Esta dissertação constrói a biografia da brasileira Flávia Schilling (1953- ) desde a sua infância, passando pelo seu exílio no Uruguai em 1964, até o seu retorno ao Brasil em 1980. Seu objetivo principal é reconstruir parte da trajetória de Flávia e, em termos mais amplos e abstratos, problematizar, por meio de sua biografia, as formas de constituição do indivíduo na história, buscando respostas para questões como: como se dá a construção do indivíduo – por si e pelo outro? Como se forma a sua identidade? Quais os elementos, escolhas e condicionamentos precisam ser analisados nesse processo? Pretende-se, assim, repensar e discutir como o indivíduo pode ser percebido pelas diversas óticas que o constituem e como ele interage – ativa e passivamente – com o meio em que vive, e aqui mais especificamente, relacionando-o com o período das ditaduras de segurança nacional na América Latina. O exílio, a militância, a clandestinidade, a prisão e a campanha de libertação da referida personagem, juntamente com as ditaduras iniciadas com os golpes civis-militares do Brasil em 1964 e do Uruguai em 1973, são temas analisados ao longo do trabalho. / This dissertation builds the biography of Brazilian Flavia Schilling (1953-) from her childhood, through her exile in Uruguay in 1964, until her return to Brazil in 1980. Its main objective is to reconstruct part of the trajectory of Flavia and, in terms broader and more abstract problematize through her biography, the forms of the constitution of the individual in history, seeking answers to questions such as: how is the construction of the individual - for themselves and for each other? How is your identity? Which elements, choices and constraints need to be analyzed in this process? It is intended, therefore, to rethink and discuss how the individual may be perceived by many that the optics are and how it interacts - actively and passively - with the environment they live in, and here more specifically, relating it to the period of dictatorships national security in Latin America. Exile, the activists, underground, imprisonment and release of that campaign character along with dictatorships began with the civilian-military coup in Brazil in 1964 and Uruguay in 1973, are themes explored throughout this research.

Entre as décadas de 1960 e 1980, Brasil e Argentina vivenciaram ditaduras de segurança nacional. As diferentes experiências vividas por essas nações possuem alguns elos em comum: a tomada do poder pelas Forças Armadas, a aplicação da Doutrina de Segurança Nacional, suspensão de direitos e garantias fundamentais, o consequente estabelecimento do Terrorismo de Estado e, por fim, a aprovação de algum tipo de anistia ao fim desses regimes. Tendo diferentes designações, as leis aprovadas visavam um mesmo objetivo: impossibilitar a responsabilização de militares e civis pelas inúmeras violações a direitos humanos cometidas durante as ditaduras. O discurso de “virar a página e olhar para o futuro” esteve presente em ambos os países, e foi usado para propagar a ideia da pacificação nacional. A partir dos anos 2000, já em um contexto de democracias consolidadas, o quadro difere imensamente. Enquanto na Argentina, entre 2004 e 2007, a Corte Suprema de la Nación julgou inconstitucionais todos os dispositivos que representavam obstáculos ao julgamento dos crimes da ditadura (Lei de Obediência Devida, a Lei do Ponto Final e os indultos concedidos por Carlos Menem), no Brasil, o Supremo Tribunal Federal julgou improcedente, em 2010, uma ação ajuizada pela Ordem dos Advogados do Brasil (OAB) e considerou a Lei da Anistia (Lei n. 6.683/79) fruto de um acordo político e, por consequência, impossível de ser revisado. Partindo dessas premissas, o presente trabalho tem por objetivo analisar o posicionamento das Cortes Supremas de Brasil e Argentina no que diz respeito à responsabilização penal dos crimes de lesa humanidade cometidos pelas ditaduras. As decisões dos fallos Arancibia Clavel, Simón e Mazzeo, e a sentença da Arguição de Descumprimento de Preceito Fundamental (ADPF) n. 153, serão comparadas sob o viés histórico do contexto democrático nas quais foram geradas, buscando compreender a discrepância entre os entendimentos das Cortes e do quadro atual de ambos os países no que diz respeito à efetivação de mecanismos de justiça de transição. / Between the decades of 1960 and 1980, Brazil and Argentina have experienced dictatorships. The different experiences for these nations have some links in common: the seizure of power by the armed forces, the application of the national security doctrine, suspension of fundamental rights and guarantees, the consequent establishment of State terrorism and, finally, the adoption of some kind of amnesty in the end of those regimes. Having different designations, the laws adopted had the same goal: make it impossible the accountability of military and civilians by the numerous human rights violations committed during the dictatorships. The speech of "turn the page and look to the future" was present in both countries, and was used to propagate the idea of “national pacification”. From the year 2000, in a context of consolidated democracies, the situation differs immensely. While in Argentina, between 2004 and 2007, the Supreme Court ruled unconstitutional all devices that represent obstacles to the prosecution of crimes commited by the dictatorship ( the Due Obedience Law, the Final Point Law and pardons granted by President Carlos Menem), in Brazil, the Supreme Court dismissed, in 2010, an action filed by the Bar Association of Brazil, and considered the Amnesty Law (Law n. 6.683/79) the result of a political agreement and, consequently, impossible to review. Starting from these premises, the present study aims to analyze the positioning of the Supreme Courts of Brazil and Argentina, with regard to the criminal liability of the crimes against humanity committed by dictatorships. Decisions of “fallos” Arancibia Clavel, Simón and Mazzeo, and the sentence in the Arguição de Descumprimento de Preceito Fundamentl (ADPF) n. 153 will be compared under the historical bias of the democratic context in which they were generated, seeking to understand the discrepancy between the understandings of the courts and of the current framework of both countries regarding the establishment of transitional justice mechanisms.

