Since mid-October, supporters of the far-right Brazilian President Jair Bolsonaro, who had been voted out, had camped outside Brazilian Army headquarters demanding that the military overturn the results of the presidential election. For the past 10 weeks, the protesters faced little resistance from the government.
On 8 January, many of the camp’s inhabitants left their tents in Brasília, the nation’s capital and joined hundreds of other protesters. Together, the group stormed Congress, the Supreme Court and the presidential offices. A day later, Brazilian authorities were sweeping through the encampment. They dismantled tents, tore down banners and detained c.1,200 of the protesters for questioning.
Immediately, the events have been compared to the events at Capitol Hill in January 2021 when a throng of Donald Trump supporters attacked the US Capitol building. Their stated goal was to overturn the valid results of the 2020 presidential election by interrupting the US Congress's count of electoral votes that would certify the election.
Similarly, the Brazilian protesters were seeking military intervention to either restore the far-right Bolsonaro to power or oust the newly inaugurated leftist Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva. In the months that followed Bolsonaro's October electoral defeat, Bolsonaro had been stoking belief among his supporters that the electronic voting system was prone to fraud, though he never presented any evidence. Results from the election (the closest in over three decades) were quickly recognised by politicians across the spectrum, including some Bolsonaro allies, as well as governments around the world. Bolsonaro neither conceded defeat nor emphatically called fraud, though he and his party submitted a request to nullify millions of votes, that was swiftly dismissed.
Brazilian Justice Minister Flávio Dino said the acts amounted to terrorism and coup-mongering and that authorities have begun tracking those who paid for the buses that transported protesters to the capital. Brazil's minister of institutional relations said the buildings attacked would be inspected for evidence including fingerprints and images to hold people to account and noted that the rioters apparently intended to spark similar actions nationwide.
Discussions have begun to abound as to whether the riots can be considered as an act of domestic terrorism (as alleged by the Brazilian Justice Minister) or indeed as another political crime such as a coup attempt, treason, seditious conspiracy or rebellion.
By comparison, in response to the Capitol Hill events of January 2021, President Joe Biden condemned the group that stormed the Capitol as domestic terrorists. He said “they weren’t protesters. Don’t dare call them protesters. They were a riotous mob, insurrectionists, domestic terrorists. It’s that basic. It’s that simple.”
There is a long-standing recognition that there is no single definition of terrorism. At an international level, there is no universally agreed-upon definition. United Nations Security Council Resolution 1566 (2004) comes closest to describing terrorism as: criminal acts, including against civilians, committed with the intent to cause death or serious bodily injury, or taking of hostages, with the purpose to provoke a state of terror in the general public or in a group of persons or particular persons, intimidate a population or compel a government or an international organisation to do or to abstain from doing any act.
Based on any definition of terrorism, in order to determine whether these riots could be considered an act of terrorism it would be important to prove that an individual involved committed (or threatened to commit) a violent act(s) and were politically motivated to do so. In order to determine whether this requirement is met, looking into the statements of persons at the riots or at their social media postings prior to attending the riots, could provide a start-point to determine whether such an intent was there. The use of different symbols such as flags and t-shirts or props, any statements made specifically on recordings during the attacks could all help to identify which extremist groups were represented and could clarify the political intent of individuals.
Bolsonaro, who is currently in Florida, stoked rumours of electoral fraud but has not supported the attacks on the capital, “Peaceful demonstrations, within the law, form part of democracy,” he wrote on Twitter. “However, depredations and invasions of public buildings like those that happened today, as well as those practiced by the left in 2013 and 2017, are exceptions to the rule.”
The day after the riots, the heads of Brazil's three branches of government, President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva, acting Senate President Veneziano Vital do Rego, Lower House Speaker Arthur Lira and Chief Justice Rosa Weber all signed a joint statement condemning the collective actions of Bolsonaro's supporters the previous day as “terrorist acts”. They have vowed to hold rioters to account.
It remains to be seen as to how exactly the events will be characterised; political demonstration or terrorism?