Background analysis and modes of approaching the study of the security forces in Argentina Gerardo Halpern Mariana Galvani

Karina Mouzo This work examines how the Argentine Security Forces (SF) have been analyzed and presents the state-o -the-art which serves as the rame o re erence or the ob!ect o our research" the construction o the sub!ectivity o the o icials# o the Argentine Federal $olice (AF$) and the Federal $enitentiary Service (F$S)% Although in the early stages our investigation into this construction was delimited by several issues& none o these took into consideration a speci ic analysis o the meanings o the term 'insecurity() To some extent& we would attempt to leave the game that the ield *according to +ourdieu* invited us to play) The somewhat obvious answer is that i you are within a ield * such as 'doxa( or 'heterodoxy( * there is no outside and that& should there be any& this is at the expense o staying on the sidelines o the legitimized debates over meaning& o the existing symbolic disputes and conse,uently& at the expense o making no legitimate contribution there where our interest lies) -n short& re lecting on our location and the de inition o the ield o study o the SF resulted in a change to our irst approach" we relin,uished the na.ve attempt to remain outside the ield where we are somehow also included) The ollowing text is divided into three sections" in the irst& we go over the meanings o the paradigm of insecurity in Argentina ($egoraro" #///) and the disputes over the signi icance o 'insecurity() At the same time& we account or the way in which the ield o research on the SF in Argentina gains visibility0 in the second section we present an outline o the ,uestions addressed to the 'SF ob!ect( rom the Social Sciences0 lastly& in the third section& we attempt to ob!ecti y our ,uestions about the SF) 1-Pro lematizing !insecurity" 1uring the decade o the /2s the intensi ication o the neoliberal policies in Argentina brought to light the apparent paradox o a double process" on the one hand& the dominant discourse on the 'withdrawal o the State( and& on the other& the growing presence o the State through its mechanisms o repression) 3e say alleged paradox& because in act the State not only did not withdraw but created new regulations or those areas in which it consolidated its centrality" a new #

and strong presence where the SF gained a leading role) The strengthening o the 'repressive arm o the State( was also accompanied by the media discourse about 'insecurity( and the imputation o those who allegedly caused it) +eyond the media simplicity o use o the term 'insecurity( as a guiding concept or much o the contemporary narrative& in our approach the term presupposes a complexity o meaning that re,uires the reconsideration o di erent de initions * thus views * which call or its denaturalization as well as the explicit conceptualization o the theoretical background on which it is constructed) 4 e (#//5) has put orward a series o de initions o security by connecting it consecutively with the 3el are State (social security)& with military strategy (external defense) and with social control (social protection)) According to his analysis& it is the third meaning (social control) that currently takes precedence& and a close link between 'security( and its signi icance as social control is established) 6e understands social control in the 7uropean tradition8& in which the State is responsible or dealing with any threats to the 'social order( by relying primarily on the criminal !ustice system) Simultaneously& 'insecurity( emerges as 'a sense o exposure to danger( in a multiplicity o socially shared orms o discourse (media& political discourse& public opinion pollsters& security orces and re erents o the so-called 'social orces( among others) 3ho are then the o enders 9 potential aggressors whom society ears: Foucault (#/;/) maintains that o enders are those who& same as the rest o the members o the population& commit illegalities) +ut unlike the rest& they are not tolerated in spite o the act that they prove use ul to hide other tolerable illegalities) The logic across the discourse is& according to this author& social defense) A logic that seeks& to the limit& the elimination o the one who is labeled as 'the enemy o society() -n this context& and returning to 4 e& 'insecurity( crystallizes into one o its possible meanings" the lack o protection against crime) < This& as an ideological sign& appears mainly in connection with crimes against private property and people) The meaning given to 'insecurity( in Argentina has been critically analyzed rom di erent perspectives and de initions) $egoraro (#//=) points out that we are at present in what he calls the 'paradigm of insecurity(& a conse,uence o the transition rom the paradigm of security in the late =2s to that o 'insecurity() -n the irst& the goal o the social policies was the inclusion o the most disadvantaged sectors in the labour market whereas in the second& a ter the neo-conservative revolution o the ;2s& it was criminal policies designed to repress and there ore to reproduce the %

exclusion o

marginal sectors that prevailed over 'social security() $egoraro then de ines in which

'insecurity( against common sense" the state o uncertainty and precariousness disaffiliated sectors live (1997).

