‘Too little too late’ or ‘Premature’? The Brazilian Truth Commission and the Question of ‘Best Timing’

Abstract

This article combines empirical findings on recent Brazilian history and theoretical questions related to the timing and nature of mechanisms associated with political transitions by raising the controversial question of whether the recently inaugurated Brazilian Truth Commission is ‘too little too late’ or even ‘premature’. After locating it in its wider historical context, this article introduces key competing opinions about the Brazilian Truth Commission, which has been perceived as belated and weak in comparison with those of other Latin American countries. Yet, rather than aligning itself with any of these positions, the Brazilian Truth Commission serves to exemplify that there is neither a generic nor an ‘impartial’ solution to the question of best practice and timing—any evaluation of the Commission depends on its specific goals and key target group. Processes of transition are neither linear nor predictable; they constitute power struggles, depend on the population's interest in the past, and can take on a dynamic of their own.

Keywords:

• Brazilian Truth Commission
• history
• competing opinions
• target group

View correction statement:

Erratum

Notes

This version has been corrected. Please see Erratum (http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13260219.2013.827291).

 1. According to Tricia D. Olsen, Leigh A. Payne, and Andrew G. Reiter, the only South American countries yet to hold trials or create a Truth Commission are Trinidad and Tobago and Venezuela, see Transitional Justice in Balance: Comparing Processes, Weighing Efficacy, Washington D. C., United States Institute of Peace Press, 2010, pp. 181–8. However, although crimes undeniably occurred, these countries are not considered classic authoritarian regimes. Concerning Central America, the only post-dictatorial nation not to hold trials or establish a Truth Commission is the Dominican Republic.

 2. The author wishes to thank her interviewees (Criméia de Almeida, Edson Teles, Vladimir Safatle, Victória Grabois, Maurice Politi, Caroline G. F. de Menezes, Eugênia Barbosa Gonzaga, Marlon Weichert, Paulo Abrão, Iara Xavier Pereira, Gilney Viana, all interviewed in August 2012). Support for this research was kindly provided by the German Academic Exchange Service (DAAD) and the EU FP7 Marie Curie ZIF Programme, University of Konstanz (grant no. 291784).

 3. For a concise genealogy of ‘transitional justice’, see Ruti Teitel, ‘Transitional Justice Genealogy’, Harvard Human Rights Journal, 16, March 2003, pp. 69–94. For further discussion about the concept, I suggest Christine Bell, ‘Transitional Justice, Interdisciplinarity and the State of the “Field” or “Non-Field” ’, The International Journal of Transitional Justice, 3, October 2009, pp. 5–27, and Arthur Paige, ‘How Transitions Reshaped Human Rights: A Conceptual History of Transitional Justice’, Human Rights Quarterly, 31:2, May 2009, pp. 321–67.

 4. For the original wording see Teitel, ‘Transitional Justice Genealogy’, p. 69: ‘Transitional justice can be defined as the conception of justice associated with periods of political change, characterized by legal responses to confront the wrongdoings of repressive predecessor regimes’. For an elaboration of the political and cultural dimension of transitional justice, see Nina Schneider, and Rebecca J. Atencio, ‘When Memory Culture and the Arts Precede Legal and Political Measures: Transitional Justice à brasileira (the Brazilian Way)?’ (forthcoming).

 5. For recent literature on the transnational repression network ‘Operation Condor’, see John Dinges, The Condor Years: How Pinochet and His Allies Brought Terrorism to Three Continents, New York, The New Press, 2004.

 6. Maria A. Aquino, ‘A especifidade do regime militar brasileiro: abordagem teórica e exercício empírico’, in D. Aarão Reis (ed.), Intelectuais, história e política: séculos xix e xx, Rio de Janeiro, Viveiros de Castro, 2000, p. 275.

 7. Anthony W. Pereira, ‘An Ugly Democracy? State and the Rule of Law in Postauthoritarian Brazil’, in Peter R. Kingstone, and Timothy J. Power (eds), Democratic Brazil: Actors, Institutions, and Processes, Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh University Press, 2000, p. 224.

