Are we on the right track?

Everything goes to the ruling party. Thus, the approval of the reform of the National Guard law by the Chamber of Deputies, both in general and in particular, consolidates what had been on the horizon for several years: the concentration and management of security in the hands of the armed forces, equipped with ever-expanding capabilities to manage, intervene, and operate, to safeguard citizen security and the territory. Whether we like it or not, the process continues, and the powers of the armed forces are growing in economic, security, and institutional terms. While it is true that Article 164—reclassifications and transfers—confirms the disappearance of the civilian perspective, and Article 44 recognizes the participation of National Guard members in political functions, which implies seeking elected office through special leave, without clarifying how they will participate? As government collaborators or in opposition to it? Many questions arise, especially in our current context, both political and criminal.

At the same time, investigative powers are being added under the command of public ministries - which in many cases have vulnerable or deficient professionalization -, which implies acquiring expanded powers to venture into ministerial investigative tasks - with a weakened Attorney General's Office - and intelligence for the prevention and prosecution of crimes, with inter-institutional collaborations with intelligence agencies - CNI - and information, where social networks and telecommunications will be monitored and reviewed, interfering in private conversations, among other actions to weave information networks with the three levels of government and the citizenry.

In this sense, the National Guard's continued operational presence in the territories is expected, a broader military presence, although it is emphasized that the privacy and security of individuals would be guaranteed. Thus, the questions of concern are sensible under this scenario and the reality we face every day: How will the security and privacy of citizens be guaranteed? Who will verify the work of the National Guard and how? How will checks and balances be generated to certify how the authorities act and sanction them in cases of abuse? Will there be room for dialogue and contribution from civil society organizations? The questions and suspicions about these measures are valid, following the timeline of the national project, which has opted for the disappearance of autonomous organizations in the country, the inability to provide accountability, the dismantling of the Supreme Court of Justice, and the renewal of "elected" ministers and officials in highly questionable legal areas, a Human Rights Commission that is rarely present and sometimes in a biased manner, a clear militarization of public security, and an expansion of the functions of the armed forces - at least 38 counted to date in a multitude of important tasks, which were previously civilian -, make us worry about the ways in which a state that calls itself democratic will be able to exercise controls, monitoring, containment and transparency mechanisms over itself.

Accumulating so much power in a single pocket can end up tearing it apart due to its own inability to self-regulate. This always requires balancing outside of government logic itself, opening up possibilities to avoid destroying our own institutions through excessive accumulation of power and combating opacity. A worrying outlook lies ahead for the country in the coming months, and we will have to build and connect a new citizenry—one that's more active, attentive, and responsible, one that defends its freedom of expression, asks open questions, demands accountability, and is recognized as a contributing actor and contributor to institutions. This is a matter of concern to us as a society. Hence, we will have to rethink our cultural and political foundations for citizenship... Will we be willing to rise to the occasion?