-n the same vein& Tiscornia proposes 'public security(as an alternative to 'public order( as this is one o the governance problems that the rule o law in contemporary democracies should solve) This shi t o meaning allows him to claim that 'the protected interest is neither the established order nor the rules that support it& but rights and reedom( (Tiscornia& #//;"%))> Along the same line& some agents in the intellectual ield and 6uman ?ights organizations re ormulate the problem o 'insecurity( in terms o 'citizenship security( and con ront the idea o 'public order( -n the syntagm& 'citizenship security(& security is directly linked to 'citizenship rights(& these understood in terms o civil rights) This shi t rom insecurity to citizenship security also implies a di erent way o conceiving the role o the State" it is no longer !ust a matter o answering whether the State should protect citizenship rights or en orce the (an) internal order& but there are other actors apart rom the State involved in issues concerning public security) '@itizens (1ammert& %222) and amongst them academics& legislators& etc)& are also summoned to actively participate in this complex scenario) Security then becomes an issue every man and woman should participate in) 3e understand that this shi t not only alls within the ramework o the situation o visibility that 'security( ac,uires but also it is originated in a change o the way in which States reshape the issue o internal order) This recon iguration takes on speci ic characteristics in each country and has a peculiar orm in the post dictatorial democracies in Aatin America) 3e maintain that it is this struggle over the meaning and the scope o 'insecurity( and its transition to citizenship security that marks the starting point o the ield that takes the SF as the ob!ect o study) +esides& and not only as part o a categorical dis,uisition& the SF appear and are reported as a ma!or source o 'citizenship insecurity( as they have violated and still violate the rights o individuals) At the same time& the political importance o the matter will result in the act that the State& through its agencies& and along with other international organizations& invests in this type o research recognizing it as a vacant area)

#he security forces as an o $ect of study% 7ven though in the B)S) and in +ritain the SF have been studied since the =2s& it was not until the decade o the /2s that this type o research started in Aatin America& particularly in Argentina) -n act& in the early democratic period& the military orces occupied the stage centre) Caminsky and Daleano !usti y this by the act that the ears o the democratic transition process were condensed in the military issue and that 'the police institutions were ignored& or recognized as subordinate agencies o the government in charge& whether civilian or military) @onse,uently& it was naively or blindedly assumed& that taming the military actor would automatically bring the security orces under control( (%22;" %<=)) Along the same lines& 3aldmann (#//5) holds that the SF were not analyzed in the irst instance because they did not appear as a politically or scienti ically interesting ob!ect0 it was the armed orces that had le t a crucial mark on li e in the Aatin American countries and were there ore the ocus o interest) -t is not coincidental that the irst to analyze the SF were the 6uman ?ights organizations& which had a long history o accusations against dictatorial governments and could ocus on those which violated these rights in the new Aatin-American governments a ter the process o transition to democracy) -n the late /2s there were con erences& seminars& panels and orums that explicitly included the SF as an academic issue under the citizenship security heading Amongst them& there are two in which the SF were central to their agenda" irst& in #//> the congress organized by the @enter or the Aatin American 1evelopment Studies (@-71AA) sponsored by the Conrad Adenauer Foundation in $an!achel& Duadala!ara& with participants rom Argentina) The outcome o the work on the SF carried out at this meeting& displaced the hitherto dominant analysis o the armed orces in Aatin American research) 5 The second& in %22#& took place in Argentina) -t was the con erence organized by the Bniversidad Eacional de Deneral Sarmiento that resulted in the book iolence! "rime and #ustice in $rgentina compiled by Dayol and Cessler (%22%)) +eyond the spatial and temporal ubi,uity o the two examples above mentioned& we understand that it is impossible to set a date or the beginning o a ield) 6owever& there are landmarks that eature the recognition o the ield by other actors and other local institutions) -n connection with this& we are interested in two scienti ic meetings which& among others& illustrate the recognition o the SF as a ield o study) The irst was the meeting o the Assessment $rogram o Scienti ic and Technological Activities at the Bniversity o +uenos Aires (%22%) under the title <

