Talk:Law enforcement in Brazil

Army

The article currently says "Army, Navy and Air Force police units are not to be confused with the state Military Police. These are internal security units of each Armed Forces branch. They do not have general order maintenance or law enforcement functions." I read in the paper that there's some discussion about changing the Constitution to allow for the Army to be used for law enforcement. It seems it is already used in Rio de Janeiro for that purpose. A.Z. 06:38, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

The Armed Forces have in fact been involved in street operations at times of emergency. However, save for these exceptional situations, they never patrol streets or investigate crime. Since they have never been consistently and systematically involved in general law enforcement duties, they do not have assignments related to typical police activities. Furthermore, they are not listed in article 144 of the Federal Constitution, so they cannot be considered “police institutions”. There has always been an intense debate calling for a change in this scenario, but so far no conclusion has been reached. Sparks1979 15:35, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

I believe that information should be in Wikipedia. A.Z. 03:52, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

No problem, I will add "In times of emergency, the Army has been called upon to maintain order, most notably in Rio de Janeiro". What do you think? Sparks1979 15:06, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

According to Brazilian federal constitution, only the state military polices could enforce law on urban and rural environment. Army are just to protect country against foreign attacks.--Officer Boscorelli (talk) 17:49, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

Constitutional amendment

Information about a constitutional amendment has been removed and I don't understand why. A.Z. 02:54, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

I support the removal of that information because that’s only a mere proposal. If we are going to include all legislative proposals of changes related to security, the article will be clustered with unnecessary information. Note most of these proposals never see the light of day. That information may fit the “Municipal Guards” article. Sparks1979 15:10, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Agree, though my original reason was a lack of a source combined with saying that was "criticism"--Dali-Llama 16:20, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

I don't undestand why the information was removed.The Municipal Guards are reconized as a police de facto for many entities.And about Sparks1979 opinion, a little information: This Amendment is suported by many representants.So I, as a brazilian citzen and Municipal Guard have faith in the heart in the Amendment aprovation.By the way: Many informations about the article are uncomplete.For many years, the municipal guards served the brazilian people as a full circle police in the times of empire.The State Governors in the First Republic eliminated that institutions because the municipal guards never acepted the State Elite political games.So, there is a lot of people supporting (and against) my profession.I request a best research in this article.--Bryard 11:07, 14 Stember 2007 (UCT)

Well Bryard, I was actually the one who reverted that. The primary reason was for adding "critics say" (which was not necessary in this case), with secondary reasons being mentioning the amendment without a source and the amendment itself touching on WP:CRYSTAL. While the amendment may very well pass, so far it hasn't. Therefore, I echo Sparks' assertion that it should be included in the municipal guards article, but it's too tenuous for this article. And the points you make on the history of the institutions are valid--but they would need a source meeting the WP:RS requirements, and would still probably be included only in the municipal guards article.--Dali-Llama 16:59, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

Currently, the Municipal Guards are not police institutions. The Constitution says that, the Supreme Federal Tribunal says that, and I got at least three law books at home saying that (José Afonso da Silva, Guilherme de Souza Nucci, Fernando da Costa Tourinho Filho). They are indeed a security force, but they are not a police force. If the Constitution is changed in the future, then we can change the article accordingly. Also, they are not police institutions de facto either. They do not investigate crime and they do not have general order maintenance assignments. Their only function is to protect Municipality assets. Who considers them police de facto and why? Sparks1979 18:29, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

Well Sparks1979, our former president Fernando Henrique Cardoso, and Mr.Benedito Mariano, the former São Paulo State Police Obudsman consider Municipal Guards as police units.In other hand, Mr. Hely Lopes Meireles never consider Municipal Guards and State Civil Guards police (of course, he served as São Paulo State Public Safety Secretary in the Military Era).Well, it's a free world and everyone have right of opinion.--Bryard 16:46, 17 September 2007 (UCT) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 201.28.40.220 (talk)

Bryard, it would be nice if you said why they consider them police, and cited a source saying that they do. A.Z. 03:10, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

Fair enough. But if we are to change the article, we need technical opinions of experts. FHC is not an expert on Law. This is a “law” issue. I can cite several authors saying the only “police institutions” in Brazil are the ones listed in article 144 of the Federal Constitution. Likewise, the Supreme Federal Court has said the very same thing. If you can cite some experts saying Municipal Guards are “police institutions”, then we can reconsider. I myself have never seen any law scholar specialized in Constitutional or Criminal Law making this claim. Sparks1979 13:56, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

