Deliberação sobre o pacote anticrime : democracia e direitos humanos na troca de razões por grupos opositores

Abstract

Urban criminality is one of the key themes in Brazilian political agenda, from which groups of different orientations engage in an exchange of arguments in different discursive arenas. The objective of this dissertation is to identify how groups with different political views exchange reasons about public security, democracy and human rights in the deliberation of anticrime Bill during its legislative procedures, in 2019. The context of the bill's discussion was marked by the performance of political actors who defend illiberal and regressive agendas regarding the guarantee of rights. To do so, a content analysis about posts and comments of representatives and its supporters on Facebook was made and the representatives' speech acts on public hearings about this subject were also analyzed. Guided by a systemic approach of deliberation, this study sought to identify which arguments were produced by different actors, analyzed how these arguments circulated in different discursive arenas and how democratic issues were seen and discussed, based on normative principles of deliberation. The framework is based on internet and politics studies, deliberative democracy theory and human rights. The results show justification associated with humanist and punitive approaches of public security such as references to political minorities, the right to life, freedom of expression and direct attacks to human rights. There was more justification among parliamentarians linked to vulnerable populations compared to those linked to police forces in different arenas. However, data about disrespect opposes the study hypothesis: disrespect was higher among the followers of parliamentarians who defend human rights, which is partially explained by the data of disagreement and attacks by political opponents of these representatives.