Statement on basic agreements for a democratic security agenda

On April 9th ​​and 10th, the Second Conference on Social Studies of Crime, Violence, and Policing was held in Buenos Aires. Nearly three hundred researchers specializing in security-related issues, grouped into more than 30 research teams from across the country, gathered to analyze and discuss public security policies. During the event, the teams reached a consensus on a document containing basic agreements for designing an effective criminal policy focused on crime prevention and the protection of rights. The document reflects the consensus among the specialists regarding the current crisis facing democratic security, as well as the deterioration and/or abandonment of key public policies related to defense and security. In this sense, proposals/suggestions are outlined in 12 relevant areas of criminal policy: information on crimes, violence and the penal system, the use of firearms, the role of the security forces, policies for the control of illegal drugs, communication policies, gender violence, the juvenile penal system, the criminalization of the migrant population, the intelligence system, the criminalization of social protest, the criminal justice system and the prison issue, and the blurring of the distinction between internal security and defense.

– Information on crimes, violence and the penal system. It is essential to improve the production, access, analysis, and use of data from official sources on crime, violence, and the criminal justice system to develop policies based on accurate diagnoses that can be monitored during implementation and evaluated for their effects. Police-based crime statistics (SNIC) need improvement through a systematic monitoring and cross-referencing mechanism with other sources (judicial, health) to verify the accuracy of the information. Furthermore, the data for each article of Law 23.737 (narcotics) must be disaggregated. The Early Warning System (SAT) reports, with detailed information on incidents, victims, and defendants, have yet to be published. The 2017 National Victimization Survey uses an outdated format, preventing international comparisons. Moreover, data production for monitoring violence by security and prison forces is virtually nonexistent. Statistics on arrests with or without a warrant, police lethality and harm, the number of police officers prosecuted or convicted of crimes, among other things, are not produced, and in the few cases where they exist, they are fragmented and very difficult to access. Regarding the functioning of the criminal justice system, basic data is lacking on the number of people arrested by the police, the number of defendants in pretrial detention or with a conviction, and for what types of crimes. Furthermore, there is no monitoring mechanism to ensure the reliability of data on the execution of sentences (SNEEP), for example, on the number of people deprived of their liberty. This reveals extraordinary deficits in transparency within federal and provincial police, judicial, and prison institutions, concealing key aspects of their operation from public debate and the design and implementation of relevant policies.

– Use of firearms. Firearms control must be a cornerstone of any security policy aimed at reducing violence in society. Conversely, statements made by officials advocating for their use by private citizens are concerning, as our studies show that the proliferation of firearms can increase the lethality of conflicts, proving counterproductive as a protective measure. Therefore, demand must be discouraged and proliferation reduced through: the voluntary surrender of weapons and ammunition program (currently abandoned); stricter requirements for obtaining licenses, including screening for gender-based violence; mandatory license renewals; increased oversight of security forces' arsenals; the registration and prompt destruction of confiscated weapons; the tracing of stolen weapons; and the elimination of the police state and the practice of carrying service weapons off-duty, which increases the likelihood of homicides, femicides, and suicides by and within the police force. and the strengthening of oversight of factories, gun shops, exporters, and importers of firearms and ammunition. All of this would be possible if progress were made in implementing Law 27.192/15, which created the National Agency for Controlled Materials (ANMAC, formerly RENAR), by allocating its own budget and qualified personnel, along with the participation of civil society and other state agencies, as stipulated in the aforementioned law.

– Security forces. We underscore the gravity of the statements and actions by the national government that legitimize uses of force that contradict legal frameworks and undermine the priorities that should guide police practices, namely the defense of life, rights, and the physical integrity of all people. The government's narrative encourages harassment, abuse of force, and summary executions while deceptively defining it as a form of protection for police officers, which, far from protecting them, puts their lives, jobs, and freedom at risk. Faced with this approach to managing the security forces, improving police working conditions, training, implementing protocols that comply with international human rights standards, establishing external oversight mechanisms, and ensuring the rational and minimal use of force are essential requirements for improving the quality of police interventions. Equally essential is the prosecution and punishment of officers who commit crimes. It is essential to raise awareness among public employees regarding gender issues, as violence is not only perpetrated by the institution against other citizens but also within the institution itself. Finally, we emphasize the importance of fostering public debate on mechanisms for protecting the social and labor rights of public employees, such as their right to freedom of association and collective bargaining.