Esta dissertação constrói a biografia da brasileira Flávia Schilling (1953- ) desde a sua infância, passando pelo seu exílio no Uruguai em 1964, até o seu retorno ao Brasil em 1980. Seu objetivo principal é reconstruir parte da trajetória de Flávia e, em termos mais amplos e abstratos, problematizar, por meio de sua biografia, as formas de constituição do indivíduo na história, buscando respostas para questões como: como se dá a construção do indivíduo – por si e pelo outro? Como se forma a sua identidade? Quais os elementos, escolhas e condicionamentos precisam ser analisados nesse processo? Pretende-se, assim, repensar e discutir como o indivíduo pode ser percebido pelas diversas óticas que o constituem e como ele interage – ativa e passivamente – com o meio em que vive, e aqui mais especificamente, relacionando-o com o período das ditaduras de segurança nacional na América Latina. O exílio, a militância, a clandestinidade, a prisão e a campanha de libertação da referida personagem, juntamente com as ditaduras iniciadas com os golpes civis-militares do Brasil em 1964 e do Uruguai em 1973, são temas analisados ao longo do trabalho. / This dissertation builds the biography of Brazilian Flavia Schilling (1953-) from her childhood, through her exile in Uruguay in 1964, until her return to Brazil in 1980. Its main objective is to reconstruct part of the trajectory of Flavia and, in terms broader and more abstract problematize through her biography, the forms of the constitution of the individual in history, seeking answers to questions such as: how is the construction of the individual - for themselves and for each other? How is your identity? Which elements, choices and constraints need to be analyzed in this process? It is intended, therefore, to rethink and discuss how the individual may be perceived by many that the optics are and how it interacts - actively and passively - with the environment they live in, and here more specifically, relating it to the period of dictatorships national security in Latin America. Exile, the activists, underground, imprisonment and release of that campaign character along with dictatorships began with the civilian-military coup in Brazil in 1964 and Uruguay in 1973, are themes explored throughout this research.

