CRY IN UNISON (INDIGNANT SHOUT):
”NASRUAS” MOVIMENT AGAINST CORRUPTION
CARLA ZAMBELLI AND MARÍA CORINA: TWO LATIN AMERICAN DIVAS FIGHTING AGAINST CORRUPTION IN BRAZIL AND VENEZUELA FOR LATIN AMERICA DEMOCRATIZATION
CRY IN UNISON (INDIGNANT SHOUT):
”NASRUAS” MOVIMENT AGAINST CORRUPTION
"There is widespread corruption participation in the public Brazilian institutions.
" Carla Zambelli's NASRUAS Group Moviment”
Carla Zambelli was born in São Paulo city, with a degree in strategic planning and an MBA from Getúlio Vargas Foudation. Besides acting as a Project Manager of a large company, Carla has another activity: it is one of the founders and activists of the NasRuas Group Mmovement , it was created with the aim of combating impunity and fight corruption in Brazil. Coordinated with other anti-corruption movements people, has helped to mobilize some protests in major cities in the country. She manages groups with thousands of Internet users through Facebook and produces conferences for discussion on corruption. Gently, Carla Zambelli accepted this interview the Best Country Institute, which will tell a little more about the initiative and how it intends to fight against corruption.
IPM: First, Carla, as you see corruption in Brazil and it causes?
CZ: Corruption in Brazil today has huge proportions. Is involved in the executive, legislative and judiciary at the municipal, state and federal plus present in all political parties. For example , there is widespread corruption participation in the public Brazilian institutions .
Moreover, such corruption causes unacceptable harm to our republic country. And the money deviated contribute to a or a less problematic country. Each portion of the stolen money, for example, diminishes the opportunities to invest in health sector and consequently causes deaths of people who depend on the National Health Service (SUS), for example.
Besides that, the same logic can be applied to other areas, such as education or infrastructure. If at this moment, we have cities fulfilled with true holes in the streets, traffic become chaos and also, the lack of investment in subways, on asphalt quality and the situation goes far beyond this superficial interpretation of mind.
There is no charge contractors responsible for the quality of asphalt in cities because the relationship is based in any other form than that of vendor-contractor, as it should be. Bids are mislead, service delivery is done anyway, because the goal is not to improve the public welfare, but the delivery of "anything" for that bill and divide the profits taken from the pocket of every honest citizen of this country.
"Corruption due to its ubiquitous nature, it has a huge participation in our three power institutions of executive, legislative and judiciary power at the municipal, state and federal governments spheres, as well as present in all political parties. There is widespread corruption participation in the public Brazilian institutions. "
IPM: What is the difference between the motion "sweeps Brazil" and "The Streets"?
CZ: NasRuas Group Moviment arose before September 7. At that pre-protest began to feel the need to better organize information on the manifests for the whole country, not only for São Paulo city. It happens on the contrary, in fragmented way, each group scheduled a different time and place . There was a great interest conflict and if we divide the events, we would not have any sufficient strength. For that reason we try to make the NasRuas a bigger congregation of groups besidess a single group “Varre Brasil”. In addition they coud schedule better time and place to meet ones with others directed to “October 12 Movement.
At this time we created “Sweeps Brazil” would participate in this NasRuas to represent our interests . But this movement did not work at all, because the NasRuas Group Moviment, since the beginning was interpreted as another movement. For this reason the “Sweeps Brazil” was finished it. But we are trying to make it a common place for groups to discuss proposals, dates, times and locations of new manifestos against corruption. When all realize that only together we get strength enough to fight against impunity, maybe we can see it in the same way that we would like to.
IPM: Do you feel a positive feedback of people in protests against corruption? Or expect greater participation?
CZ: Yes, who participates gives us a positive feedback even though they were only 600 people in Sao Paulo state in January or February 1200 in Maranhão State. We remark a provision and a insurgency in every one of these people, which gives us the necessary strength to continue this important work.