'Security and @itizenship() -ts aim was to propose a peer review o the research that was being carried out in relation to that sub!ect by bringing together six groups rom di erent Faculties rom the Bniversity o +uenos Aires) There& the Aegal Anthropology commission stressed the importance o the study o the SF) The second scienti ic meeting relates to recognition outside the academic arena0 in this case it was the national government that invited researchers to participate in the Second Feeting o the +icentennial Forums called& as in the previous case& 'Security and @itizenship( in %22=) -t was organized by the Eational Secretariat o @ulture and there were representatives rom di erent areas that take the SF as their speci ic ob!ect o analysis and re lection) The organization o such events also updates (and ritualizes) a common world o speculation& re lections and in,uiries that are shaping the perception that has established itsel as legitimate) At the same time& and as a ield e ect& there are also the approaches that are le t in the subalternity or that compete or the recognition o the other agents in that ield and 9 or others) 6ence& growing map of views a%out the o%&ect can be recovered to understand the intellectual and political course o the ield in ,uestion and o the agents it involves) @onse,uently& to paraphrase +ateson and being aware that the map is not the territory (but it serves or orientation within it)& we present one o the possible maps as a way o approximation to these ,uestions& to the various ,uestionings& and to the distance and proximity o the various positions that de ine the game o the production o the discourse and policies on the security orce) a%#he imputations -t was the 6uman ?ights organizations and research !ournalism who highlighted the imputations o violence& abuse and corruption in connection with the action o the SF) -n the case o the organizations& their accusations and the resulting legal actions were made on acts that were considered paradigms o abuse by the State SF) The Aegal and Social Studies @entre (@7AS)& ounded in #/=/& and the @oordinating 4rganization against $olice and -nstitutional ?epression (@4??7$-) that began operations in #//% stand out among the most active and recognized organizations in this area) = @harges o wrongdoing against the SF were also made by research !ournalism& irst in newspaper articles and then& in some cases& in book ormat) -n this way& !ournalism became a re erence point or cases o abuse by the FS) These !ournalistic productions ollow two lines) 4ne o them includes >

those who describe and analyze the operation o the SF as a whole& in its capacity as an 'institution() The other& those who analyze its per ormance through the case study) The books written by ?agendor er and 1util (#//= and %22%)& Andersen (%22#) and Clipphan (%22<) on the +uenos Aires police serve as example or the irst0 or the second AlarcGn& who wrote 'hen ( die ( want you to play me cum%ia& )ife of young croo*s ( ida de +i%es "horros) (%228) based on his notes on police s,uads operating in the town o Tigre ($rovince o +uenos Aires) in the newspaper $Hgina9#%) -n the same line are the books by Almada and Aicht (%22#)& Iecchi (%22#)0 @echhi (%222)) -n any case& the precursor o the above mentioned is BbertalliJs ,he *illing of -udge (19.7) that narrates the murder o three youths by the police in the town o -ngeniero +udge& $rovince o +uenos Aires) Foreover& this case became the paradigm o the imputations o police violence) +oth orms o imputation have at least two characteristics" the irst is that cases should be anchored in the de ense o human rights0 the second& that or a case to become paradigmatic& this should not only involve an illegitimate and illegal action o the state security orces against the individualJs li e and personal integrity& but must also have public impact) 3e maintain that both the 6uman ?ights organizations and research !ournalism belong in the same group because they in,uire into the legality or illegality of the act committed %y any of the security forces. That is& the attention is primarily directed to the normative level); % #hinking of solutions As stated above& the claims or the 'wrongdoings( o the SF became the starting point or their analysis and several intellectuals began to speculate about the reasons or this) 3hy do the security orces violate the individualJs rights and abuse their power:0 in what way do they do so:0 3hat are the reasons: Some o them also wondered how the 'correct( mode o operation could be made e ective) 4bviously& this orm o ,uestioning the SF presupposes the idea o what 'ought to be( their mode o operation) At the same time& these ,uestions re,uire a proper diagnosis o the situation o the SF as well as the de inition o the possible public policies that could lead to overcome their ' laws() This creates a grey zone between the intellectuals and the government (s) in which a sub!ect area o signi icant political interest brings about migrations rom research to management (and vice versa) when addressed by the scienti ic ield) 7xamples are the successive 'police re orms( which are inspired in the scienti ic ield or in which researchers are directly involved) @onsonant with this& 5