 8. As of this writing, a much praised summary of the transitional justice history in Brazil authored by Glenda Mezarobba is being published by the Encyclopedia of Transitional Justice, vol 1–3, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 2013. For an overview also consult Alexandra B. De Brito, ‘Truth, Justice, Memory, and Democratization in the Southern Cone’, in Alexandra B. De Brito, Carmen Gonzalez-Enriquez, and Paloma Aguila (eds), The Politics of Memory: Transitional Justice in Democratizing Societies, Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2001, pp. 119–61; Anthony W. Pereira, Political (In)justice: Authoritarianism and the Rule of Law in Brazil, Chile, and Argentina, Pittsburgh, University of Pittsburgh Press, 2005; Glenda Mezarobba, ‘O preço do esquecimento: as reparações pagas às vítimas do regime militar (uma comparação entre Brasil, Argentina e Chile)’, Ph.D. Diss., University of São Paulo, 2007; and Paulo Abrão and Marcelo D. Torelly, ‘As dimensões da Justiça de Transição no Brasil, a eficácia da Lei de Anistia e as alternativas para a verdade e a justiça’, in Leigh A. Payne, Paulo Abrão and Marcelo D. Torelly (eds), A anista na era da responsibilização: o Brasil em perspective internacional e comparada, Brasilia and Oxford, Ministry of Justice and Oxford University, 2011.

 9. Alfred P. Montero, Brazilian Politics, Cambridge, Polity Press, 2005, p. 20.

10. Elio Gaspari, A ditadura encurralada, São Paulo, Companhia das Letras, 2004.

11. Bolivar Lamounier, Voto de desconfiança: eleições e mudança na política no Brasil, 1970–1979, Petrópolis, Vozes, 1980, p. 7; Maria H. M. Alves, State and Opposition in Military Brazil, Austin, University of Texas Press, 1985; ‘Gallup culpa reformas pela queda de prestígio de Geisel’, Jornal do Brasil 26 (May 1977), n. p.

12. Montero, Brazilian Politics, p. 20.

13. Alves, State and Opposition, p. 211.

14. Ronaldo Costa Couto, História indiscreta da ditadura e da abertura. Brasil: 1964–1985, Rio and São Paulo, Record, 2003, pp. 144, 148; Gaspari, A ditadura encurralada, 2004.

15. In April 2010 the Brazilian Supreme court confirmed the 1979 Amnesty Law. Nina Schneider, ‘Impunity in Post-Authoritarian Brazil: The Supreme Court's Recent Verdict on the Amnesty Law’, European Review of Latin American and Caribbean Studies, 90, April 2011, pp. 39–54.

16. Secretaria Especial dos Direitos Humanos (SEDH), ‘Direito à memória e à verdade: comissão especial sobre mortos e desaparecidos políticos’, http://www.presidencia.gov.br/estrutura_presidencia/sedh/mortosedesap/id_livro/ (accessed 11 November 2009), pp. 32–3.

17. Members of the Amnesty Commission have, however, expressed doubts that more evidence can be found. Yet, unlike the CNV, the Amnesty Commission does not enjoy unrestricted access to classified documents.

18. The Araguaia guerrilla movement (1972–1975), wiped out by military troops, constitutes the largest group of victims assassinated during the dictatorship. Most of the dead bodies have never been found.

19. Vladimir Safatle and Edson Teles (eds), O que resta da ditadura: a exceção brasileira, São Paulo, Boitempo, 2010.

20. Aquino, ‘A especifidade’, p. 271.

21. Ellen Lutz and Kathryn Sikkink, ‘The Justice Cascade: The Evolution and Impact of Foreign Human Rights Trials in Latin America’, Chicago Journal of International Law, 2, April 2001, pp. 1–34, p. 1; Elazar Barkan, The Guilt of Nations: Restitution and Negotiating Historical Injustices, New York and London, W. W. Norton & Company, 2000, pp. x, 308.

