For racism crime, MPF in Paraíba asks for the arrest of TV host Sikêra Jr.

Mencius Melo – From Cenarium Magazine

MANAUS – The host of the TV show “Alerta Nacional“, of RedeTV!, Sikêra Jr., had a request for arrest and payment of fine, made by the Federal Public Ministry (MPF) in Paraíba, for a crime of racism committed on June 5, 2018, during the broadcast of the show “Cidade em Ação”, on TV Arapuã, an affiliate of the RedeTV! broadcaster in the state. The MPF filed a criminal action on Monday, 30, and the 16th Federal Court in Paraíba will judge the action, which does not provide for a settlement with the presenter.

Currently, Sikêra Jr. hosts the show “Alerta Nacional”, produced in Manaus (AM) and aired nationally. The criminal action against the presenter was widely reported in sites such as G1 da Paraíba, Carta Capital, among others. According to the Intervozes collective, Sikêra Jr. is accused of making racist and misogynistic remarks against a young black woman in custody of the State of Paraíba.

On that occasion, Sikêra violated Law 7.716/89, which foresees the crime of racism in article 20. It also considered, the body, that the presenter extrapolated all limits of freedom of expression, “because he practiced discrimination and racial prejudice of gender through the media or publication of any kind, whose penalty is imprisonment of two to five years and fine”, said the MPF.

On his social network profile Instagram, the host himself posted a photo, printed, about the request for arrest and fine, but did not go into detail about it.

Sensationalism

For the political scientist Paulo Queiroz, programs like Sikêra Jr.’s repeat an old formula used on TV. “Before talking about freedom of expression or lack of it, we have to understand that police shows are not concerned about laws or content. They are looking for the old formula of sensationalism, that is: the incessant search for ratings, and this is in the root of TV and has not changed because, now, we are in the era of ‘like’,” he observed.

According to Queiroz, for this type of production it doesn’t matter ethical principles or anything like that, what matters is the largest number of viewers. “All these programs are the same. It’s a lot of talking and little journalistic investigation. They work to spectacularize misery in order to sell it, and the content doesn’t matter.”

But this does not mean a lack of limits, as the scientist points out. “These programs will always exist, but what can also exist is television regulation and, when I say this, I am not talking about censorship, because in everything there are limits and even fundamental rights are not absolute,” he explained.

Data

According to a survey conducted by the Intervozes collective, the NGO Artigo 19, and the civil society organization Andi – Comunicação e Direitos, in partnership with the MPF, broadcasting in Brazil is fertile ground for human rights violations. The organizations monitored, in detail, 28 radio and TV shows for 30 days. The result was a staggering 4,500 human rights violations that directly infringed 12 Brazilian laws and seven multilateral treaties.

The infractions and violations of Brazilian laws pointed out by the study are varied. Among them are the disrespect to the presumption of innocence; incitement to crime, violence, disobedience to laws or judicial decisions; undue exposure of people and families; hate speech and prejudice; identification of adolescents in conflict with the law; violation of the right to silence; psychological torture and inhuman or degrading treatment.

Platform

In addition to producing a volume of misinformation and attacking laws in force in the country, several presenters, reporters, and commentators take the opportunity to make their programs a platform for political candidacies. According to the Intervozes study, in 2018, programs considered police-esque had 23 candidacies in 10 states. In 2022, the number almost doubled. There were 43 candidacies from police programs or who benefited from them to get elected. Most of the candidates are men who use the programs as campaign platforms.

In the context of proposals or lack of proposals, the speeches follow the recipe of populism, with the defense of welfare agendas. Besides welfarism, the programs and their candidates defend the policy of death in public security, following the mantra that says: “good criminal is dead criminal”. Besides discursive violence, there is room for religious conservatism in the defense of moral agendas and the denial of politics itself as an instrument of democratic dialogue.