Talk:Law enforcement in Brazil

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	Law enforcement in Brazil is within the scope of the Law Enforcement WikiProject. Please Join, Create, and Assess. Remember, the project aims for no vandalism and no conflict, if an article needs attention regarding vandalism or breaches of wikiquette, please add it to the article watch list.
B	This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale.

Portal	Law enforcement in Brazil is within the scope of WikiProject Brazil, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Brazil and Brazil-related topics. If you would like to participate, visit the project page.
B	This article has been rated as B-class on the quality scale.
Mid	This article has been rated as mid-importance on the importance scale.
To-do list for Brazil: This article has been rated for quality and/or importance but has no comments yet. If appropriate, please review the article and then leave comments here to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article and what work it will need.

[edit] 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)

[edit] 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 178.000.000 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)}

[edit] 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)