Today (04/01), in the Band TV Newspaper, Mr. Joelmir Beting took advantage of of the popularization of the protests in Italy against the Brazilian government's decision of granting diplomatic asylum to Cesare Battisti to prick the Brazilian left.
He said that if Cesare Battisti went a Fascist the extradition would be granted. Besides deliberately to despise the historical antecedents (during the Fascist several Dictatorship they received political asylum in Brazil, among them some Latin-American dictators), the journalist omitted what prescribes the Brazilian Constitution.
Let us like or no, the competence to grant or not diplomat asylum is of the Brazilian President. Doesn't the journalist like decision uttered by Lula? OK, the freedom of press checks him this right. But the journalists should not put in doubt the power attributed by Brazilian Constitution to the President. The presidential decision of concession or not of asylum it doesn't need to be legitimated by the press or for the Italian government. What legitimates the concession of diplomatic asylum Battisti for the former-President is the Brazilian Constitution, whose content should be valued integrally by the journalists because in it is guaranteed the freedom of press.
No satisfied, the born citizen in Tambaú affirmed that the government depreciated the content of the Law of the Amnesty, because during the Dictatorship the leftists killed and they were died. Here the committed distortion is still more serious. The commentator of the Newspaper of Band deliberately omitted the decision uttered by the Tribunal of Human Rights of OAS, that judged DISABLE the Brazilian Law of Amnesty approved during the Dictatorship. Fact this published by the press:
"The Tribunal of Human Rights of OAS it condemned Brazil for not having punished the responsible for the deaths and disappearances happened in the Araguaia Guerrilla and it determined that all are made of the efforts to locate the missing persons' bodies. The Tribunal concluded that the Brazilian State is responsible for the 62 people's disappearance, happened between 1972 and 1974.
In a sentence published Tuesday night, the Tribunal considered that the dispositions of the Brazilian Law of Amnesty cannot impede the investigation and the sanction of serious violations of human rights. For it, "the dispositions of the law are incompatible with the American Convention, they lack juridical effects and they cannot follow representing an obstacle for the investigation of the facts of the present case, nor for the identification and punishment of the responsible". "
Every journalist is entitled of positioning on the announced facts and about the government decisions that they be uttered. But the freedom of press should be exercised in an abusive way. Unhappily, exactly this that happened in relation to Amnesty was.
When he referred the this subject in the Band TV Newspaper today, disapproving the position adopted by some Brazilian authorities, Joelmir Beting played the viewers deliberately against the Dilma government. But it hid of the public the content of the valid decision uttered by the Tribunal of Human Rights of OAS that, without any doubt, it checks legitimacy to the theory that Beting seems not to like. But from when journalism is a taste subject? The journalist read with facts and the facts should not be distorted, omitted, edited or invented just because the journalist wants to manipulate the public opinion.
To I World war's end, questioned about the hard sanctions that it intended to impose Germany, Georges Clemenceu affirmed that "nobody can say that Belgium invaded Germany". Facts are facts and nobody can say that the Tribunal of Human Rights of OAS considered valid the Brazilian Law of Amnesty when that Tribunal decided the opposite exactly.
But the pinpricks of Beting in the left didn't just tear the facts. They tore feelings also.
In 1967, when I had only 3 years of age, my house was invaded to kicks several times for the gorillas of the Dictatorship because my father dared to defend the legitimacy of João Goulart's mandate. The executioners called my father communist and of criminal, but me, that I also suffered in reason of those brutal lunges, it just sucked pacifiers and it urinated in that pursued man.
The crimes that my father eventually committed in that period, I ignore. While it was alive, he never wanted to talk with me on the subject. The crimes that I committed, I also ignore. Maybe Mr. Joelmir Beting can investigate them and to publish them in the Band TV Newspaper. If the crimes against the National Security that I committed in the first childhood go really unforgivable I won't be displeased to the being humiliated in public again. At least I will know that the humiliation that I suffered was deserved. But today I am sure that it didn't deserve so much unjustified humiliation in the Band TV Newspaper.