– Communication policies. Government discourse that uses threats and fear has become state policy; it justifies the use of force, institutionalizes violence, and is a primary source of social and media agendas. In this sense, some media outlets construct news stories that amplify the impact of crime and uncritically disseminate security narratives, contributing to climates of social alarm. Given this situation, we emphasize the importance, in a democratic system, of respecting victims, exercising prudence in categorizing perpetrators, and recommend the use of news reporting protocols that: utilize multiple sources and content; protect victims; and carefully consider the use of legal cases to avoid stereotyping and defining scenarios of fear that only deepen social and institutional violence.

– Gender violence. Gender-based violence has gained prominence on our country's public agenda in recent years, largely thanks to the consolidation of the women's movement. The generation of statistics on femicides, an initiative of civil society, was the first step in producing criminal information on lethal violence. This task, later undertaken in parallel by various organizations, reveals the severity and extent of the most extreme manifestation of gender-based violence. This focus on producing criminal information on femicides and, to some extent, on domestic violence, is justified, but it does not absolve the State of its responsibility to compile information on other multiple forms of gender-based violence. It is necessary to improve data quality, create unified registries, establish agreed-upon parameters and collection mechanisms that consider the various channels for managing this type of conflict (criminal, civil, and family courts, telephone hotlines, and local support programs), and promote accountability regarding the judicial handling of cases. On the other hand, enacting laws and creating programs to address this issue are necessary, but not sufficient, especially when they are not accompanied by the necessary budget for proper implementation. Shortcomings in the coordination between the executive and judicial branches in ensuring the effective implementation of victim protection measures are a priority to guarantee interventions that fulfill their purpose. It is also necessary to incorporate a gender perspective in the various agencies, especially judicial and police ones. Finally, urgent progress should be made in developing policies for the prevention of sexual assault, including situational prevention policies and comprehensive policies such as Comprehensive Sexuality Education (CSE).

– Juvenile Criminal System. We believe it is necessary to move forward with the enactment of a juvenile criminal responsibility system that guarantees the rights of young people accused of committing crimes and that replaces Decree Law 22.278, currently in force. However, the reform will only be effective if it is accompanied by improvements and strengthening (both in terms of budget and design) of the existing specialized institutions, as well as the system for the protection of the rights of children and adolescents created by Law 26.061. It will also be effective if the use of alternatives to criminal proceedings and incarceration is prioritized. We categorically reject lowering the age of criminal responsibility to 15. This proposal is regressive in terms of human rights and contrary to international recommendations. Furthermore, there is no evidence that increased punishment reduces youth participation in crime. On the contrary, there is evidence that the experience of the criminal justice system (police, judicial, and detention institutions) negatively impacts the life trajectories of young people. There is also concern about the distortion in the diagnosis regarding the criminal participation of young people, when official figures express a low incidence of juvenile crime.

– Criminalization of the migrant population. There are legal reforms, government initiatives, and speeches by officials that blame immigrants for the rise in certain crimes and other problems. Official statistics themselves refute these claims: according to the National System of Statistics on the Execution of Sentences, only 5,8% of the Argentine prison population comes from other countries. The decree regulating the expulsion of foreigners is a cause for concern. Although it is currently under review by the Supreme Court, it has already had alarming effects: since 2016, expulsion orders have increased from 1.704 in 2014/2015 to 3.976 between 2016 and April 2018.

– Intelligence System. Recent events of public significance have highlighted the need to evaluate the intelligence system's operations and rethink it based on the pillars of democracy and the rule of law. The process by which the authorities of the Federal Intelligence Agency (AFI) were appointed is concerning, as are the setbacks in transparency and public access to information resulting from the repeal of much of the agency's doctrine. Furthermore, the transfer of wiretapping authority to the Supreme Court by decree—a task that Congress had assigned to the Public Prosecutor's Office—is also a matter of concern. In light of this experience, it is necessary to eliminate the exceptions that allow AFI personnel to perform police work, provide judicial assistance, and conduct criminal investigations. The scope of secrecy in internal regulations must also be clarified, as this secrecy should in no way impede proper external oversight of its activities. The AFI is not a police force, nor should it be. Its functions must be re-evaluated, their scope defined, and its relationship to other state functions, such as security and defense, established.

 Criminalization of social protest. Within the framework of the aforementioned government legitimization of the use of force, a fatal combination is observed: increased authorization to use force, lack of coordination, and insufficient personnel training. The presentation of the Ministry of Security's "anti-protest protocol," impractical in a context of widespread social conflict, constitutes a clear political message in this direction. Intervention in protests without firearms, and where the prevailing approach is one of political conflict management, should be the guiding principle for the relationship between security forces and the various forms of collective action.