governments provide unding to support their 'organic intellectuals(& who re lect 9 propose 9 act about security issues& more speci ically the SF) Aogically& this group o intellectuals is not homogeneous) -n act& the ormulation o public policies * inasmuch as the horizon o expectations - is common to the 'various( researchers) From their productions& analysts challenge not only the scienti ic ield& but they take the potential leaders as the privileged interlocutors who will ultimately have the power to make decisions to intervene in the SF) Somehow& the scienti ic ield structures its positions not only in relation to what is proper to that ield& but in our present ob!ect o interest0 it looks and is looked at and by the political ield especially to and rom its doxa - as part o the positioning o some o its agents) -t can be understood that it is not !ust the academic prestige that is at stake) The research and contributions o these researchers is guided by the desire to develop a system o public security that guarantees democracy) The re orm policy implies some discussions) For example& to de ine the purpose o the police& they must irst deal with what common sense considers is the unction o this orce) -n most o the cases& research starts by discussing not only the concept o 'insecurity( but also crime& thus stressing the deterministic linear assimilation o poverty and 'crime( (Sain& %22<& +inder& %22<0 Cosovsky& %2250 $almieri & #/// Salinas& %2250 Caminsky& %22>)) Bnderstandably& the diagnostic analysis o the per ormance o the SF is undamental -'condition o possibility( - to be able to consider any trans ormations) -n act& the relationship between 'political power( and 'extra-legal income( o the orces is one o the ocal points in these analyses) -n turn& and as part o the diagnostic procedures& the State is identi ied as the most responsible agent in the issues under consideration) -ts 'absence( as a controller and con lict manager is also a point o convergence) Sain (%22<) uses the term ' ailed( to describe and characterize the State that 'can not take over the police() For these authors it is essential that the security problem should become a State problem& independent rom the discussions within the same orce) The (sel -) critical analysis o the successive police re orms in the $rovince o +uenos Aires made by these intellectuals (in many o which they took part) is almost 'a must() Their di erent perspectives on the re orms have generated various approaches to possible uture amendments) The

emphasis is on di erent stages o the process o reproduction o the security orces" law& education& culture) The proposals or re orm range rom the solution o macro social problems to speci ic institutional re orms0 rom what is 'desirable( to what is 'possible() Also& prevention in all its orms (social& community and situational) and the plea to citizens or the e ective control o the SF appear as pivotal points) c% Ho& they &ork The place o law and penal institutions began to be analyzed by historiography rom the methodology developed by the new social history& discourse analysis& the studies o the subaltern classes and o gender and the various readings o FoucaultJs productions) The ocus o the analysis is the past o the SF& although& ollowing Foucault& we might say that one goes into the past to account or the present (Salvatore and Aguirre& #//5& %22#0 +arreneche& %22#0 Daleano %22;)) $unishment practices are part o the discourse o the SF& the media& the experts and the so-called 'profane (@aimari& %22<)) From the Social Sciences& there are approaches to the SF which concur in the act that the ,uestions addressed to the ob!ect are not aimed at establishing why certain practices and uses exist& but rather to ind out how.9 That is& they look into the mechanisms that allow the existence o these institutional spaces& how the relationships o power and knowledge are established& how the sub!ectivities o its members are constructed and in what way systematic violence is possible within the bureaucratic procedures) 3ithin these groups we ind the Aegal and $olitical Anthropology Team (Facultad de Filoso Ka y Aetras * Bniversity o +uenos Aires) directed by Tiscornia& the ?esearch Team rom the Bniversity o Santa Fe under Sozzo& and the team at the @ultural @enter Aa @ooperacion& directed by 1aro,ui) The $rogramme or the Study o Social @ontrol approaches the police practices rom a Foucauldian perspective& emphasizing 'their relationship and integration into the broader context o the proli eration o political& media& academic& and social discourse that problematize (in)security (Dalvani et) al)& %2#2)) 6ere the ,uestions about the operation o the SF do not only re er to the articulation o an institutional machinery& with its roles and unctions - but they attempt to go beyond the limits o institutionalism in order to analyze more complex social processes across the