On the other hand, in a country that 2 million people take to the streets to demand sexual liberation or, in contrast, for religious reasons, should have at least 500 000 outraged the streets, demanding us ending impunity in Brazil. Until we are many, we will not be taken seriously and to not be heard so really satisfying.
"In a country where 2 million people may take to the streets to demand sexual liberation, or in counterpoint, through Jesus, we should have at least 500 000 outraged people on the streets, demanding us to end impunity in Brazil"
IPM: What are the main proposals that, in their opinion, would help in the fight against corruption in Brazil?
CZ: From what I have researched so far, I believe that investment in quality education and political awareness is the main path, preventive measure in the long run. We're putting together a bill to insert a subject in high school called CEEP: Citizenship, Ethics and Education Policy. Exist a structure in which students learn about election issues, their rights and duties as citizens, and gear the powers and spheres of government in Brazil. Only an informed citizen will fight for their rights.
Furthermore, we believe that a national law to combat corruption, covering all codes of law, and specific penalties for offenses involving the theme would be a good solution. We have opinions of jurists like Dr. Ives Gandra Martins (Tax Lawer) and Dr. Ada Pellegrini, who support us in this project. And there are other key proposals, such as the end of the parliamentary ballot or alteration of immunity for crimes.
The NasRuas promoted the I Congress Against Corruption on December 09 last year and organizes the next, in São Paulo, on March 17, 2012 just to shut the proposals which will be the official movement, listening to the opinion of experts. The movement against corruption consists of volunteers and non-technical policy. It is important that we are sure about what we claim.
The reporter Monica Iozzi, CQC, and Carla Zambelli, marched promoted in October 2011.
MPI: The movement against corruption, especially in those protests last September 7, were categorized by the left as an elitist initiative. The blogger Ricardo Kotscho compared with the demonstrations that helped promote the Coup of 64 and the election of Collor. How do you see these criticisms?
CZ: All criticism should be considered and evaluated, but let's not discourage. If someone accuses us of being an elitist movement, I only regret: the beauty of this moment in our demonstrations would receive people of all classes and ages.
The poorest are the most affected by corruption and somehow we have to get to them requesting their attendance at events. The criticism that most shook the beginning of NasRuas was when we were labeled as "angry and ignorant." After that run behind technical information with our congress. After all, if we take to the streets and claim that is plausible reasons, serious and actually change something in our country and for the good.
IPM: There are political parties or even truly committed to fight corruption?
CZ: This is a difficult question. I believe that there should be serious political, as in any religious organization, political or sports there are always good people and committed. But say for sure: there is no single political party 100% honest and committed to our cause. We are not and we do not feel, currently represented by any one of them.
IPM: You consider the possibility that it would apply to any political office in the future?
CZ: I believe that this movement will arise people interested in joining political career, and I find it interesting. Incidentally, it commits an error to say that the movement against corruption are apolitical. Quite the contrary: all fighters today do through politics, but we do so partisan.
I have no intention of running for anything because it would enter into any political party active in the country today. I have my career and live well in this way, but I think we should go through a renewal policy and is by inserting the powers that be will. Anyway, as Dr. Ives Gandra Martins said in an interview with NasRuas, at the time the motion to join the political candidacy, the purity that can be lost, coalitions will be offered, sponsorships must be requested and only with great ethics and popular participation is that we could keep ourselves pure.
IPM: Before we go to the last question, we thank you immensely for the interview. What are your plans for the future of the movement against corruption and how the reader can stay informed?
CZ: First the implementation and subsequent study based on the Second Congress Against Corruption. Dali leave the master plan of our movement, which serve as the basis for our claims. And after that the continuous manifest the country. Day September 7th we have to stop Brazil, as our phrase shouted: "The people agreed, the people decided, or stop the thievery stopped or Brazil."