– Blurring of the distinction between internal security and defense. The decrees and resolutions (Decrees 228/16, 683/18, 703/18, and Resolution 860/18 of the Ministry of Defense) are concerning, as they demonstrate a progressive tendency to blur the distinction between internal security and defense, an achievement that has become a state policy since the return of democracy. This attempt to merge both agendas by invoking the need to confront “new threats” is not grounded in the reality of our country and, moreover, acknowledges dismal precedents in terms of effectiveness, increased violence, and serious human rights violations in other countries (such as Brazil, Mexico, and Colombia). Also troubling is the focus of a significant portion of national security policies on border crossings, as well as the modifications made by decree to security regulations in border areas (especially Decree 253/18). If the idea that the main national security problem is external and enters through the country's political borders continues to be fostered, it will only contribute to the stigmatization of these territories.

– Criminal justice system and prison issues. The administration of criminal justice, at the federal, national, and provincial levels, plays a significant role in exacerbating the aforementioned structural problems. There is a predominant focus on street crimes and a lack of judicial policies addressing more complex forms of crime. The judicialization of political issues and the politicization of judicial matters are long-standing characteristics that, far from being reversed, have intensified. In prisons, overcrowding stems from both the overuse of pretrial detention and the application of sentences imposed through summary proceedings and expedited trials. The sustained increase in incarceration rates deepens the systematic violation of the social, civil, and political rights of detainees. The regressive reform of the 2017 Law on the Execution of Sentences Involving Deprivation of Liberty, which restricts early release and progress toward progressive sentencing, explains part of this situation and has already generated equally worrying consequences for the homes and families of those deprived of their liberty. Given this situation, we are concerned about the punitive responses of the state and the disengagement of judicial agencies from these problems. In this regard, we believe it is necessary to revitalize treatment programs within prisons, professionalize the prison system, incorporate a gender perspective, and strengthen post-release social inclusion policies in order to address the reality described.

Buenos Aires, April 9, 2019 
CLACSO Working Group
Police and security in democratic regimes

Adhesions

Center for Studies on Security in the Province of Buenos Aires (FaHCE/UNLP).
Study Group on Police and Security Forces (CAS/IDES-UNQ).
Laboratory of Social and Cultural Studies (UNQ).
Center for Studies on Violence and Death (IDAES/UNSAM).
Security Policy Observatory of the Province of Buenos Aires (FaHCE/UNLP).
Study Group on the Governance of Insecurity (IIGG/UBA).
Team “Security and police policies in the province of Córdoba” (IAPCS/UNVM).
Group for Studies on Communication, Politics and Security (IIGG/UBA).
Latin American Institute for Security and Democracy (ILSED)
Institute for Comparative Studies in Criminal and Social Sciences (INECIP)
Center for Legal and Social Studies (CELS)
Research Teams in Citizen Security Policies (UNLa).
Laboratory of Studies in Culture and Society (FTS/UNLP).
Research Group “Changes in punishment in contemporary Argentina” (UnPaz).
University Center of San Martín (UNSAM).
Center for Sociocultural Studies on Law and its Institutions (UNSAM).
Crime and Society Program (UNL).
Center for Anthropology, Death and Politics (IDACOR/UNC).
Security and Human Rights Team (FCS/UNC).
Program “State, powers and social control” (CIECS/CONICET/UNC).
Program of Studies on Social Control (IIGG/UBA).
Security Observatory (FSOC/UBA).
UBACyT Project “The sociopolitical uses of violence” (UBA).
UBACyT Project “Public communication of tensions and conflicts between territories, borders, displacements and identifications” (IIGG/FSOC/UBA).
Social Studies Programs on Gender, Childhood and Youth (CEDESI-LICH-CONICET/UNSAM).
Center for Studies in Criminal Policy and Human Rights.
Crime and Society Studies Group (FaDeCS/UNCOMA).
Observatory of Adolescents and Young People (IIGG/UBA).
Team of Socio-Legal Studies in Human Rights (INDES-UNSE-CONICET).
Project “Interdisciplinary inquiries on the production of subjectivities and social control devices through the security-insecurity category (UNVM).
UBACyT Project “The sociopolitical uses of violence: a cultural approach to the criminal issue in Argentina”.
Security Policy Monitoring Program of the Ombudsman's Office of the Autonomous City of Buenos Aires.
Area of ​​Sociology of the Administration of Criminal Justice (ICJ/ FCJS UNLP).

This statement expresses the position of the members of the Working Group on Police and Security in Democratic Regimes and not necessarily that of the centers and institutions that make up the CLACSO international network, its Steering Committee or its Executive Secretariat.