Anielle Franco: ‘Marielle’s murder is the culmination political violence’

 

On the night of March 14, 2018, Anielle Franco realized that she couldn’t simply mourn the murder of her sister, the then councilor of Rio de Janeiro Marielle Franco (Socialism and Freedom Party, also known as PSOL).

Although she couldn’t imagine that, five years later, she would be at the forefront of a federal government, the current Brazilian Minister for Racial Equality comments that “the notion that I might have to speak publicly about it all came that night. They [reporters] stopped me to talk on the night of the murder. They stopped me to talk at the IML [Institute of Forensic Medicine]. I don’t think I’ve ever participated in an interview as full of people as that.”

In an interview on the Bem Viver program this Thursday (14), the minister spoke about the six years since her sister’s murder and her hopes for solving the case.

At the moment, three people are in prison accused of carrying out the murder: Ronnie Lessa, Élcio Queiroz and Maxwell Simões Corrêa. However, there are still no answers as to the motivations and articulation behind the murder.

The minister says she has no behind-the-scenes dialogue with the Ministry of Justice or the Federal Police.

“We don’t have access [to the investigation] and we don’t ask for it. Also – and for security and ethical reasons – I prefer not to have direct access to it regarding Marielle’s case.”

Read below the full interview:

Minister, at what point did you realize that you would have to deal with your sister’s death not only as a family member but also as a public figure? When did you realize that you would also have to deal with the political issues surrounding the crime?

I admit it was the same night. It hit me the same night, not only because I was the sister, but also because I had many other responsibilities.

It happened because I didn’t let my parents and my niece [Marielle’s only daughter] go to the scene of Mari’s crime. Therefore, I was the one who left the house that night of March 14, and I was also the one who went to the IML [Institute of Forensic Medicine] the next morning. I took care of all the burial arrangements for her and attended the vigil at Rio’s City Council building.

These were moments when I couldn’t stop crying and just sat and wait because I didn’t have anyone to do it [the funeral arrangements]. Neither my parents nor my niece, at that moment, were strong enough to take charge of all the arrangements. And when they got the news, all three of them practically fell to the ground and I realized, too, that someone had to stay strong.

It was a bit from there that the sense of responsibility came, but the sense of understanding that I might have to speak publicly came that night. They stopped me to talk on the night of the murder, they stopped me to talk at the IML itself, and I don’t think I’ve ever participated in an interview as full of people as that in my life, and then also at the wake.

The notion that I might have to speak publicly about it all came that night. They [reporters] stopped me to talk on the night of the murder. They stopped me to talk [about the crime while] at the IML [Institute of Forensic Medicine]. I don’t think I’ve ever participated in an interview as full of people as that.

Obviously, on March 14 and 15, I didn’t know how many challenges I would still face as a public figure, as Mari’s sister, as this person. But I had a small idea, and I had to take a stance right from the start.

 

I suppose that at the time you couldn’t have imagined that, five years later, you would be taking on the role of minister in a federal government, but did you imagine that you would have to face such an important political position?

I think there are two things in your question that we need to separate. Regardless of what position I was in – since law and justice aren’t my professional areas – I wouldn’t have any possibility of helping or having access to what was left of the investigations.

But on the other hand, since the crime committed against Mari, people have always said: “You’re going to have to take this place, you’re going to have to be here and there”.

A lot of people said a lot of things and I wanted to take my time. I preferred to create an institute and strengthen myself. To this day, I’m not emotionally well. I think that when it comes to this subject, I don’t think I’m ever calm enough to talk about it. There’s always something I feel and think [regarding the crime].

It’s obvious I wouldn’t have imagined myself in that position, specifically as a minister, but I’ve always been very politicized and so has my sister.

This is something I said yesterday in another interview: people aren’t used to seeing Black people, especially Black women, taking on political legacies.

Because, at the end of the day, I end up taking on my sister’s political legacy. It’s common to see uncles, cousins, nephews, fathers, sons and grandsons “inheriting” [political legacy] when it comes to white men in politics, which is normal.

We have a small percentage of women, particularly Black women [taking on political legacies]. I don’t know if we would have two women in politics today like my sister, maybe if Mari were in another place and I were in another sphere too, but I really don’t know because we’ve always been like that, we’ve always been people who want to speak up and do things.

I never thought I’d be a minister, obviously, but we never ruled out the possibility of being politicized and doing politics everywhere, not necessarily in parliament or the executive power. In short, in all the different ways we do it.

Your answer made me think about how there are many examples of racism cases in which society ends up throwing the responsibility for bearing the consequences onto the Black population itself, onto the victims themselves. Do you feel that this happened in this case? Did you feel responsible for answering all the questions about your sister’s murder?

Absolutely, and in many ways. I think your question is perfect in many ways.

I had to deal with the legal aspects of identifying her body, the wake, etc. I then had to deal with the fake news that came out about her and not just against her, since they affected the whole family and also Mari’s legacy, her memory. It was racism, a hatred of what that Black woman was becoming and had become.