22. Arquidiocese de São Paulo, Um relato para a história. Brasil: nunca mais, Petrópolis, Vozes, 1985.

23. Secretaria Especial dos Direitos Humanos (SEDH), ‘Direito à memória’.

24. For critical analyses of the Special Commission, see Mezarobba, ‘O preço’, pp. 65–187, and Janaína de Almeida Teles, ‘Os herdeiros da memória. A luta dos familiares de mortos e desaparecidos políticos por verdade e justiça no Brasil’, Ph.D. Diss., University of São Paulo, 2005.

25. Olsen, Payne, and Reiter, Transitional Justice, p. 182.

26. For information about the Amnesty Commission's work, consult Paulo Abrão and Marcelo D. Torelly, ‘The Reparations Program as the Lynchpin of Transitional Justice in Brazil’, in Félix Reátegui (ed.), Transitional Justice: Handbook for Latin America, Brasilia and New York, Brazilian Amnesty Commission/Ministry of Justice and International Center for Transitional Justice, 2011, pp. 443–85. See also the Amnesty Commission's yearly reports and the journal Revista Anistia: política e justiça de transição.

27. Ministério da Justiça, Relátorio Annual da Comissão de Anistia, Brasilia 2008, pp. 39–51; ‘Especial: As caravanas da Anistia’, Revista Anistia: política e justiça de transição, 2, September 2009, pp. 110–49.

28. Abrão and Marcelo D. Torelly, ‘The Reparations Program’, p. 484.

29. For an explanation of the Brazilian reparations program, consult Abrão and Marcelo D. Torelly, ‘The Reparations Program’, pp. 445–63. They also summarise the main points of criticism of the reparations program on p. 450.

30. Mezarobba, ‘O preço’, pp. 307–8, 322, 359.

31. Abrão and Marcelo D. Torelly, ‘The Reparations Program’, pp. 444–5, 482. The authors also disagree with the claim that reparations function as a ‘pay off for silence’, see pp. 482–3. It must also be noted that under Paulo Abrão's leadership the Amnesty Commission has deliberately attempted to address society as a whole and de-individualise the reparations program, see p. 484.

32. Priscilla Hayner, Unspeakable Truths: Facing the Challenge of Truth Commissions, New York and London, Routledge, 2002, p. 14.

33. Agência Brasil/O Globo, ‘Lula cancela reunião com Jobim, em meio a polêmica sobre Programa de Direitos Humanos’, http://oglobo.globo.com/pais/mat/2010/01/12/lula-cancela-reuniao-com-jobim-em-meio-polemica-sobre-programa-de-direitos-humanos-915507921.asp, accessed 22 May 2010.

34. Information about these discussions can be found on the official website of the Brazilian parliament (Câmara dos deputados).

35. Agência Câmara de Notícias [News agency of the Brazilian parliament], ‘Plenário aprova urgência para projeto que cria comissão da verdade’, http://www2.camara.gov.br/agencia/noticias/POLITICA/202954-PLENARIO-APROVA-URGENCIA-PARA-PROJETO-QUE-CRIA-COMISSAO-DA-VERDADE.html, accessed 21 September 2011.

36. For documentation related to the Law project and its subsequent changes see, http://www.senado.gov.br/atividade/materia/getPDF.asp?t = 97084&tp = 1, accessed 10 December 2011.

37. Many authors have discussed the benefits of Truth Commissions versus those of trials. For a brief introduction and an attempt to move beyond that discussion, see Naomi Roht-Arriaza and Javier Mariezcurrena (eds), Transitional Justice in the Twenty-first Century: Beyond Truth versus Justice, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 2006, pp. 4–5.

38. Juliana Castro, ‘Garantir eficácia em investigações sera desafio da Comissão da Verdade’, http://oglobo.globo.com/politica/garantir-eficacia-em-investigacoes-sera-desafio-da-comissao-da-verdade-2695560, accessed 29 September 2011.