We have to keep our promise and show that we can stop Brazil, so invite all who read this interview to seek a move, act in the fight against corruption in some way, even if it is only appearing on the manifest, but exercising their right and duty of citizens. The NasRuas Gruoup Moviment all works by Facebook by page www.facebook.com / nasruas and can provide more information via email: firstname.lastname@example.org. We appreciate the opportunity of the interview and will always be a pleasure to attend. Congratulations on the work you do!
Written by Country Best Writing Institute
Posted on March 13, 2012 editorial in Interviews
Brazil: 250K protest against government corruption
People march during a protest in Belo Horizonte, Brazil, continuing a wave of protests that have shaken the nation and pushed the government to promise a crackdown on corruption and greater spending on social services.(Photo: Felipe Dana/AP)
- Tens of thousands of demonstrators took to the streets in several cities Saturday
- Protests were smaller and less violent than recent days
- President Dilma Rousseff backed the right to peaceful protests but condemned violence
SAO PAULO (AP) — A quarter-million Brazilians took to the streets in the latest a wave of sometimes-violent protests that are increasingly focusing on corruption and reforming a government system in which people have lost faith. A new poll shows that 75 percent of citizens support the demonstrations.
The turnout in Saturday's protests was lower than the 1 million participants seen on Thursday and there was less violence. But in the city of Belo Horizonte police used tear gas and rubber bullets to disperse protesters who tried to pass through a barrier and hurled rocks at a car dealership. The city of Salvador also saw demonstrations turn violent.
The protests have become the largest public demonstrations Latin America's biggest nation has seen in two decades. They began as opposition to transportation fare hikes, then became a laundry list of causes including anger at high taxes, poor services and World Cup spending, before coalescing around the issue of rampant government corruption.
Many protesters were not appeased by a prime-time television address Friday night by President Dilma Rousseff, who said that peaceful protests were welcome and emphasized that she would not condone corruption. She also said she would meet with movement leaders and create a plan to improve urban transportation and use oil royalties for investments in education.
"Dilma is underestimating the resolve of the people on the corruption issue," said Mayara Fernandes, a medical student who took part in a march in Sao Paulo. "She talked and talked and said nothing. Nobody can take the corruption of this country anymore."
A new poll published Saturday in the weekly magazine Epoca showed that three-quarters of Brazilians support the protests. The poll was carried out by the respected Ibope institute. It interviewed 1,008 people across Brazil June 16-20 and has a margin of error of 3 percentage points.
On Saturday, protesters denounced congressional legislation, known as PEC 37, that would limit the power of federal prosecutors to investigate crimes - which many fear would hinder attempts to jail corrupt politicians.
Federal prosecutors were behind the investigation into the biggest corruption case in Brazil's history, the so-called "mensalao" cash-for-votes scheme that came to light in 2005 and involved top aides of former President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva buying off members of congress to vote for their legislation.
Last year, the supreme court condemned two dozen people in connection to the case, which was hailed as a watershed moment in Brazil's fight against corruption. However, those condemned have yet to be jailed because of appeals, a delay that has enraged Brazilians.
"It was good Dilma spoke, but this movement has moved too far, there was not much she could really say," said Victoria Villela, a 21-year-old university student in the Sao Paulo protest. "All my friends were talking on Facebook about how she said nothing that satisfied them. I think the protests are going to continue for a long time and the crowds will still be huge."
Across Brazil, police estimated that about 60,000 demonstrators gathered in a central square in Belo Horizonte, 30,000 shut down a main business avenue in Sao Paulo, and another 30,000 gathered in the city in southern Brazil where a nightclub fire killed over 240 mostly university students, deaths many argued could have been avoided with better government oversight of fire laws.
Tens of thousands more protested in more than 100 Brazilian cities, bringing the nationwide total on Saturday to 250,000, according to a police count published on the website of the Globo TV network, Brazil's largest.
In the northeastern city of Salvador, where Brazil's national football team played Italy and won 4-2 in a Confederations Cup match, some 5,000 protesters gathered about 3 miles (5 kilometers) from the stadium, shouting demands for better schools and transportation and denouncing heavy spending on next year's World Cup.