SF) -n short& these positions also look at the SF rom the construction o the sub!ectivity o its o icials and 9 or rom the analysis o their practices and 9 or history) ' - (uestions a out the security forces -n line with the latter method o approach& our research ,uestions aim precisely at investigating the construction o the sub!ectivity o the penitentiary and police o icials to see how it is built up and the kind o social relations which are established within this space) Throughout our research we worked with di erent orms o discourse& which we have di erentiated in three axes) -n the irst& on the basis o in-depth interviews with o icials& we recorded what they say about their practices" 'what the members o the SF say they do() 3e consider the intervieweesJ words as discursive practices o situated actors) This makes it possible to balance the dichotomy between 'saying and doing(& between practice - as the 'truth( * and discourse * as ' alse consciousness( or as part o the 'bias(& typical o any ,ualitative research (@riado" #//;)) This theoretical and methodological decision enables the analysis o the production o discursive practices rom the constraints and conditions that structure all social relations& what +ourdieu identi ies as 'structural censorship( (#/;>)) 3e have deliberately avoided the institutional access to the interviewees (being authorized restricts the interviewees to express themselves as members o the institution and thereby prevents them rom moving away rom the place that the institution 'gives( them)) -n act& we have worked on the tension between the individual and the institution& rather than ollowed the path anticipated by the latter) So much so& that the matter o our concern is not 'the truth( that lies in our intervieweesJ discourse& but being able to account or what these o icials say (and what they mean) in an interview situation according to the position they hold within the institutional sphere) 6ence we identi y some classi ication systems produced by the members o these institutions when they re er to what appears to be the 'outside( as well as when they re er to themselves (inside) These are not mere positional distinctions& but constructions that enable 9 disable certain practices in di erent spaces) +ut they are also terms promoted by the own institutional structure& as discussed in the two axes o analysis that ollow) 4n the other hand - though on the same line - although access to these institutions hampers ieldwork& the reason lies not only on sub!ective or institutional culture issues but also on legal aspects" o icials o the SF need o icial permission to make 'a statement( to people outside the /

orces) Adding to this& there is the o icialsJ excessive caution in accepting interviews& which is part o the identity that is constructed rom institutions where 'secrecy( appears as an asset) 6owever& as in many other paths in social research& we understand that the construction o the ob!ect aces di erent di iculties) -n act& these obstacles can arise in other institutional rames) #2 The second axis includes the collection and analysis o the discourse that emerges rom the AF$ and the F$S) 3e maintain that these institutions generate two types o discourse" the one produced or the 'outside( and the one produced or the actual and prospective members o the orce (inside)) This record allows us to address two topics" what the institutions say they are& and what the institutions tell current and uture police and penitentiary o icers they should be) Finally& the third axis presents the analysis o the laws that regulate both orces) These are elaborated on a series o regulations that de ine the institutional 'ought to be() There ore& current legislation sets one o the limits within which the sub!ects o the orces should 9 could move) Anyway& or us the law stipulates what is allowed and what is prohibited) 6owever& beyond its proscriptive role& what the law says can be subverted in practice and actions contrary to these proscriptions can be legitimated through mechanisms that are not stated by the law) -t is on these three axes that we delineate the AF$ and the F$S as ' ields(& as this allows us to move away rom the notion o 'apparatus( and analyze the dynamic relations that are established between o icials o both orces)## 3hile both are hierarchically structured orces which limit the possibilities o con rontation between their respective agents& this does not imply that there are no struggles and tension within them)#% Foreover& this delineation allows us to relate the practices and relations that are established within the police or penitentiary ield to the wider network o relations that makes them possible& as well as identi y the speci ic nature o the struggle within these spheres and the relationships they establish with other ields such as the political and academic ones)#8 To think o our ob!ect o study in a relational way allows us to break away irstly rom the '-ndigenous experience(& that is& rom the meaning and explanations that the agents give their practices& since the logical explanations that the interviewees provide cannot account or the practical logic which is pre-re lective in itsel ) Secondly& the assumptions o the observer are called into ,uestion) +oth ruptures are necessary conditions to carry out in part what +ourdieu characterizes as the 'epistemological surveillance((%22%)& which is not only a speci ic moment in the research process but must be continuous and permanent) #2