Dears A-Z & Sparks1979, please enter in: http://pt.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guarda_municipal. I belive it's will send a good research material.TKS! Bryard 17:58, 29 September 2007 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 201.1.111.67 (talk)

Caro Sparks 1979: Gostaria de fazer uma pergunta sem nehuma polemica: por que os Guardas Municipais estão sendo aceitos na Associação Internacional de Polícia, se nos GCM's não somos polícia.Peço humildimente que o colega entre no link acima citado, entre em discussão e veja o parecer jurídico de jurstas sobre Guardas Municipais.Agradeço.{Bryard 18:23, 3 December 2007 (UTC)}

I've replied in Portuguese in your own talk page, because we shouldn't write in Portuguese in this area. Sparks1979 (talk) 14:52, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

Dear Sparks1979, I respect your right of opinion but I'm not agree with your speech.In deed, a Municipal Guard is considered as security police officer in many countries as USA, but not in the Latin America.There is only two latin american countries with local/municipal police force institutions: Mexico and Venezuela.I'm agree with you in gender,number and degree (I love that expression) in the reading and analisys of Article 144.In the letters of Constitution we are'nt a police unit.But it's not right! Remember, in the times of Empire of Brazil,the slavery was a regular and legal business.And if the Constitution is old and wrong, we have to change the law, with the letters of law.If you agree or desegree,all right...I'm not the "True's Owner".As a wikipedia user I have the moral obligation to respect your right of opinion...But I'm asking for a favor of you: Send me a valid e-mail and I will send to you a technichal analisys of the Municipal Guards constititional status.If you agree or desagree, it's all right...But the important is your impartial analisys.Thank you.{Bryard (talk) 12:36, 28 January 2008 (UTC)}

I don’t think it’s possible to carry out a civilized debate with you after the personal attacks you you left on my user page. If you want to try convincing any type of authority on monitoring this or any other site, go right ahead, be my guest. :) I haven’t made any edit in Wikipedia before today since early december last year, so I fail to see the reason for your outburst. Sparks1979 (talk) 23:48, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

All right, pal.If you don't consider my corporation as police, or security police; beat it.I will pass the true information to the International Police Association (São Paulo State Section) and the Wikipedia Law Enforcement administrator.If I attacked u, I apologize.By the way:I have two pieces of information to you:The São Paulo State Justice Tribunals, in your decisions, are calling the Municipal Guards as "Our Municipal Police".The other information is: In Supreme Federal Court site don't have nothing about a decision against my profession.(I guess that decision was suffered a revision.It's so normal in SFT'S history: a revision of a fore decision,because in our country there aren't a political scenario for discrimination or exclusion).Or we acepted that fact or we will be crushed by the foots of history.By the way:You will never more treat me as an idiot.There's three lawyers in my family.I have a good level of law knowledge.Don't worry, it's a wonderful world were we living...Because, by the brazilian laws, I'm a municipal civil serviceman, with a police function, and I'm still; a civilian.And remember, dear and fellow citzen:There are 800.000 brazilian militaries, in a 190.000.000 brazilian citzens universe.And the militaries serve civilian autorities.If u aren't any longer a military, you're a civilian.A civilian like any other.With your constitutional rights and civical duties.And one of these duties are:Respect your fellow compatriot right of expression.If u wanna respect me or not, I realy don't care.But you inspire me to be a Law student.Thank you.You realy changed my life.I'm realy hope to talk with you in ten years to now.To see what kind of man I becamed...And what kind of man you're becamed.Have a good and happy life, my dear and fellow citzen.{Bryard (talk) 23:13, 16 March 2008 (UTC)}.