They blocked a main road and clashed with riot police who moved in to clear the street. Protesters said police used rubber bullets and even tossed tear gas canisters from a helicopter hovering overhead. The protesters scattered and fled to a nearby shopping mall, where they tried to take shelter in an underground parking garage.
"We sat down and the police came and asked us to free up one lane for traffic. As we were organizing our group to do just that, the police lost their patience and began to shoot at us and throw (tear gas) canisters," said protester Rodrigo Dorado.
That was exactly the type of conflict Rousseff said needed to end, not just so Brazilians could begin a peaceful national discussion but because much of the violence is taking place in cities hosting foreign tourists attending the Confederations Cup.
Brazil's news media, which had blasted Rousseff in recent days for her lack of response to the protests, seemed largely unimpressed with her careful speech, but noted the difficult situation facing a government trying to understand a mass movement with no central leaders and a flood of demands.
With "no objective information about the nature of the organization of the protests," wrote Igor Gielow in a column for Brazil's biggest newspaper, Folha de S. Paulo, "Dilma resorted to an innocuous speech to cool down spirits."
Outside the stadium in Belo Horizonte where Mexico and Japan met in a Confederations Cup game, Dadiana Gamaleliel, a 32-year-old physiotherapist, held up a banner that read: "Not against the games, in favor of the nation."
"I am protesting on behalf of the whole nation because this must be a nation where people have a voice … we don't have a voice anymore," she said.
She said Rousseff's speech wouldn't "change anything."
"She spoke in a general way and didn't say what she would do," she said. "We will continue this until we are heard."
Copyright 2013 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
VENEZUELAN POLITICS AND HUMAN RIGHTS
Independent, Reality-Based Analysis
About this Blog:
Venezuelan Politics and Human Rights, a blog hosted by the Washington Office on Latin America (WOLA), is a unique resource for journalists, policymakers, scholars, activists and others interested in understanding Venezuelan politics and human rights.
The contributors call it as they see it, providing insights on Venezuela’s politics that go beyond the polarized pro-Chávez/anti-Chávez debate. The views expressed in the posts are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect WOLA’s institutional positions.
About the Bloggers:
David Smilde, moderator of the blog, is a WOLA Senior Fellow and Associate Professor of Sociology at the University of Georgia. He has lived in or worked on Venezuela since 1992. He is co-editor of Venezuela's Bolivarian Democracy: Participation, Politics and Culture under Chávez (Duke 2011).
Hugo Pérez Hernáiz is Associate Professor of Sociology at the Universidad Central de Venezuela.
Rebecca Hanson is a graduate student in sociology at the University of Georgia doing doctoral research on police reform and citizen participation in Venezuela.
Timothy Gill is a graduate student in sociology at the University of Georgia doing doctoral research on issues of state sovereignty and international funding for non-governmental organizations.
Venezuela’s political field was once again upset by release of an audiotape revealing confidential behind-the-scenes gossip. This time it was opposition National Assembly Deputy and former presidential hopeful Maria Corina Machado who was taped conversing with Venezuelan scholar Germán Carrera Damas at his home. Here as with the Mario Silva tape released in May, there is little that will surprise close observers. But making public knowledge what was an open secret is itself an important political occurrence. (Listen to tape or read transcript here)
Machado has acknowledged that the tape is authentic but says it has been edited. This is apparently 10 minutes of what was a two hour conversation.
The most significant, eyebrow raising part of the audio is when Machado describes what Ramon Guillermo Aveledo, the chairman of the opposition umbrella group Mesa de la Unidad Democratica said to the US State Department. Aveledo visited Washington and met with Undersecretary for Latin American Affairs Roberta Jacobsen last week (although note that Machado does not actually say that Avelado told the State Department this while in Washington). She said,
“I found out that Ramon Guillermo Aveledo told the State Department that the only way to resolve this (salir de esto) is by provoking and accentuating a crisis, a coup or a self-coup. Or a process of tightening the screws and domesticating to generate a system of total social control.”