The use o this ramework led us to propose an analysis o the ways in which the SF are studied in our country0 that is& to identi y the context in which these studies appear& the approaches that are proposed and the assumptions they are based on& as well as to put the emergence o this ield into a context characterized by the experience o insecurity and the debates about citizenship security a ter the start o the democratic transition) -t was there ore necessary to create the map we present in the second part o this work and to ob!ecti y our position within this ield)#< 3e understand that the approach to our ob!ects o study calls or previous analysis since this situates us in the broader intellectual ramework that is the point o 'departure( o our research) 6owever& some topics are dissociated by the se,uential treatment o the issues and will there ore re,uire later colligation) Although the 'security 9 insecurity( rame helps us to contextualize the appearance o the studies on the SF in our country& there is a debate about the State and the government orms o security that lies behind the expression) 3hat is critically involved is the discussion about how to govern& how to maintain order& which order is to be ensured& how to create security policies in a rule o law& etc) and this is clearly not a local but a global problem) 4n the other hand& the map o research on the SF is to some extent a 'photo( presentation in which it is di icult to recognize the contributions across the classi ications we suggest but which was necessary to update the discussions and contributions that are part o our work) 3hat appears as static here& there becomes dynamic) Finally& we return to the need o the epistemological surveillance not as a mere ormal expression& but as a undamental research tool) 3e believe that the act that we have recognized and located ourselves within the ield is a step in the right direction towards the identi ication o the constraints across our work) 3e have the certainty that keeping them in mind challenges us to overcome them)

