A new book aims to redirect discussion of public security in Brazil from surface issues to infrastructure. The book, called “Public Security – A Project for Brazil,” was written by Professor Daniel B. Vargas, who is a professor at the FGV Rio de Janeiro Law School and FGV Sao Paulo School of Economics (FGV EESP).

According to the author, when looking at data on the quality of social services in Brazil since the 1988 Constitution came into effect, it is clear that all areas – education, health and welfare – have improved, except one: public security. In recent years, debate on public security in Brazil has been restricted to the sphere of criminal law, involving questions about the increase or decrease in the number of prisoners in the country.

On the one hand, there are those who argue that “a good bandit is a dead bandit.” On the other hand, some people argue that imprisonment is, by definition, unjustified violence. In this context, “Public Security – A Project for Brazil” suggests the first foundations for a new public security paradigm.

According to Vargas, who holds a doctorate and master’s from Harvard University, the core reason for public security problems in Brazil is institutional isolationism. In most Brazilian states, he argues, there is a lack of dialogue between the military and civilian police, which, in turn, also fail to talk to public prosecutors more than is absolutely necessary. In addition, public prosecutors do not usually talk to judges, except in court cases.

Vargas, a former acting head of the presidential Strategic Affairs Secretariat, notes that judges tend to avoid contact with the prison system. The members of this system demonstrate ignorance of the communities to which prisoners must be returned, causing deficiencies in all spheres of public security. “Multiply this institutional silence by Brazil’s 26 states and the Federal District, and you can see the full extent of this crisis,” he says.

The author evaluated the successes and failures of former justice and public security minister, Sergio Moro. According to Vargas, Moro’s victories during his time as minister included obtaining approval for a tougher differentiated disciplinary regime, the infiltration of agents and greater rigor in regime progression, as well as the creation of a closed regime for criminal organizations. On the other hand, Moro failed to institute second-instance arrests, create a so-called “license to kill” and expand plea bargains, inspired by the American regime. The House of Representatives has also introduced some important innovations, such as the “judge of guarantees” and the increase in the penalty ceiling from 30 to 40 years.

According to Vargas, the former justice minister’s plans were profoundly altered, and one of his flaws was his failure to detect that the public security system is unstructured, due to the lack of dialogue between the entities that make up this system. Every link in the chain is broken.

“The effects of isolationism are bleak. Fewer than 10% of homicides are solved. A fraction of cases goes to trial, and only a fraction of these cases ends up with imprisonment. At the same time, prisons are packed with people whose cases have not yet been judged, many for minor crimes – the vast majority of whom are black, poor and living in peripheral areas,” Vargas notes.

In this context, Vargas proposes a set of actions, centered on changes to the relationships between the federal, state and municipal governments, between the military and civil police and Public Prosecutors’ Office; between the Public Prosecutors’ Office and courts, and between the courts and prisons. He also suggests recreating the Ministry of Public Security, tasked with orchestrating and strengthening the actions of municipal and state governments across the country, based on data and the organization of a “public security science,” less focused on insufficient statistics and more focused on concrete institutional experiences.

For more information about the book, click here.