I still don’t understand why you made this so personal. I don’t have any feelings regarding the Brazilian Municipal Guards. Quite frankly, I don’t care if they are considered police institutions or not. In fact, it probably would be a good thing if they were a police force, since it would mean there would be more units to do the job. However, my personal opinion is totally irrelevant. So is yours. What matters here is the opinion of experts, so we can keep our Encyclopedia technical. About STF’s decision, I found it in Alexandre de Moraes's book on Brazilian Constitutional Law. Since I don’t have the book near me, you have to wait until I can post the reference. Sparks1979 (talk) 02:33, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

Ok, pal, I wanna make a deal with you.If your send me a valid e-mail adress, I wiil send to you a good juridical analisys about my profession.Sorry for anything written in the heat of the moment.TKS.{Bryard 13:15, 29 April 2008 (UTC)}

Only for u, dude: http://blogdodelegado.wordpress.com/policia/delegados-apoiam-novas-atribuicoes-para-guardas-municipais/

Best regards & a good labor's day.{Bryard 22:47, 25 April 2009 (UTC)} —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bryard (talk • contribs)

Ranks/Structure

Is there any information that can be added regarding the different ranks of the Brazilian police as well as a general structure regarding the different divisions of the Brazilian police? ~QuasiAbstract {talk/contrib} 19:56, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

I'm think I can help.Give me a couple of weeks to send the ranks to u. Regards, { Bryard 18:14, 29 June 2009 (UTC)}

Hey, I found a good article in english wikipedia: Military Police (Brazil). All the best.{Bryard 02:03, 8 July 2009 (UTC)}

Federal Police duties

In Brazil all criminal offences are violations of Federal law, because only the Federal government can enact laws about criminal matters. So the article is wrong about the Brazilian Federal Police duties when it says "It has the main duties of preventing and investigating federal crimes (offences that violate federal law).", because, in Brazil, there is no concept of federal crime. The article about Brazilian Federal Police nails the actual duties of the Federal police when it says "main assignments are the investigations of crimes against the Federal Government or its organs and companies, the combat of international drug trafficking and terrorism, and immigration and border control police (includes airport and water police)." However, as the article is being watched for vandalism, and this error is too common in Brazil, I'll let others correct it, after some talk, if they feel it must be done. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 189.25.115.179 (talk) 18:32, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

These comments are correct. Thus I've made some changes in the lead. 200.140.140.194 (talk) 12:53, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

That sentence infact nails it perfectly.But it appears no one has added it to this article yet, either that or it got reverted and i cant find on the edit log...it still says " The Federal Police, officially the "Departamento de Polícia Federal", is described by the Constitution as "a permanent administrative organ of the federal Executive branch". It has the main duties of preventing and investigating federal crimes (offences that violate federal law). Thus, it has both order maintenance and law enforcement tasks. It also patrols airports, maritime waters, and the border.[7] It is directly subordinated to the Ministry of Justice." i will say once again ,as has it been said on the comment by 189.25.115.179 in brazil, only the federal government has the power of enacting laws about criminal matters, and as so the concept of federal crime doesnt really exist.i will go forward and add it to the article.As follows (no outer quotes obviously):

"The Federal Police, officially the "Departamento de Polícia Federal", is described by the Constitution as "a permanent administrative organ of the federal Executive branch".Main assignments are the investigations of crimes against the Federal Government or its organs and companies, the combat of international drug trafficking and terrorism, and immigration and border control police (includes airport and water police).It is directly subordinated to the Ministry of Justice"

if you think you can further improve that sentence please go ahead and do it... --187.59.186.144 (talk) 14:00, 17 July 2010 (UTC)

Why is the {{POV}} tag being added?

This has happened twice now - one be User:Bryard and once by an IP. Please do not add the tag unless you also explain, here, what you perceive the problem to be. ninety:one 14:25, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

--Well, that's the question--

I don't trust in the article.It's readed based in bad faith & vices of reading.

If u or the author of the article explain me why Municipal Guards are not police officers,it's all right.

But remember, we're reconized by International Police Association & International Labour Organization.

Best regards,

Bryard { 16:24, 24 August 2009 (UTC)}

--Well, that's the question part II--

Well, my fellow wikipedeans.I' gived up to change the article.I can't belive in the good faith in wikipedia, so, I give up to watch this article.It's based in lies.The logic of mr sparks 1979 is the same of the Gestapo/SS/Nazi propaganda machine. Bryard { 19:25, 25 November 2009 (UTC)}

--Well, that's the question part III-- (AKA: Law Enforcement in Brazil)