The first sentence is very damning, suggesting that the opposition is doing just what the government has been accusing it of: trying to destabilize the country to the point that there is a break in democratic institutions. This should provide some context for the government’s continual accusations of conspiracies against it. Some of these conspiracy theories might be a little fantastic but they are inspired by some fundamental truths revealed in this tape.
First, important sectors of the opposition see the generation of crisis as the primary tool for defeating Chavismo. As I have suggested before, they have made great strides with this tactic since the contested election and it is not surprising that they would continue on this line.
Second, they seek to gain international support from countries that might support their cause. In another part of the tape Machado says “We have to raise the political costs for these vagabonds [the Maduro government], beginning with the gringos and followed by the Colombians, the Brazilians—well they take the prize, the Nobel, the Oscar.”
This strategy should not surprise. In any given context, political actors use their international allies to strengthen their internal position. Capriles’ visit to Colombia to meet with President Juan Manuel Santos clearly had this intention, as well as his attempt to visit Mexico and plans to visit the US. Maduro, in turn, has traveled to the Southern Cone countries to demonstrate international support for his legitimacy. In the last phrase Machado is apparently making reference to the Brazilian government’s support for the Maduro government which many in the opposition regard as hypocritical.
Aveledo’s statements could cause him legal troubles and could complicate US Venezuelan relations. Mayor of Caracas Jorge Rodriguez, who presented the tape, suggested that asking for foreign intervention is treason, and also suggested that if Aveledo really did say these things, the State Department should have informed the Venezuelan government.
The tape also reveals serious divisions within the opposition regarding strategy. The tape begins with Machado expressing her disappointment that Capriles called off the April 17 march to downtown Caracas, as well as Aveledo’s praise for the meeting between Venezuelan Foreign Minister Elias Jaua and US Secretary of State John Kerry.
“It could not have been more inopportune. I feel indignant. I should have gone earlier to the State Department, I should have gone…We should have done other things. You have to sit down with key actors, taking them key information so that the Congress reacts! I mean how can it be that what is happening in Venezuela is happening and people don’t find out because the State Department does not think it is important. They [the MUD] are very fearful that I am going to go and meet with the State Department, with senators or with other people that have the capacity to influence, and put forward a position that is radical, as they call me, of non-dialogue and non-electoral confrontations.”
Machado is lamenting that she did not act earlier to prevent a rapprochement between the US and Venezeula, and suggests that the MUD is fearful that she will act independently with her more radical line. But perhaps most damning of her was the fact that she describes her position as one of confrontation beyond dialogue and electoral politics.
There are a couple of elements of the tape that are hard to understand at this point, but which may become clear in the coming days.
First, when she is talking about what Aveledo told the State Department Machado apparently says “Or a process of tightening the screws and domestication to generate a system of total social control.” It is hard to understand what this could mean from the perspective of an opposition that controls no branches of the government. Two possibilities occur to me, both of them assume that this part of the tape was edited. Either Machado was talking about the Maduro government and this segment was pasted in to make it look like she is talking about opposition tactics. Or she was talking about what the opposition would do if they were to take power, i.e. create a sort of transition police state.
Second, Machado criticizes Capriles and Aveledo for their conciliatory stances, suggests she should have gone to the State Department to talk tough, but then describes how Aveledo went to the State Department to talk tough. It is a little hard to understand what her complaint is. In the released tape these statements follow one another in this order. My assumption is that they actually occurred at temporally distant parts of the conversation and that Machado contradicts herself just as much as anybody else does in spoken communication.
Finally, where did this tape come from? Jorge Rodriguez says it was given to him by an opposition activist. But who made it? Machado has suggested that this was an illegal recording which would mean that neither she nor Carrera Damas made it. Is his house under surveillance?
1. wastydkittyn likes this