Paralleling that, when you bring up this comparison of what we go through in terms of violence, what Black people go through on a daily basis, and what we had to take the lead in doing, I think there are phrases that always help in this sense, and a famous one is “we for us”.

Obviously, we know that not everyone is an ally, not everyone is working for the same causes as you.

But when we meet people who hold our hand and do things collectively – whether it’s regarding Mari’s murder or any other situation – it makes a difference to us, because often we find ourselves alone in a decision-making space.

Although you’ve just explained that all this legacy shouldn’t fall on you and your ministry, I wanted to hear from you about what measures are planned for March 14.

That’s a perfect question. We could even list everything we’ve done up to now.

First, there’s a difference. I saw that some media outlets reported that, this year, I said I wanted to approve the Marielle Franco Day Bill [a bill creating the Marielle Franco National Day for Confronting Political Violence on the Basis of Gender and Race].

Actually, this proposal was born on March 8, 2023, made, led and coordinated by Minister Aparecida Gonçalves, Brazil’s minister of women to debate and set the agenda for political violence on gender and race in this country, which is not a simple matter.

Marielle’s murder is the culmination of political violence, but it’s not Anielle who wants to create a day [dedicated to combating this kind of violence].

I think it’s important to say we did this with several hands: members of parliament, senators, and some boys too, obviously. Janja [Brazil’s first lady] herself has always spoken a lot about political violence, and I’ve experienced political violence in my daily life, just as Cida [Aparecida Gonçalves, the minister of women], Janja, Simone Tebet [Brazil’s minister of planning and budget] and others have in different spheres, but they experience political violence in the most diverse ways. That’s one point.

I was in charge of the [Marielle Franco] Institute for three or four years, and every March 14 we always held a mass, an act, a festival. This is what the Marielle Franco Institute in Rio de Janeiro is planning for March 14, but many collectives are also doing their part.

At the Ministry of Racial Equality, we don’t have any specific action for March 14. However, we do have specific action for March 21 [International Day for the Elimination of Racial Discrimination], which is an important day for us. We will be launching – actually, relaunching – the Living Black Youth Plan. It means a lively youth, improving people’s lives in terms of employability, health, culture, education, sports, you name it.

Since last year, we’ve been doing a lot of different actions, whether for women or Black men. We had to prioritize [them]. There were priorities that ranged from access to decent housing to university. By the way, we managed to renew the quota law [to support Black people to enter public universities].

We needed to think about the public service as a whole. Now, we’re working on a bill for quotas in the civil service, which is something we need and will try with all our might to approve.

We had more than 50 ideas last year and managed to have the first budget for the Ministry of Racial Equality, something historic.

The Ministry of Racial Equality is transversal and people need to understand and accept that we can’t do anything on our own. We have ideas, but we need to do them collectively.

After almost a year and a half in charge of the ministry, do you still feel people’s distrust – a distrust from some of your colleagues in the government, but especially from people not related to the government? A distrust about the very need for having a Ministry of Racial Equality?

Look, within the government I think the opposite is true, and it’s not because I’m part of the government, but because it’s really been a movement of partnership with everyone. All the ministers have been working together.

We are in politics. Therefore, it’s okay for people to criticize, to be unsupportive, to have something to say. What isn’t common is when criticism is coupled with racism, hatred, threats, death threats, or when people try to belittle a curriculum that I’ve been working hard on my whole life ever since I can remember.

It’s okay when criticism is constructive. It’s okay for people to speak out and take a different position. What’s not ok is for people to say that it’s not important and that’s due to the racist nature of our society. If it doesn’t affect you, you could just respect it. That’s what’s so difficult in our country.

But we’ve been trying to make people understand. We’ve been trying to talk to all social classes, races and genders, so that they understand, once and for all, that the fight against racism is not just about Black people. It’s not just about the Ministry of Racial Equality. It’s about the whole federal government, the whole country: mayors, governors, parliamentarians, you name it.

Minister, I’d like to talk again about the investigation into Marielle Franco’s case. I’d like to hear from you if you feel that in the last year and a half of Lula’s administration, the investigation has sped up.

I think the investigation into Mari’s case is very peculiar. It’s horrible to say this, but this crime was well planned. We followed the investigation very closely and we always do. Of course, I understand that Brazil wants an answer to this crime. I understand the work of the Federal Police and everyone who has been part of the investigation so far. It’s difficult for me to say that it sped up because of the Lula government.

Obviously, having a president who is humane, more sensitive and really concerned about finding out who ordered Marielle’s killing makes a difference. But I also think that we can’t erase everything that was done previously.

I remain very confident. Andrei himself [Rodrigues, director general of Brazil’s Federal Police], went public to say how the investigations were going. I feel confident and hope that we will be able to answer who ordered the killing.

Have you had direct contact with Andrei and the Federal Police? What is this relationship like? 

No, I don’t have direct contact with the Federal Police to talk about the investigations into Marielle’s case. Yes, we do have a lot of dialogue with the Federal Police, which has been a great partner to approach various racism crimes that have occurred in the country. From the airport racism case to those targeting delivery men and doormen, we always dialogue with the Federal Police thinking about how to act collectively, not only with them but also with the Ministry of Justice, governors and mayors.