39. In August 2012, Criméia and members of her family won a historic court case against Colonel Brilhante Ustra, the former commander of the repressive organ Doi-Codi in São Paulo. While the court ‘morally’ convicted him of torture, the decision had no criminal consequences due to the 1979 Amnesty Law, see for example, O Estado de São Paulo, http://blogs.estadao.com.br/roldao-arruda/tag/janaina-teles/ (20 August 2012).

40. These quotations are taken from the official website of the Brazilian Senate: Luiz C. Canuto, ‘Jurista: Brasil precisa cumprir decisão da OEA sobre a Guerrilha do Araguaia’, http://www2.camara.gov.br/agencia/noticias/DIREITOS-HUMANOS/199417-JURISTA:-BRASIL-PRECISA-CUMPRIR-DECISAO-DA-OEA-SOBRE-A-GUERRILHA-DO-ARAGUAIA.html, accessed 30 June 2011.

41. Abrão and Torelly, ‘As dimensões da Justiça’, pp. 212–49.

42. On key pressure groups like Torture Never More (Tortura Nunca Mais) or the Special Commission, see Cecília MacDowell Santos, Edson Teles, and Janaína de Almeida Teles (eds), Desarquivando a ditadura: memória e justiça no Brasil, vol. I and II, São Paulo, Aderaldo & Rothschild, 2009, and Cecília M. B. Coimbra, ‘Tortura ontém e hoje: resgatando uma certa história’, Psicologia em Estudo, 6:2, June 2001, pp. 11–19.

43. Abrão and Torelly, ‘The Reparations Program’, pp. 227, 237–39, 244.

44. While the author is unaware of any statistics, informal interviews with numerous Brazilians along with popular comments on internet blogs show that criticism of the CNV was widespread in 2011 and early 2012.

45. Schneider, ‘Impunity’, pp. 47–9.

46. Rabbe Almeida, ‘Ministra confia em aprovação da Comissão da Verdade’, http://www.jusbrasil.com.br/politica/6941073/ministra-confia-em-aprovacao-da-comissao-da-verdade, accessed 7 May 2011.

47. For a detailed study of the 1979 Amnesty and its consequences, consult Glenda Mezarobba: Um acerto de contas com o futuro: a anistia e suas conseqüências. Um estudo do cas brasileiro, São Paulo, FAPESP, 2006.

48. Abrão and Marcelo D. Torelly, ‘As dimensões da Justiça’, p. 227 fn. 18; Pereira, Political (In)justice, pp. 161, 165.

49. Interview with Eugênia Gonzaga Barbosa, São Paulo, 20 August 2012; Maurice Politi, São Paulo, 21 August 2012; and Caroline G. Franco de Menezes, São Paulo, 17 August 2012.

50. The figures were obtained from the Brazilian Embassy in London, http://www.brazil.org.uk/brazilinbrief/population.html, accessed 19 February 2013.

51. Samuel P. Huntington: The Third Wave: Democratization in the Late Twentieth Century, Oklahoma, University of Oklahoma Press, 1991; Pereira, Political (In)Justice, p. 162; Abrão and Torelly, ‘As dimensões da Justiça’, pp. 232–3.

52. Pereira, Political (In)Justice, pp. 4, 12, 37, 61, 162, 166, 170, 197.

53. Abrão and Torelly, ‘As dimensões da Justiça’, pp. 240–2.

54. Anthony W. Pereira, ‘An ugly democracy? State and the Rule of Law in Postauthoritarian Brazil’, in Peter R. Kingstone, and Timothy J. Power (eds), Democratic Brazil: Actors, Institutions, and Processes, Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh University Press, 2000, p. 223; Schneider, ‘Impunity’, pp. 46–7.

