“The great differential of the intelligence activity is anticipation,” said Maurício Viegas Pinto, intelligence advisor to the Security Secretariat of the Supreme Federal Court (STF), when he spoke about ‘Identifying and Evaluating Hostile Messages: a protocol for intelligence action in the information environment’, the closing lecture of the first day of the VI National Meeting on Intelligence in the Judiciary. The event continues until this Thursday (March 27th), in the auditorium of the Court of Justice of the State of Tocantins (TJTO).
The lecture by Viegas addressed the issue of intelligence not only in the physical environment, but also in the information environment, especially in relation to social media.
“We live in a hyper connected environment, people nowadays post messages and these messages circulate quickly. Some of them can often affect institutional security,” he said.
How to quickly identify, evaluate, interpret and work with these messages were issues addressed during the explanation of the intelligence advisor of the STF, which included concepts of hostile messages, characterized by the promotion, incitement or glorification of violent actions intentionally directed against a particular group or individual, and characteristics of the information environment.
The cycle of ideological radicalization was also another point highlighted by the speaker, who indicated that this phase can be found in hostile environments. According to Viegas, this cycle of radicalization is formed by predisposition, exposure to extremist ideology, transformation of social identity, adherence to extremist ideology, promotion of extremist ideology, willingness to act in favor of ideology and the practice of violent action.
Public security and public policies
Before the closing lecture of the programming of the day, George Estefani de Souza Couto, a delegate from the Civil Police of the Federal District and Undersecretary for Information Management at the Public Security Secretariat of the Federal District, spoke about “Public Security Intelligence and Public Policies.”
On the occasion, the speaker addressed the role of the public security intelligence in a more political-strategic layer of knowledge production and how this work can be useful in building effective public policies.
The delegate presented a diagnosis and a slightly different view of public security intelligence, which perspective is focused on the issue of producing tactical-operational knowledge, operations and arrests, building a concept to promote the efficiency that intelligence can, at a political-strategic level, help governments develop public policies, based on the analysis of their own data.
He spoke about the impact of this, considering a scenario of changing criminality and how it is possible to adapt to a future scenario that naturally impacts on the functioning of the Public Security and the Judiciary.
“There is a very clear, very evident process of criminal migration, in which we are moving from violent crime to less violent crime, which is very focused on fraud,” said the speaker, who also highlighted his concern about the silent growth of organized crime in the country.
“Analyzing the situation is very important in the process of understanding where we are, precisely so that we can draw up scenarios of where we might be,” said the delegate.
Scenario analysis is fundamental, because this naturally impacts on state-building models.
Check out the programming of the 2nd day of the event here.
