As “I’m still here,” nominated for an Oscar, may be considered a Brazilian leadership responsible

“I’m still here” – a candidate for the best painting of the Oscar on the murder of the Brazilian Congressmen of the Military Dictatorship of the Earth – concludes with one punishment that brings the gut of historical reality: five soldiers accused in the murder have never been punished for the law they have assigned them to Amnesty.

Now the movie could help it.

This month, the Supreme Court of Brazil unanimously decided to consider whether to revoke the amnesty of military officers accused of killing Congressmen, Rubens Paiva and two others. In December, a decision of one justice followed to recommend removing the protection of amnesty in a separate case from the dictatorship. In his judgment, justice explicitly quoted “I’m still here.”

A sudden and extraordinary judicial showdown that the film has caused could have legal consequences: will the Brazilian law on amnesty, as it has almost half a century, continue to protect those who have committed crimes during dictatorship?

The fact that the question is now asking the question shows how “I’m still here” – next to her Exceptional commercial and critical success – He also had great political influence in Brazil.

And from the release of the film in November, the authorities have revised the death certificates of the victims of the victims to clarify that they have died in the hands of the army and re -opened cold cases to see if they are associated with the military regime.

“Brazil still has many open wounds,” said the son of Mr. Paive, Marcelo Rubens Paiva, whose book about his mother’s treatment with his father’s disappearance inspired the movie. “I think this whole movement forced society, especially young people, thinking about what kind of country they wanted.”

Through the personal story of the temptation of a family in the hands of dictatorship, the film greatly managed to cross the political lines and gather the Brazilians over the common idea of ​​justice, said Fernanda Torres, whose depiction of Eunica, the widow of Mr. Paive, earned her widespread academic and academy.

“It didn’t happen for a long time – a cultural phenomenon that we all agree on was not fair, that the family did not deserve it, this father did not deserve the fate he had,” Mrs. Torres said in an interview. “We really live at the time of the revolution,” she added. “Culture has enormous power.”

The movie’s message became particularly cold because it arrived in the midst of new charges of modern threats to Brazilian young democracy of former President Jair Bolsonar, who was charged this month with the supervision of plans to set up a coup and Kill his rivalPresident Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva, after losing his election in 2022.

This helped expand the call for justice. Caetano Veloso, one of the most fertile Brazilian singers and songwriters, said in an interview that at his latest concerts they took over the singing of “No Amnesty” – seemingly to laws protecting dictatorships, but also to new Billov that could protect Mr. Bolsonaro.

“I’ve never seen it,” said Mr. Veloso, who was closed and exiled during the dictatorship.

Human rights groups estimate that more than 400 people have forcibly disappeared and about 20,000 have been tortured in Brazil during dictatorship. But unlike Chile or Argentina, where many crimes committed in military dictatorship resulted in trials and punishments, and the number of deaths were much higher, Brazil did not continue to responsibility for the crimes of his army.

Mr. Paiva, a left -wing congressman, dictatorship was expelled from duty, but continued to resist the regime and accused him of exchange letters with disidentia in exile.

In Brazil, the transition back to democracy was largely formed by the military Hunt herself, which in 1979 passed the Law on Amnesty, protecting both disidentia and military officials from criminal persecution.

“Amnesty, the way it was done in Brazil, wiped out the past,” said Nilmário Miranda, a special advisor to remember and the truth to the Brazilian Ministry of Human Rights, who said he was a victim of torture. “He treated the perpetrators like their victims, torturers like tortured.”

Attempts to the army responsible for the crimes of dictatorship over the years have faced a decisive resistance of the army, which continued to in accordance with political exit, even after the return of Brazil to democracy.

But now the movie has helped to launch perhaps the most significant threat of impunity the army approved.

In December, Justice Flavio Dino quoted the film in the judgment that the recall of Amnesty, which gave two colonaries charged with the murder of political activists during the dictatorship. “I’m still here” is “moved millions of Brazilians,” he wrote. “The story of the disappearance of Rubens Paiva, whose body has never been found or given properly burning, emphasizes the lasting pain of innumerable families.”

Justice Dino supported the legal argument that, in any case, when the bodies are still missing, this “permanent crime” is open to criminal persecution until the remains are found.

Earlier this month, the Supreme Court also decided to consider whether to revoke Amnesty in the case of Mr. Paiva. In 2014, the Brazilian authorities charged five men for his torture and death; They never acknowledged the crime. The two of them are still alive and remained generally quiet, and one told plaintiffs that he was on vacation during Mr. Paive’s detention, which was rejected by documents from that period.

The Supreme Court’s decision in this case could set a legal precedent that could affect at least 41 other cases from the dictatorship.

In a symbolic gesture, the federal body ordered the audit 434 death certificates for people who were killed or disappeared during the dictatorship. Mr. Paiva was the first record to be corrected, from citing any cause of death to quoting the cause as a “unnatural, violent, caused by the Brazilian state.”

The acknowledgment of the film, a special government commission also reopened the death investigation from 1976 in the car accident of former President Juscelino Kubitschek, stating evidence that it could have been orchestrated military dictatorship.

“The role of the film was extraordinary,” Mr. Miranda said. “Art has that power,” he added, to ensure that “history is not forgotten, so it never happens again.”

Mr. Bolsonaro, a retired captain of the army who often has spoken Dictatorship, he repeatedly attacked “I’m still here”, acting as a political movie that demonizes the army and shows only “one side” of the story.

“I won’t even watch her movie,” he said in an interview with the New York Times last month, when asked if she would root for Mrs. Torres at the Sunday Award of the Academy.

Some of Mr. Bolsonar’s supporters similarly boycotted “I’m still here” and have opposed the efforts that the army be brought to justice for past crimes.

Mr. Lula, on the other hand, praised the movie, calling it “a source of national pride” and creating Reward Honor of Eunice Paiva. This week, Brazilian president gathered Government ministers and leaders of Congress, as well as two grandchildren of Mr. Paive, in the presidential palace on a special project.

Yet, even while Brazil is considered to be its gloomy past, some care that justice may come too late. In decades since the return of Brazil to Democracy, many who committed crimes during dictatorships – including most of Mr. Paive’s martyr – died without ever holding care.

“Better late than never,” Marcelo Rubens Paiva said. “But why took it so long?”

Flávia Milhorance contribute to the research.