55. Abrão and Torelly, ‘As dimensões da Justiça’, pp. 236–238; Mezarobba, ‘O preço do esquecimento’, p. 333.

56. Leonardo Avritzer, ‘Democratization and Changes in the Pattern of Association in Brazil’, Journal of Interamerican Studies and World Affairs, 42:3, October 2000, pp. 60, 66; Victor A. Albert, ‘Participatory Opportunity and Collective Action: A Critical Reflection on Brazil's Experiments in Democracy’, Journal of Iberian and Latin American Research, 16:2, November 2010, pp. 133–49.

57. Mezarobba, ‘O preço do esquecimento’, p. 336; Abrão and Torelly, ‘As dimensões da Justiça’, p. 234.

58. Aarão Reis, ‘Ditadura’, p. 48.

59. Schneider, ‘Impunity’, p. 41.

60. Daniel Aarão Reis, ‘Ditadura e sociedade: as reconstruções da memória’, in Daniel Aarão Reis, M. Ridenti, and R. P. Sá motta (eds), O golpe e a ditadura militar: 40 anos depois (1964–2004), Bauru, EDUSC; 2002, p. 47.

61. Mezarobba, ‘O preço do esquecimento’, p. 361; Pereira, ‘An Ugly Democracy?’, p. 217–22, 233–4; Schneider, ‘Impunity’, pp. 45–47.

62. Schneider, ‘Impunity’, pp. 47–9.

63. Schneider and Atencio, ‘When memory culture’.

64. Navi Pillay, the UN High Commissioner of Human Rights, has welcomed the Brazilian Truth Commission, ‘ONU diz que Comissão da Verdade é “passo vital” para lidar com abusos passados’, http://agenciabrasil.ebc.com.br/noticia/2011-11-18/onu-diz-que-comissao-da-verdade-e-passo-vital-para-lidar-com-abusos-passados, accessed 12 January 2012. See also the letter from Human Rights Watch to the Brazilian President, http://www.hrw.org/news/2012/05/16/brazil-letter-president-rousseff-truth-commission, accessed 20 June 2012, and the public welcoming statement by Amnesty International, http://www.hrw.org/news/2012/05/16/brazil-letter-president-rousseff-truth-commission, accessed 20 May 2012.

65. Pablo de Greiff, ‘Some Thoughts on the Development and Present State of Transitional Justice’, Zeitschrift für Menschenrechte/Journal for Human Rights, 2, December 2011, p. 112.

66. According to Teitel's genealogy, the notion of linear transitional justice processes was abandoned in the post-Cold War period (the second cycle); see Teitel, ‘Transitional Justice Genealogy’, p. 86. However, in the author's view, linear conceptions still inform much of the literature.

67. Steve J. Stern, Reckoning with Pinochet: The Memory Question in Democratic Chile, 1989–2006, Durham and London, Duke University Press, 2010, pp. 41, 48.

68. Elizabeth Jelin, ‘Public Memorialization in Perspective: Truth, Justice and Memory of Past Repression in the Southern Cone of South America’, The International Journal of Transitional Justice, 1, January 2007, pp. 138–56.

69. Steve J. Stern, Remembering Pinochet's Chile: On the Eve of London 1998: The Memory Box of Pinochet's Chile, volume 1, Durham, Duke University Press, 2006; Stern, Battling for Hearts and Minds: Memory Struggles in Pinochet's Chile, 1973–1988, The Memory Box of Pinochet's Chile, volume 2, Durham, Duke University Press, 2006; Stern, Reckoning, volume 3.

70. Stern, Reckoning, pp. 7–8.

71. Stern, Reckoning, pp. xxxi, 3, 33, 286, 312–13.

72. 29 July 2012, Brasília; 13 August 2012, Rio; 29 August, Belém; 10 September 2012, Recife.

73. See the Commission's official website, http://www.cnv.gov.br/sobre-a-comissao-da-verdade/plano-de-trabalho-da-cnv/, accessed 20 August 2012.

74. Several survivors made this claim during the public meeting on 29 July 2012: ‘We want the impossible’.