A look at the 21st. Century on the Amnesty Law of august 28, 1979

Abstract

This study aimed to shed light on the amnesty institute, especially the amnesty of August 28, 1979. To this end, documental analysis of articles and dissertations on the object of study on screen was used as a methodological support. Every process of institutional rupture is traumatic, especially if it is capable of producing forgiveness and forgetting the atrocities resulting from this process. Brazil, unfortunately, has a tradition of rupture processes since forever, but in the case of the 1979 amnesty, its effects would affect, on the one hand, those – opponents of the military-authoritarian regime – who, according to the government at the time, had committed crimes against security. national, and on the other side, those – government agents and their supporters – who had committed crimes against human rights. It remains clear that these two types of crimes are not equivalent, nor can a fair comparison be made between the offensive potential of the first group against the second, but there is no doubt as to the superiority of the second group over the first in several aspects. Therefore, from the study carried out, it is evident that the 1979 amnesty was broad and unrestricted in order to reach “those” who brutally attacked the human rights of several Brazilians. Of the dictatorships that took place in Latin America, the Brazilian one was certainly the one that produced the worst horrors that a State could perpetrate against its own people, especially against the opponents of the regime of exception, that is, such horrors were forged from a false equivalence between the antagonistic groups of the time. Possibly, because of this amnesty, several murderers and torturers linked directly and indirectly to the civic-military government were pardoned for crimes against humanity. The fact that Brazil has not cleared up all these absurdities that were committed by the operators and thinkers of the dictatorship, has the current consequence, a country with a “wound” still open, part of it necrotic, and the other part bleeding, waiting for justice and accountability. In this way, it seems that the 1979 amnesty served much more to legitimize the executioners' impunity than to promote peace and justice to the victims of the violence of the years of lead.