##

+ibliography" +A??7E7@67& 4svaldo (%22#) /entro de la ley todo. )a &usticia criminal de -uenos $ires en la etapa formativa del sistema penal moderno de la $rgentina & 7diciones Al Fargen y Bniversidad Eacional de Aa $lata& +uenos Aires) 1BT-A& @arlos y ?AD7E14?F7?& ?icardo (#//=)" Aa bonaerense& historia criminal de la $olicKa de la $rovincia de +uenos Aires& $laneta& +uenos Aires) F4B@ABAT& Fichel (#/;/) igilar y "astigar! nacimiento de la prisi0n! Siglo LL-& +uenos Aires) F4B@ABAT& Fichel (#///) 1istoria de la sexualidad. ol (& Siglo LL-& +uenos Aires) DAAIAE-& Fariana (%22=) )a marca de la gorra) @apital -ntelectual) DAAIAE-& F4BM4& 7T AA (%2#2) $ la inseguridad la hacemos entre todos. +r2cticas policiales! medi2ticas y acad3micas. 6ekht Aibros& +uenos Aires) DAA7AE4& 1iego (%22;) " FHrtires e in,uisidores" notas sobre la construcciGn del hNroe policial) I Oornadas de SociologKa de la BEA$ y - 7ncuentro Aatinoamericano de FetodologKa de las @iencias Sociales& Aa $lata& #2& ## y #% de diciembre) DAP4A& Sandra y C7SSA7?& Dabriel (comp)) (%22%) iolencias! /elitos y #usticias en la $rgentina& Fantial y Bniversidad de Deneral Sarmiento& +uenos Aires& Argentina) CAF-E-SCP& Dregorio (%22>) ,iempos inclementes. "ulturas policiales y seguridad ciudadana& 7diciones de la BEAa& +uenos Aires) CAF-E-SCP& Dregorio y DAA7AE4& 1iego (%22;) '6acer saber" la entrada de la seguridad ciudadana en la ormaciGn universitaria argentina( en 4stado! democracia y seguridad ciudadana. $portes para el de%ate. AAIA?7M Ale!andro& +7?T?AE4B& OuliHn& et al& $EB1& +uenos Aires) CA-$$6AE& AndrNs (%22<)" Asuntos -nternos& las ma ias policiales contadas desde adentro& Aguilar& +uenos Aires) C4S4ISCP& 1arKo (%225) 4l ciudadano 5heriff. $rmas y violencia en la $rgentina & @apital -ntelectual& +uenos Aires) F4BM4& Carina& DAAIAE-& Fariana (%225) '@Gmo el saber lego se comunica con el saber experto) Bn recorrido por el tema de la QinseguridadJ(en /elito y 5ociedad) ?evista de @iencias Sociales& ER %%& BEA& Santa Fe) F4BM4 Carina& DAAIAE- Fariana (%22=) 'Aeyes& normas y prHcticas cotidianas en la $olicKa Federal Argentina y el Servicio $enitenciario Federal() Traba!o presentado en las -I Oornada de OGvenes -nvestigadores del --DD de la B+A F4BM4& Carina& DAAIAE-& Fariana (%22;) 'Aocos y mHrtires) AnHlisis comparativo de la construcciGn de identidad en dos uerzas de seguridad(& mKmeo) 4FF7& @laus (#//5)& $artidos polKticos y nuevos movimientos sociales& Sistema& Fadrid) $AAF-7?-& Dustavo (#///) '?e ormas en las instituciones policiales( en @7AS& -n orme de derechos humanos en la Argentina #//;& +uenos Aires) $7D4?A?4& Ouan (#//=) 'Aas relaciones sociedad- 7stado y el paradigma de la inseguridad( en /elito y 5ociedad 6evista de "iencias 5ociales) ASo 5& Eum) /-#2& 4 icina de publicaciones del @+@& +uenos Aires) $7D4?A?4& Ouan (#///) 'Aa corrupciGn como cuestiGn social y como cuestiGn penal( en /elito y 5ociedad 6evista de "iencias 5ociales) ASo ;& Eum) #8& BEA& Santa Fe) ?AD7E14?F7?& ?icardo (%22%)" )a secta del gatillo. 1istorias sucias de la polic7a %onaerense& $laneta& +uenos Aires) ?-@4& OosN FarKa) (#/;#)) "rimen y &usticia en $m3rica )atina& Siglo LL- editores& FNxico) ?-@4& OosN FarKa) (#/;8)) +olic7a y sociedad democr2tica& Alianza& Fadrid) #%

SAAIAT4?7& ?icardo& ADB-??7& @arlos (#//5) ,he %irth of the penitentiary in )atin $merica8 essays on criminology! prison reform! and social control! 1.9:;19<: & Bniversity o Texas $ress& BSA) SAAIAT4?7& ?icardo& ADB-??7& @arlos& O4S7$6& Dilbert (%22#) "rime and punishment in )atin $merica. )aw and society since late colonial times& 1uke Bniversity $ress& BSA) SA-E& Farcelo (%22<)" +ol7tica! +olic7a y /elito. )a red %onaerense! @olecciGn @laves para Todos& @apital -ntelectual& +uenos Aires) SA-E& Farcelo (%22;)" 4l leviat2n azul! polic7a y pol7tica en al $rgentina & Siglo Ieintiuno 7ditores& +uenos Aires) SAA-EAS& ?aTl (%225)" 4l pro%lema carcelario. )7mites del castigo. @olecciGn @laves para Todos& @apital -ntelectual& +uenos Aires& Argentina) S4MM4& FHximo (%22;)" (nseguridad prevenci0n y polic7a. FAA@S4& Uuito& 7cuador) T-S@4?E-A& So Ka (#//;)" 5eguridad p=%lica y derechos humanos! en -n orme Anual del @7AS& @ap) LI---& +uenos Aires) B+7?TAAA-& Oorge Auis (#/;=)" >$) suelo se?ores...@ )a matanza de (ngeniero -unge & $unto sur editores& +uenos Aires& Argentina) I7@@6-& Ale!andro (%22#)" 4l crimen de ca%ezas. 6adiograf7a de un pa7s mafioso & 7ditorial +iblos& +uenos Aires) I4A4S6-E4I& IalentKn (#//%) 4l marxismo y la filosof7a del lengua&e ()os principales pro%lemas del m3todo sociol0gico en la ciencia de lengua&e)& Alianza 7ditorial& 7spaSa) 3AA1FAEE& $eter (#//5) #usticia en la calle. 4nsayos so%re la polic7a en $m3rica )atina & 1ikN& FedellKn)) MAFFA?4E-& 7ugenio (#/;<) 5istemas penales y derechos humanos en $m3rica )atina & 7diciones 1epalma& Bniversidad de Texas) MAFFA?4E-& 7ugenio (#//8) Auertes anunciadas& 7ditorial Temis& +ogotH)