I' propose the the full article delection Proposed deletion, ' coz the article is based in unvoluntary bad faith and prejudice. Before you try to quest my reasons, I have the legal suport of many brazilian citzens.The simple reason of Mr Sparks 1979 be a Brazilian Army lawyer isn't a reason to that individual write in the article " The Municipal Guards are not considered Police Institutions". The competence to define who is or isn't a police officer don't belong (thanks god) to Brazilian Army or the Military_Police_(Brazil) forces. That prerrogative belongs to: International Labour Organization, International_Police_Association, the Brazilian Ocuppations Code, many Civil_Police_(Brazil) directors, the Order of Attorneys of Brazil (the Brazilian Bar Association) and the authorities of the judicial power (judge & prosecutor).If some persons don't respect my profession, patience. Well, in anyway, if the article is based in lies, is not my problem, it's a Wikipedia problem, coz the users arround the world still remember the Essjay controversy case. And the article is not based in the opinion of a specialist in Law Enforcement and Public Safety. For a best and more honest and democratic wikipedia, please, consider the proposal.Thank You. Bryard { 23:19, 18 November 2010 (UTC)}

I think what you're trying to say is that you disagree with the article saying that the municipal guards are not police officers? If that is the case, it is perhaps a bit of an over-reaction to attempt to propose the deletion of the article, to start labelling "mr sparks" (I have no idea who he might be) as part of the Nazi regime and to start throwing around accusations of bad faith.

To try and deal with your key point: the article cites a judicial opinion and that judicial opinion appears to be validly cited. If you wish to challenge the reliability of a source, please feel free to do so here. ninety:one 23:43, 18 November 2010 (UTC)

Improved description of entry requirements

I rewrote, improving, the entry requirements description. The previous version stated that just an academic test allows the entry and that's absolutely not true in any of the Brazilian forces. --Officer Boscorelli (talk) 17:46, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

not sure where this NYT potential resource may go?

• In Brazil, Officers of the Law, Outside the Law by Simon Romero and Taylor Barnes published New York Times January 9, 2012 reporting from Niterói Brazil; excerpt ...

  Patrícia Acioli, a judge known for imprisoning corrupt police officers, pulled into the driveway of her home one August night in this city across the bay from Rio de Janeiro. Her pursuers arrived at the same time. Then they did their work, shooting her 21 times until her body lay crumpled in the seat of her car. ... According to judicial investigations, they extort protection money from residents, operate unlicensed public transportation, charge commissions on real estate deals, mete out punishment to those who cross them and, most alarming, carry out extrajudicial killings. ... While the militias have recently expanded with vigor, their sway in various parts of Rio, especially on the city’s western fringe, is not new. Originally called “polícia mineira,” a nod to the aggressive policing tactics in Minas Gerais, a state bordering Rio, militias have operated in Rio for three decades.

A 2008 legislative investigation of Rio’s militias led to the arrests of several officials tied to the groups, including legislators, councilmen and senior police officers. The Rio militias, together with death squads formed by police in neighboring São Paulo, have been responsible for hundreds of murders each year and impunity in these cases remained the norm, according to a 2009 Human Rights Watch report.

• http://www.hrw.org/print/news/2009/12/08/brazil-curb-police-violence-rio-s-o-paolo Brazil: Curb Police Violence in Rio, São Paulo 1; Extrajudicial Killings Undermine Public Security December 8, 2009. See Human Rights Watch
• Rio Slum Is ‘Pacified’ in Advance of Games by Simon Romero published: November 13, 2011, see Rocinha
• Milícias se alastram por pelo menos 11 estados, excerpt ... "A report in the newspaper O Globo described how militias had spread to 11 of Brazil’s 26 states, often initially winning over slum residents by killing drug traffickers before imposing their own methods of coercion and control."
• Minha dor não sai no jornal in O Estado de S. Paulo; see Nilton Claudino
• Caso Patrícia Acioli: PMs acusados de executar juíza começam a ser interrogados; see Judge Patrícia Acioli

99.181.131.214 (talk) 01:59, 13 January 2012 (UTC)

Editing

Hello, I have been working on the Crime in Brazil page where I deleted A LOT of information having to do with law enforcement in Brazil. I just wanted to write on this talk page and let anyone who is interested know in case they wanted to get the information from there and add it to this page! Maggiejo10 (talk) 00:03, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Law enforcement in Brazil. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080712083616/http://www.policiamilitar.mg.gov.br/_pmmg.htm to https://www.policiamilitar.mg.gov.br/_pmmg.htm
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://web.amnesty.org/report2006/bra-summary-eng
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080712083616/http://www.policiamilitar.mg.gov.br/_pmmg.htm to https://www.policiamilitar.mg.gov.br/_pmmg.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 13:33, 12 May 2017 (UTC)