Nietzsche and the punishment of media humiliation.

During the Parliamentary Commission of Inquiry (CPMI), Cachoeira chose to exercise his constitutional right to remain silent and heard the following exhortation from Senator Kátia Abreu (PSD-TO): "We are asking a mummy. I'm not going to stand here giving gold to bandits. We are here to work." Senator Demóstenes also exercised his constitutional right to remain silent and heard, during the live broadcast of the CPMI, a barrage of insults from Deputy Sílvio Costa (PTB-PE): "You, who are part of Cachoeira's gang, will not go to heaven because heaven is not a place for liars." Senator Pedro Taques (PDT-MT) argued that no one should be treated with indignity or humiliation, and it was then that the deputy, shouting, spoke of hypocrisy, demagoguery, son of a bitch, shit, etc.

A video surfaced on social media in May 2012, showing the media humiliations of the sensationalist crime news program "Brasil Urgente Bahia," known as "The System is Brutal" (Band BA). This ended up generating a great deal of noise (a jolt) in the (normally) anesthetized social sensitivity. A reporter (blonde), while interviewing an 18-year-old (black) youth accused of robbery and attempted rape, asked him if he had ever had a "prostate exam" (and if he liked it!) to determine whether or not there had been sexual violence against the alleged victim. The reporter ridiculed and mocked her interviewee, addressing him in a "prejudiced," "racist," and "elitist" manner.

What all this grotesque media sensationalism that violates human rights, sometimes called the "Date-ization of criminal law," has in common is mockery, prejudice, disrespect, and the purpose of humiliating, offending, despising, or belittling people accused of a crime. In short: this is the punishment of media humiliation, which is not only not provided for in any legal or constitutional norm, but also contradicts the basic rules of Ethics, understood as "the art of living well humanly" (Savater). The punishment of media humiliation, however pleasurable it may be, however much popular support it may have, denigrates the Ethical Quality of our Republic.

What is the historical origin of this abominable subhuman behavior? According to Nietzsche (On the Genealogy of Morality), it comes from prehistory, before the birth of the idea of ​​the State. The taxpayer, the journalist, the parliamentarian, the police officer, the judge, the prosecutor, etc., when they practice or demand the mockery of the suspect or accused, fulfill the same role as the ancient creditor in relation to his debtor, who does not honor the commitment made. Whoever is accused of breaking the legal order (the enemy) would have to assume the position of this venerable debtor, an inferior, who must be treated in a pejorative, humiliating, and vexatious way by the superior, who experiences a feeling of power in inflicting pain and humiliation on this "debtor".

As can be seen, it is from the relationship of an unpaid debt that the degrading punishment of the debtor arises. Through punishment, "[...] the creditor participates in a right of the masters; he finally experiences the exalted sensation of being able to despise and mistreat someone as inferior." With this power to execute a penalty on the debtor, "the creditor has, in a certain way, at least the power to see his debtor despised and mistreated."*

When a promise is broken or an agreement dishonored (that is, when someone is accused of a crime), the pain of the one who owes (the accused) and who caused harm serves as an equivalent for the displeasure caused by the unfulfilled promise (the violation of the norm). The humiliation of the accused generates pleasure, a pleasure equivalent to the satisfaction of the debt. Punishment (especially when humiliating) functions "as a kind of reparation for harm suffered, and the feeling of pleasure in causing suffering to the one who owes (the accused) is the equivalent for such debt."

There is a (subjective, psychological) equivalence between the pain inflicted on the offender and the damage caused (or allegedly caused) by him. There is a kind of compensation between the humiliation of the accused and the offense he committed (or allegedly committed). Human beings find pleasure in seeing another human being (the debtor, the accused or convicted person, etc.) suffer or be humiliated, especially, when possible, publicly (and through the media). Anger (as well as revenge) is discharged onto the accused as a form of extra-legal punishment for what he did. This explains the punishment of media humiliation, which comes from prehistory, portraying pre-modern moments of subhuman behavior.

Luiz Flávio Gomes is a professor, jurist, and member of the Commission for the Reform of the New Penal Code.

Source: webarticles site