#8

VVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVV 3e use 'member( to re er to any employee o these institutions0 'o icer( in the case o !unior sta and 'o icial( when re erring to senior sta ) The research that serves as background or the present work is carried out by Carina Fouzo and Fariana Dalvani under the supervision o Derardo 6alpern)
%

This tradition di ers rom the American tradition o the decade o the %2s& which understands social control as the ability o a society to sel -ad!ust and which presupposes a voluntarist and consensual vision o society)
8 < 3e

understand ideological signs as multi-accentual) -n IoloshinovJs view& words are dynamic social signs which take di erent meanings or di erent social classes in di erent historical contexts) The meaning o verbal signs is the arena or continuous class struggle" a ruling class will try to narrow the meaning o social signs& making them 'uni-accentual( but the clash o interests will make the 'multi-accentuality( o words clear) Apart rom Tiscornia and $egoraro several Argentine authors argue about the hegemonic meaning given to the term 'insecurity() @ +inder (%22<)0 Sozzo (%22;)0 Salinas (%225)0 Cosovsky (%225) among others)
> 5 The presentations were edited by $eter 3aldmann and published in the book Oustice in the Street * essays on the Aatin American police)

-t is worth mentioning other organizations such as the -nstitute o @omparative Studies o $enal and Social Science (-E7@-$) and the Aatin American -nstitute o Security and 1emocracy (-lsede)
=

@oncurrently with these views& urther research about the legality and legitimacy o the orces was carried out rom the legal ield& (Ma aroni& #/;<& #//80 ?ico& #/;#& #/;8 among others) and opened debates in di erent areas o the social space)
;

The similarities in the approaches do not necessarily imply political& theoretical& methodological coincidences or the same initial assumptions The coincidence lies exclusively in the way the ob!ect is ,uestioned)
/

The reluctance to provide in ormation is not an exclusive attribute o the SF& although it is more notorious in these institutions) Secrecy and the reluctance to give in ormation about the tasks carried out is customary in many public and private activities) $ublic health o icials and employees o ast ood companies undergo permanent evaluation by the socalled 'undercover customers(
#2

+ourdieuJs conceptual 'apparatus( re ers to a pathological condition o the ield" 'it is true that under certain historical conditions& which must be studied empirically& a ield can begin to unction as an apparatus) 3hen the dominant class succeeds in suppressing the resistance and reactions o the dominated& when all movements occur vertically& rom top to bottom& the struggle and the dialectics that constitute the ield tend to disappear) 6istory exists only as long as individuals rebel& resist and react)Totalitarian institutions * asylums& prisons& concentration camps * and dictatorships are attempts to do away with history) The apparatus represent an extreme case (W) but this is a point that is never completely achieved& even in the most repressive 'totalitarian( rNgimes)( (+ourdieu y 3ac,Xant& #//>" 5;))
## #% #8 #<

@ Fouzo& Dalvani (%22=) For urther development @ Fouzo and Dalvani (%22;)

As +ourdieu notes& ' it is only the sociology o sociological knowledge that provides the sociologist with the tool that enables the epistemological criti,ue to gain orce and speci icity& updating the unconscious assumptions and claims or the beginning o a theoretical tradition rather than ,uestioning the principles o an established theory( (+ourdieu& %22%" //)

#<

#>