Manifesto in defense of civil society organizations

The National Council for the Legal Amazon (Conselho Nacional da Amazônia Legal – CNAL, in Portuguese), chaired by Vice-President Hamilton Mourão, is currently the federal government body responsible for coordinating and monitoring public policies for the Legal Amazon. Documents from this council, mentioned in a recent news report from the newspaper O Estado de S. Paulo, revealed the government's goal of “obtaining control of 100% of the NGOs that operate in the Amazon region by 2022.” The executive branch's idea is to authorize only NGOs that “serve the national interests” and to establish a “regulatory framework for NGO activities”.

Freedom of association is one of the pillars of democracy. However, the ambition to control and limit the activities of civil society organizations has been a constant issue in Bolsonaro's administration. From day one, it issued a provisional measure that had the purpose of transferring the responsibility for controlling, monitoring, and following up on the actions of civil society organizations to the Secretary of Government. This was followed by a presidential decree removing the participation of civil society organizations from several governmental councils responsible for the implementation of public policies.

Fortunately, the National Congress changed the wording of the provisional measure, and the Federal Supreme Court partially overturned the decree that restricted the participation of civil society.

We now see, through the Amazon Council, this ambition to control civil society organizations being reintroduced. If this goes ahead, we will once again have the violation of a fundamental principle of our democratic Rule of Law.

The Brazilian Constitution, in its 5th article, guarantees full freedom of association in the country. Therefore, not only is the creation of NGOs independent from the authorization of public authorities but also any governmental interference in the functioning of these organizations is prohibited. Furthermore, only the Judiciary Branch can determine the suspension of activities or termination of an NGO.

Therefore, any attempt by the Brazilian government to control these organizations will find in the Constitution an insurmountable obstacle.

Contrary to what is disseminated in government circles, NGOs are subject to inspection mechanisms. All of them are obliged to register their acts in a notary office supervised by the Courts of Justice. They are annually accountable to the Brazilian Federal Revenue Department and, in the case of foundations, also to the Public Prosecutor’s Office. They are subject to sectorial regulation by councils, ministries, and secretariats, as occurs in the areas of social assistance, education, or health.

If they are foreign NGOs, they must have the approval of the Ministry of Justice and Public Security to operate in the country. If they receive funds of public origin – which is rare in the universe of more than 780,000 Brazilian NGOs – they are subject to several levels of control, including courts of auditors. In 2014, Brazil published a “regulatory framework” for NGOs, Law No. 13,019.

The Amazon Council apparently ignores this entire compilation of norms and institutions.

A government taking control of NGOs is not a constitutionally legitimate goal. Defending and protecting the environment is. Preserving the Amazon is a task not only for the government but for the community as a whole, as the Constitution expressly states in Article 225. The work of NGOs in the Amazon region – often working under difficult and insecure conditions – collaborates with the common interest

Narratives discrediting the work of these organizations, which act in defense of a common heritage, definitely do not belong in a society that intends to be democratic.

The government's monitoring of NGOs and their representatives in international forums as a way to spy on "bad Brazilians" – as happened at the COP 25 conference in Madrid – is also inappropriate.

Restricting freedoms harms the national interest.

As is the case with any fundamental right, the right to freedom of association is not absolute. However, eventual restrictions must have constitutional justification. And, as established by the UN International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, which Brazil has followed since 1992, they must be compatible with a democratic society. Controlling 100% of the NGOs in the Amazon region definitely exceeds these limits.

It is worth remembering: in a democracy, it is the society that controls the government, not the other way around.

Arns Commission

São Paulo, November 19, 2020

--

Photo: Arquivo Carta Maior