The fight for memory, truth and justice in Brazil gained renewed momentum with the success and Oscar nomination of the film "I'm Still Here," which tells the story of Eunice Paiva and her tireless search for answers about the disappearance of her husband, former deputy Rubens Paiva, during the military dictatorship. However, the topic has been part of reporter Juliana Dal Piva's life for more than a decade, back to when she began researching the case for her Master's thesis. Now, that research has been adapted and transformed into the book “Crime sem castigo: como os militares mataram Rubens Paiva” (Crime without punishment: how the military killed Rubens Paiva).
Unlike the film, which shows Eunice's fight for justice, the book goes through the disappearance, torture and execution of the former federal deputy through the research carried out by Dal Piva. The work features investigations and interviews by the journalist, in addition to the analysis of thousands of documents, articles, interviews and testimonies to reconstruct the story of the crime. The military dictatorship and the coverage of deaths and disappearances during this period have guided Dal Piva's career since her college days and, as she said in an interview with LatAm Journalism Review (LJR), following and investigating military personnel ended up leading her to covering former President Jair Bolsonaro, about whom she has also written a book.
Dal Piva also highlights the need for newsrooms to give due importance to coverage of the military dictatorship in Brazil. She said that for many years it was difficult to raise awareness among editors about the issue, which was considered of “less importance” and something that “had already passed.”
“We have been forced to see in recent years, above all, that democracy is not given. A path to destruction [of democracy] is forgetfulness, which is very much how this topic was treated. As if these issues belonged to families and this is a cause of Brazilian society,” Dal Piva said. “I get asked a lot if I have a relative involved and I don’t. I am simply a Brazilian citizen, journalist, who has basic notions of human rights, but also empathy. We are not demanding anything other than compliance with the Brazilian constitution.”
As part of its 5 questions series, LJR spoke with Dal Piva about the process of investigating and adapting her Master’s thesis into a book, the relationship with military sources and the importance of journalistic coverage on the topic in Brazil. The interview has been edited for brevity and clarity.
1. What was the research process like for the book?
It's my adapted Master's thesis, but I can't do this research without my work as a reporter. I had been studying the topic since I was in college. Since then, I started building a library. I don't want to elevate overwork, but you can't cover an area that already has almost 50 years of history without having in-depth knowledge. I immersed myself in studying books, articles, biographies, reports from the Special Commission on Political Deaths and Disappearances. I started attending events to discuss this topic, on my own, during my breaks, when I could fit a story here and there about the subject. Delving deeper into this topic requires patience and persistence, because it involves crossing information between documents, witnesses and victims to put together a puzzle with many missing pieces. Many people have already died, many documents have been destroyed and many people do not want to cooperate. But it was essential for me to have studied in Buenos Aires and then at the Center for Research and Documentation on Contemporary History of Brazil (CPDOC, for its initials in Portuguese) at Fundação Getúlio Vargas (FGV), where I was able to expand my vision of research and investigation, better understanding how files and documents work. We don't do journalism about journalism, so interacting with professionals from other areas of research was also important to enrich my perspective. All of this was essential for the construction of the book.
2. What was the biggest challenge during the investigation?
As a reporter, I can't help but say that I went to interview Paulo Malhães [retired Army colonel, who revealed to the Truth Commission that Rubens Paiva's body was thrown into a river]. It was one of the most difficult interviews I've ever done in my life. It's something that perhaps many professionals never do: to interview a person who has been trained and specialized in being a torturer. At first I went together with [reporter] Chico Otávio and, a few years later, alone. I tried in every possible way to prepare myself for this moment of listening to him without letting myself be deceived, misled. He would test me throughout the interview with questions and comments about how he had tortured women and things like that, almost as if he was provoking me to see if I would break out of my role as reporter. At the same time, I knew that the most important thing here was to collect his testimony in as much detail as possible so that I could continue with the investigation, comparing it with other statements and documents.
3. What was the relationship like with these top military sources?
Machismo has always been there. Disqualification due to my age and being a woman was constant. But I studied a lot to avoid falling into these traps. They treated me like I was a little girl who would believe any story. I shielded myself with knowledge, studying them a lot to position myself in situations. I knew their codes, the way they spoke, their references, their vocabulary, their language, so that they understood that they weren't dealing with someone who didn't know what they were doing. I was also always very transparent about what I was investigating and how. And so I started building a space within this extremely difficult coverage.
4. How important is journalism for the case of Rubens Paiva and for other victims of the dictatorship?
It was a fundamental point. Journalism often fulfilled a role that belonged to the authorities. Those who disappeared people, the violence, was carried out by security agents who, in practice, would be responsible for investigating crimes of disappearance. So, it was reporters who investigated and were willing to investigate. In the case of Rubens, this was very clear, always in partnership and with the help of Eunice Paiva. I told the story of some articles in the book because they were the ones that made it possible to put together the pieces of the puzzle. Investigative journalism is often confused with journalism that follows the investigation and transcribes documents. Investigative journalism is like you have a wall. You put some bricks there along with the existing bricks of the official investigation. It's not simply talking about the bricks in the wall. These works play this role and were fundamental without any doubt.
5. How can journalism still contribute to discovering more stories about the dictatorship?
We need newsrooms to give more space to the topic. A major difficulty was the lack of space in the press following the National Truth Commission. I had a lot of difficulty doing investigative work on this topic in practically every place I worked since 2014. We went into a spiral of Lava-Jato, then the rise of the extreme right, the Bolsonaro government and several other issues. Working conditions also became difficult, newsrooms went through a major crisis. But the truth is that this topic was not given the importance it deserves. Having permanent work on this and creating space for reporters to carry out investigations on this topic again is essential. It can't just be our initiative. I did all the [reporting] I could, but in between there was a lot of pressure to cover other things. So my dream, my wish, from the bottom of my heart, is that it goes beyond the Oscars. Because that's it, the film has already moved the Supreme Court so that crimes against humanity are finally recognized. If the press moves so as not to stop with the Rubens Paiva case and we can do other work, re-investigate the case of the dead and disappeared, see which torturers are still alive, which cases can still be prosecuted... There is a universe of things to be investigated. But it is a space that also depends on the reflection and empathy of the editors, who once again give space and dedicate resources to these cases.
