Brazil the Timeline of the Federal Government's
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
BRAZIL THE TIMELINE OF THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT’S STRATEGY TO SPREAD COVID-19 São Paulo, 28th May 2021. Study prepared within the scope of research project ““RIGHTS IN THE PANDEMIC - Mapping the impact of Covid-19 on human rights in Brazil” of the Centre for Studies and Research on Health Law (CEPEDISA) of the School of Public Health (FSP) of the University of São Paulo (USP)”, updated at the request of the parliamentary committee of inquiry created by Federal Senate Requests 1371 and 1372, of 2021, by means of Official Letter 57/2021- CPIPANDEMIA. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1. This study is part of research project ““RIGHTS IN THE PANDEMIC - Mapping the impact of Covid-19 on human rights in Brazil” of the Centre for Studies and Research on Health Law (CEPEDISA) of the School of Public Health (FSP) of the University of São Paulo (USP)”, carried out in partnership with Non-Governmental Organization “Conectas Direitos Humanos” until January 2021 and, since then, with the National Council of Health Secretaries (CONASS), with the aim of collecting federal and state regulations relating to Covid-19 and assessing their impact on human rights in Brazil. The partnership entered into with CONASS refers to the mapping and analysis of rules drawn up by the State and Federal District Health Offices and is restricted to the scope of health policies during the Covid-19 pandemic. The timeline of the federal government’s strategy to spread Covid-19 was first published in January 2021, and has now been updated at the request of the Federal Senate's Parliamentary Committee of Inquiry on Covid-19. 2. This document is composed of two main parts: the report, which presents the methodology and summary of the study results; and a timeline, which presents the systematization of the collected data. 3. The study aims to assess the hypothesis that a strategy to spread Covid-19 is in progress in Brazil, which is systematically promoted on a federal level. It is based on documental research with public data, carried out by an multidisciplinary team with qualifications in the areas of Public Health, Law, Political Science and Epidemiology, using as sources federal regulations, case laws, official speeches, public pronouncements by federal authorities and searches in digital platforms. The collection of data for the specific purposes of this study covered the period from 03/02/20 to 28/05/21, and sought information corresponding to events (actions and omissions) that demonstrate the presence of intent, herein understood simply as the confluence between the awareness of the acts and omissions practiced, and the willingness to practice them. 4. The collection has resulted in the identification of three types of evidence: 2 • federal normative acts, including the enactment of rules by federal authorities and bodies and presidential vetoes; • government acts, which comprise acts of obstruction to state and municipal government efforts to respond to the pandemic, omissions related to the management of the pandemic on a federal level, and other elements that allow understanding and contextualizing governmental acts and omissions; and • propaganda against public health, herein defined as the political discourse that employs economic, ideological, and moral arguments, in addition to fake news and technical information without scientific verification, with the purpose of discrediting health authorities, weakening popular adherence to science-based recommendations, and promoting political activism against the public health measures required to contain the spread of Covid-19. 5. A confluence has been verified between the normative, administrative and speech aspects of the federal response to the pandemic, with consistency between what is said and what is done. Therefore, the hypothesis of the existence of a strategy for dissemination of the disease through the following acts and omissions, is valid: − Defence of the theory of herd (or collective) immunity by infection (or transmission) as a response to Covid-19, spreading the belief that the “natural immunity” resulting from the virus infection would protect individuals and lead to the control of the pandemic, in addition to unfounded estimates of the number of deaths and the end date of the pandemic; − Constant encouragement to exposure of the population to the virus and non- compliance with preventive health measures, based on denying the seriousness of the disease as an act of courage and the supposed existence of an “early treatment” for Covid-19, converted into a public policy; − Trivialisation of deaths and damage caused by the disease, remaining silent about the protection of the family members of victims and survivors, promoting the idea that only elderly people or people with comorbidities, or people who did not have access to “early treatment” would die; 3 − Systematic obstruction of containment measures promoted by governors and mayors, justified by the supposed opposition between health protection and the protection of the economy, which includes spreading the idea that quarantine measures cause more damage than the virus, and that they - and not the pandemic - would cause hunger and unemployment; − Focus on assistance measures and abstention from disease prevention measures, often adopting measures only when prompted by other institutions, especially the National Congress and the Judiciary Branch; − Attacks on critics of the federal response, the press and professional journalism , questioning especially the scale of the disease in the country; and − Awareness of the irregularity of specific conduct. 6. Although not exhaustive, the timeline is sufficient to offer an overview of a process experienced in a fragmented manner. The results rule out the persistent interpretation that there would have been incompetence and negligence on the part of the federal government in managing the pandemic. On the contrary, the systematization of data reveals the commitment and efficiency of the Federal Government's work in favour of the extensive spread of the virus in Brazilian territory, with the stated goal of resuming economic activity as quickly as possible and at any cost, which according to the Federal Court of Accounts, shows the “political option chosen by the Central Government to prioritize economic protection “. 7. Finally, the tenacity in the behaviour of Brazilian federal authorities in the face of the widespread dissemination of the disease within the national territory and the sharp increase in the number of deaths is noteworthy, notwithstanding the fact that institutions such as the Federal Supreme Court, the Federal Court of Accounts and the Federal Public Prosecutor’s Office have pointed out, countless times, the non- compliance with the Brazilian legal order of actions and conscious and voluntary omissions by federal administrators, as have also done, tirelessly, scientific entities and entities from the health sector. 4 AUTHORS Coordinators of the “RIGHTS IN THE PANDEMIC - Mapping the impact of Covid-19 on human rights in Brazil” Research Project responsible for this study Deisy de Freitas Lima Ventura, Full Professor at FSP/USP Fernando Mussa Abujamra Aith, Full Professor at FSP/USP Rossana Rocha Reis, Professor at the Department of Political Science - DCP/USP Researchers André Bastos Ferreira, Doctoral Student at the Faculty of Law of the University of São Paulo (FD/USP) Alexia Viana da Rosa, Graduand at FD/USP Alexsander Silva Farias, Graduand at FD/USP Giovanna Dutra Silva Valentim, Master's Student at the Department of Political Sciences of the University of São Paulo (DCP/USP) Lucas Bertola Herzog, Graduand at FD/USP Acknowledgements We would like to thank Camila Asano, Program Director at Conectas Direitos Humanos, and Professors Conrado Hubner Mendes, Danielle Hanna Rached, Élida Graziane Pinto, Eloísa Machado de Almeida, Jânia Maria Lopes Saldanha, Pedro Bohomoletz de Abreu Dallari and Salo de Carvalho for reading and making valuable comments on the document. 5 SUMMARY EXECUTIVE SUMMARY............................................................................... 2 AUTHORS ...................................................................................................... 5 LIST OF ACRONYMS .................................................................................... 8 REPORT ........................................................................................................... 11 Presentation ...................................................................................................... 11 Aim and hypothesis........................................................................................... 12 Methodology .................................................................................................... 13 Typology .......................................................................................................... 15 Results ............................................................................................................. 16 WHO position on herd immunity through infection ………............................ 18 Difference between measurement of intent and causal relations .................... 23 Conclusion ....................................................................................................... 24 TIMELINE ...................................................................................................... 26 February 2020 ................................................................................................. 26 March 2020 ....................................................................................................