Search

Introduction: In recent years mass protest movements have taken to the streets in many countries across the world. Despite strong international and domestic legal protections for the right to freedom of peaceful assembly and other fundamental human rights, entire assemblies are frequently labelled violent and less lethal weapons are used to disperse them. Methods: This article examines the weapons often used by police against public assemblies. Focusing on striking weapons (batons), chemical irritants, kinetic impact projectiles and stun grenades, the article uses examples from various countries to illustrate how these weapons are being used and the associated human rights and health impacts. Results: Worrying trends identified include the use of dangerous or untested equipment, such as thermal foggers to deploy chemical irritants; the use of inherently abusive weapons, such as whips or sjamboks; and the increasing use of certain types of munitions, specifically indiscriminate kinetic impact projectiles. Discussion: The article seeks to support medical and legal professionals becoming more familiar with the weapons being used in the countries they practice in, the effects of those weapons, and clinical aspects in the presentation and care of those exposed.

The present article presents securitization theory and applies it to energy policy in Latin America. The article's focus is on how the Brazilian State marginalizes tribal land claims by securitizing energy production in order to pursue so-called development projects in the energy sector. This practice occurs via the utilization of a procedural instrument known as ‘Security Suspension’, the origins and consequences of which are examined in this work. The research suggests that contrary to what is affirmed by the State, this securitization does not benefit the population at large, which raises a question as to why these projects are really being carried out. While a plethora of tribal peoples’ human rights are violated by this practice that perpetuates a policy directed at the marginalization of these minorities, the interest of the majority of the population in the preservation of the environment is sidelined.

The present article presents securitization theory and applies it to energy policy in Latin America. The article's focus is on how the Brazilian State marginalizes tribal land claims by securitizing energy production in order to pursue so-called development projects in the energy sector. This practice occurs via the utilization of a procedural instrument known as ‘Security Suspension’, the origins and consequences of which are examined in this work. The research suggests that contrary to what is affirmed by the State, this securitization does not benefit the population at large, which raises a question as to why these projects are really being carried out. While a plethora of tribal peoples’ human rights are violated by this practice that perpetuates a policy directed at the marginalization of these minorities, the interest of the majority of the population in the preservation of the environment is sidelined.