Latin-American Dictatorships as a Source of Literary Inspiration - Fiction in 20th Century - The literature that deals a historical fact helps us to understand the history, showing us life of fictive individuals representing persons who lived those historical circumstances from an intimate, partial and improbable perspective and thus is not opposed to the "official history"; it creates a fictive chronicles of historical moments. Using the words of Miguel de Unamuno, there is something small and substantive, that history does not manage to capture: the intrahistory, things that happened in the lives of people that witnessed great historical events: All the things described daily by the newspapers, the history of the "present historical moment" is nothing but a surface of a sea, a surface that freezes and crystallizes in books and archives, and once they are crystallized in a hard layer, not major to a poor skin in relation to the intrahistorical lives we live inside of its immense ardent center. The newspapers say nothing about the silent lives of millions of men that wake up at any hour of the day in all the countries of the globe by the order of the Sun and go to their fields to proceed to their dark and silent eternal everyday work, that work, that as the submarine corrals create the bases for the islets...

No description available.

<p>Since the 1980&rsquo / s, many dictatorships around the world have been replaced by new democracies. These old dictatorships were notorious for their human rights abuses. Many people were killed and tortured / and many others were disappeared. When the new governments came into power, they had to confront these injustices that were perpetrated under the predecessor regime. This was necessary to create a culture of human rights / promote a respect for the law and access to justice. Many confronted these injustices in different ways, some granted amnesty, some prosecuted and others instituted truth commissions. This research paper focuses on truth commissions. The research focuses particularly on the study of the South African Truth Commission. The mandate of the South African Truth Commission is analysed and the investigation into whether the commission served the purpose for which it had been established is discussed.</p>

<p>Since the 1980&rsquo / s, many dictatorships around the world have been replaced by new democracies. These old dictatorships were notorious for their human rights abuses. Many people were killed and tortured / and many others were disappeared. When the new governments came into power, they had to confront these injustices that were perpetrated under the predecessor regime. This was necessary to create a culture of human rights / promote a respect for the law and access to justice. Many confronted these injustices in different ways, some granted amnesty, some prosecuted and others instituted truth commissions. This research paper focuses on truth commissions. The research focuses particularly on the study of the South African Truth Commission. The mandate of the South African Truth Commission is analysed and the investigation into whether the commission served the purpose for which it had been established is discussed.</p>

Magister Legum - LLM / Since the 1980's, many dictatorships around the world have been replaced by new democracies. These old dictatorships were notorious for their human rights abuses. Many people were killed and tortured; and many others were disappeared. When the new governments came into power, they had to confront these injustices that were perpetrated under the predecessor regime. This was necessary to create a culture of human rights; promote a respect for the law and access to justice. Many confronted these injustices in different ways, some granted amnesty, some prosecuted and others instituted truth commissions. This research paper focuses on truth commissions. The research focuses particularly on the study of the South African Truth Commission. The mandate of the South African Truth Commission is analysed and the investigation into whether the commission served the purpose for which it had been established is discussed. / South Africa

Étudier l’édifice post-exotique construit par Antoine Volodine en s’intéressant à la langue revient à l’envisager à la fois comme objet de représentation, comme « matériau » façonné par l’écrivain et comme outil d’une stratégie littéraire sans concession vis-à-vis du lecteur. Représentée dans de nombreuses séquences fictionnelles, la langue revient d’œuvre en œuvre et permet de révéler l’importance particulière de certaines d’entre elles ainsi que la cohérence interne de cet ensemble romanesque. Façonné sans relâche par Volodine, le français s’en trouve modifié car l’auteur y insère des néologismes et en perturbe les expressions a priori intangibles ; l’analyse de cette poétique fondée sur le mélange et la perturbation, soit l’hybridité, permet en outre de distinguer quelques pratiques linguistiques propres aux hétéronymes. Mais surtout, l’écrivain ouvre le français aux langues étrangères par un biais qui fait jouer la traduction d’une façon inédite et cette hospitalité linguistique qui fait appel à la créolisation conduit à reconsidérer la francophonie (dont elle se revendique). Utilisée pour dénoncer les mésusages linguistiques de discours historiquement identifiés, la langue volodinienne permet à l’écrivain de mettre en place des dispositifs linguistiques et littéraires qui exigent une participation active du lecteur, régulièrement invité à prendre part à la construction du sens. / To study Antoine Volodine’s post-exotic fiction through the prism of language is to consider language as an object of representation, as “material” shaped by the writer, and as a tool in a literary strategy which makes no concessions to the reader. Language is represented in numerous fictional sequences, reappearing as a theme from one text to the next, thereby revealing both the importance of certain novels in his oeuvre as well as the internal coherency of his work. Volodine relentlessly remodels the French language, introducing neologisms and disrupting expressions that seem, a priori, intangible. Furthermore, the analysis of this poetics based on heterogeneity and disruption - or its hybridity - allows certain linguistic practices specific to heteronyms to be identified. Above all, Volodine opens French to foreign languages through an innovative use of translation. This linguistic hospitality, which draws on “creolisation”, calls for a reconsideration of the francophone literary field (which it claims to be part of). Volodine’s language is used to denounce the misuse of language in historically identified discourses, and it is the means by which the writer sets up linguistic and literary devices which demand the active participation of the reader, who is regularly invited to partake in the construction of meaning.

