relationship. We managed to break camp on the 9th, in the morning, without incident. And this was only possible thanks to the commitment and collaboration of the Brazilian Army. With regard to PM, it is important to highlight that, from the beginning, I had the full support of the corporation, which collaborated so that we reached the end of this intervention with stabilized forces and discipline and hierarchy absolutely reestablished. We cannot confuse the eventual inadequate attitude of some with the institutions. For this reason, the Internal Affairs Department of the Federal District Military Police, at our direction, opened six military police investigations to investigate inappropriate conduct by military police officers on the 8th. wounded in combat, defending democracy. That’s what doing justice is: balance, proportionality and individualizing conduct, not generalizing it to institutions. EBC: You have stated, in interviews, that the central objective of the federal intervention in public security in the Federal District was to dismantle the camp set up in front of the Army headquarters in Brasília. In the report on the January 8 attacks, however, it is pointed out that, since the end of 2022, there have been some planned actions to demobilize the camp, but that these initiatives were “cancelled by factors beyond the control of the security forces of the Federal District”. What extraneous factors were these? Cappelli: On the three occasions when an attempt was made to intervene [no acampamento], the Army has always pondered, alleging a lack of security conditions and the possibility of a conflict. Considering the Army’s considerations, the Public Security Secretariat of the Federal District postponed the operations. EBC: But if the factors were beyond the control of the local security forces, what was the need for intervention? Cappelli: The intervention has nothing to do with dismantling the camp. The Constitution establishes that who guarantees security in the Federal District, including the security of the Constituted Powers, is the government of the Federal District. It became clear that, on the 8th, the Federal District failed to fulfill its constitutional mission. There was a breach of inter-federative trust and, therefore, the intervention took place. Most importantly, on the 9th, we managed to break camp in front of Army HQ without incident. More than 1,200 people were taken to the Federal Police, which recorded the incidents. Some of these people were taken to prison units. Having done this on the morning of the 9th was very important, as that camp was a symbol, an attack on democracy. It became an incubator of plans against Brazilian democracy. I consider it very symbolic that we dismantled the camp without any incident and arrested all those who were collaborating with plans against the democratic rule of law. EBC: The report on the attacks also highlights that the Federal District intelligence agencies knew that there would be attempts to invade public buildings. In this sense, is it possible to speak of omission or sabotage on the part of the responsible authorities? Cappelli: A report was delivered to the office of Mr. Anderson Torres, then secretary of public security for the Federal District, from the Undersecretariat for Intelligence of the portfolio itself, making it clear that there was the risk of invasion of the National Congress and public buildings. This was serious information that did not generate operational development consistent with the seriousness of the situation. What we saw on the 8th was a shabby security operation that failed to comply with the operational standard that is usually adopted by the corporation. Mr. Anderson Torres took over on the 2nd and, on the same day, he began to dismantle the nucleus of the Secretariat of Public Security, generating great instability. He does that, travels and when the report is forwarded to his office he was not even in Brazil. He was traveling, and his vacation didn’t start until the 9th, and therefore he was still district security secretary. Is it a succession of coincidences that end with the disaster of the 8th? Honestly, I don’t think so.* With contributions from Rádio Nacional reporters Daniella Longuinho and Lucas Pordeus.
Agência Brasil
Folha Nobre - Desde 2013 - ©