There are still differences regarding the results, according

anik4200

The journalist. "In 1984, the seed of redemocratization was planted. In 2013, the serpent's egg of proto-fascism was hatched", he quotes, highlighting that, in both cases, the effects — respectively, the end of the dictatorship and the election of Jair Bolsonaro — were not immediate. Of all the demonstrations since redemocratization, analyzes Oscar Pilagallo, those of the "painted faces", who called for the impeachment of President Fernando Collor, in 1992, are the ones that have the greatest affinity with the Diretas campaign. "To begin with, with an interval of just eight years between them, it can be assumed that the same people, for the most part, were on the streets on both occasions. Probably many children who went with their parents to the mega rallies painted their faces to testify Collor. The creativity of the protesters, in fact, was a common trait between 1984 and 1992", he recalls. "Furthermore, in both cases, public acts responded to an external stimulus that met a general desire. In Collorgate, the role of spark was played above all by the press, which helped to destroy the icon of public morality that had been built two years before.

Finally, both in Diretas and in Collor's impeachment there was a certain consensus — in the first case, from the beginning; in the second, as the plot of lies and corruption ensnared the president."Article 186 of the Civil Code establishes that "anyone who, through voluntary action or omission, negligence or imprudence, violates the right and causes harm to another, even if exclusively moral, commits an unlawful act." The Fed Special Phone Number Data eral Constitution orders that legal entities under public and private law that provide public services will be liable for damages that their agents cause to third parties in cases of intent or guilt. reproduction PM was without a vest and was shot during a traffic inspection in RJ These were the grounds adopted by judge Belmiro Fontoura Ferreira Gonçalves, of the 1st Civil Court of Duque de Caxias, to condemn the State of Rio de Janeiro to pay R$450,000 in compensation for moral damages to the children and wife of a dead military police officer. in service.



In the lawsuit, the public agent's family members claim that he died due to the absence of a bulletproof vest while working in a Prohibition operation. In the decision, the judge points out that it was proven by the witnesses' testimonies that the police officers who were involved in traffic inspections did not have the right to wear ballistic vests. It was also proven that there were already formal requests for the public administration to make the equipment available. "The defendant must answer objectively for the damages caused, because, failing to do or prevent what he should have done, through omission or commission, creates the specific cause that generates the harmful event. The defendant failed to comply with his legal duty to provide the equipment basic and necessary security measures for Anselmo Alves Júnior to exercise his profession as a military police officer, as an attaché to Operation Prohibition, as he did not bring to the file any evidence to confirm that the vests were in fact provided for the professional's performance in question", highlighted the judge in his decision.