Neste trabalho comparamos dois documentários-propaganda das ditaduras do Brasil (1964-1985) e da Argentina (1976-1983). Nossa pesquisa busca desenvolver uma análise enunciativo discursiva dos dois documentários que permita estabelecer relações com aspectos das suas condições de produção e com as características do enunciador e do co-enunciador. Trata-se dos filmes, Brasil de Ontem, Hoje e Amanhã, exibido em 1975 no programa Amaral Netto, o Repórter da Rede Globo e Ganamos la Paz, exibido em 1977 no canal 7 da televisão argentina. Os dois filmes expõem a versão dos governos militares da situação política e social daqueles anos, justificando a necessidade de intervenção das forças armadas, que se apresentam como a única instituição capaz de conter o avance de um mesmo inimigo: o comunismo. A noção de condições de produção mostrou-se especialmente produtiva porque nos permitiu indagar o âmbito institucional dos dois países e a circulação de superfícies discursivas produzidas a partir de uma mesma doutrina na qual ambos os regimes se fundamentaram: a de Guerra Revolucionária francesa. O estudo do funcionamento e da modalidade de representação expositiva do gênero documentário (Nichols, 1997), as categorias de discurso constituinte (Maingueneau, 2008) e de heterogeneidade discursiva (Authier Revouz, [1982] 2011) foram fundamentais em nossa análise. Dessa forma, pudemos estabelecer não apenas relações interdiscursivas, mas também entre os diferentes lugares de dizer que o enunciador ocupa, a representação do inimigo e a interlocução representada nos dois filmes. / In this study we compare two propagandistic documentary films of the Brazilian (1964-1985) and Argentinean (1976-1983) dictatorships. Our research aims at carrying out a discourse and enunciation analysis in order to relate some aspects of their production conditions with the enunciator´s and co-enunciator´s characteristics. The films under study were Brasil de Ontem, Hoje e Amanhã, exhibited in 1975 on Rede Globo´s Amaral Netto, o Repórter show, and Ganamos la Paz, exhibited in 1977 on channel 7 in Argentina. Both films exposed the military government version of the political and social situation in those years, justifying the intervention of the armed forces which introduce themselves as being the sole institution capable of hindering the progress of the same enemy: communism. The production condition notion has proved to be productive since it allowed us to get into the institutional framework of both countries and into the circulation of discursive surfaces produced based on the same doctrine to which both governments adhere, namely the French Revolutionary War. The study of the functioning and representation mode of the documentary genre (Nichols, 1997), the constitutive discourse categories (Maingueneau, 2008), and the discursive heterogeneity (Authier Revouz, [1982] 2011) were of the utmost importance in our analysis. Therefore we were able to assess not only interdiscursive relations, but also the place of speech the enunciator occupies, the representation of the enemy and the interlocution represented in both films.