We don’t have access to him [André] and we don’t ask him anything. For reasons of security and ethics, I prefer not to have direct access to him regarding Marielle’s case.

And with the minister of justice, be it former minister Flávio Dino or the current minister, Lewandovski?

No, I think it’s the same answer. We met with Dino a few times. We were building Juventude Negra Viva, by Pronaf [National Program to Strengthen Family Farming], with psychosocial support programs for mothers whose sons and daughters suffered violence, and now we’ve passed it on to Minister Lewandowski.

Flávio Dino said he would deliver the resolution of the case by March. That didn’t happen. Do we have a new forecast?

Not that I know of. I think that if or when there are any forecasts, Andrei and Minister Lewandowski will probably talk about it, but as far as I know there have been no recent developments.

Brazil has seen countless cases of racism and violence in everyday life. Like the delivery man who was shot for not going up to the apartment to deliver the package. Is the ministry concerned about this? How has it acted?

Of course, we talked to iFood last year. We started an attempt a long time ago. There were 13,000 complaints of racism on the platform in 2023. We followed it not only attentively, but also very concerned. We thought up various actions not just within iFood, but with various companies.

Talking about this specific case, which is a cruel and cowardly portrait of a racist society is the most concrete example of what we have experienced.

On the same day, I tried to speak to the governor [of Rio de Janeiro] Cláudio Castro (Liberal Party). We hadn’t been able to do so before due to some situations, but we already have this on the radar so that we can continue debating it.

I spoke to Justice Lewandowski that we need to remember that cases like this are also within public security, within the Ministry of Justice. We need and have to act, obviously, because black people are dying more and more, suffering violence, without justice, education and so on. But it also needs to be a coordinated joint action.

For instance, when the case of racism against a doorman happened, we followed up. We always do. We always get in touch with the governors, mayors and make ourselves available not only to educate about the issue, but also to think, whether through municipalities, with the Ministry, through the councilors and deputies, so that we can actually have concrete action.

 

We can’t normalize it. We haven’t normalized it here [in the ministry]. However, we also need to do it with several hands. It’s impossible for the Ministry of Racial Equality alone to solve the problem, and that’s what I’ve been trying to convey and talk about almost daily to everyone in all instances. We need support to resolve every situation like this.

Do you sometimes feel that you’re fighting a bit alone? When you try to contact the Ministry of Justice, the governors…

Of course not. The concrete proof of this is that Juventude Negra Viva is a joint effort of 17 ministries. But I don’t feel like I’m fighting alone, because when we go to a place or to a minister and say ” I’m worried”, people say “Let’s act, let’s build [a solution] together”.

The problem is that, unfortunately, this has become increasingly common, the certainty of impunity for a person who shoots another. And that’s because they feel superior to others like Black people.

We need to do several things. There are several nuances. I’m talking about raising [antiracist kids], basic education and access to higher education.

I think we’ve been working together; the ministry really has to be a pioneer in this mission. It couldn’t be any different. It would be different if I had sat back and said “I’m not going to do anything”. I think that’s unacceptable.

But we need to develop effective public policies with several people involved in them, so that we can have a country less racist, as we have been fighting for.

Do you think that a measure to support the victims of racism could help embarrass people not to commit this kind of crime?

I don’t think so. I don’t think it’s about embarrassing people. That’s not the point. I think there are more important things for us to focus on and do than just embarrassing them, because embarrassing them will make people feel ashamed for a while, and then they do it all over again.

This has to be the exception. That can’t be the rule. In the ministry, we’re working for every Black person in this country, so that when a crime happens, we go there and give them support.

We do need to provide support for victims, of course, such as the program I told you about that supports mothers who are victims of violence, psychosocial support, which was done by several hands with the Ministry of Justice, but also with the Ministry of Health. That’s an example.

It’s more than just embarrassment: it’s support, but also getting people in positions of power to become aware and take action. However, at the same time, we also need to raise awareness and make society understand that this is not normal.

You’ve talked a lot about dialoguing with the governor of Rio de Janeiro. I’d like to know about the relationship with Tarcísio de Freitas (Republicans Party), from São Paulo, particularly because of the wave of deaths that have occurred on the coast of São Paulo state during police operations.

There are people taking a stand, various government structures. I saw that Minister Silvio Almeida [Human Rights and Citizenship] took a stand; the Ministry of Racial Equality also takes a stand whenever there is a situation like this. We received Mothers of May here at the Ministry last year. We’re also in contact. Whenever it happens [violence during police operations], we’re there to show not only solidarity, but also to talk about it.

I think Tarcísio’s government has its position, values and perspective of how to govern, but we’re here to talk and build together, with whoever it is.

Our concern is not who he supports, who he defends – it’s not about that. It’s about making sure that situations and actions like this don’t happen again anywhere in this country, whether in São Paulo or Rio de Janeiro. We will always be pointing, dialoguing and calling people to talk, because the importance of all this is for people to stay alive, and for violence to be reduced once and for all.

Publicação de: Brasil de Fato – Blog