The Federal District Court ordered the Federal Deputy (PL-MG) to pay R $ 200,000 in collective moral damages for the episode in which the parliamentarian made transphobic speech in the House of Representatives in 2023.
“I consider high the degree of social reprobability of conduct, as the defendant occupies a political office that requires reverence for the pillars of the democratic rule of law even greater than expected of other citizens,” said the responsible judge.
According to magistrate Priscila Faria da Silva, parliamentary immunity does not protect the lines of Nikolas, which would be hatred speech by discrediting the gender identity assumed by the population
Transsexual and inflate society to do the same.
The decision is not definitive and appeals against the conviction.
In a social network, Nikolas said that the Constitution guarantees him “parliamentary immunity for opinions, words and votes” and will appeal the decision. “My crime? Wearing a wig and denouncing the tyranny of LGBT activists – who give me reason once again,” he said.
“Although parliamentarians have wide freedom to defend during the legislature the ideology with which they compact, it cannot be admitted to find out from the fundamental vectors of the Republic, among which is the dignity of the human person, and even less that incur hate speech,” he said.
By the decision of the 12th Civil Court of Brasilia, the amount of the judicial conviction must be reversed to the Diffuse Rights Defense Fund.
The statements were made on March 8, 2023. At the time, wearing a blonde wig, the federal deputy used the Tribune of the House of Representatives to speak about the. He stated that the left wanted to stop him from pronouncing “for not being in his place of speech” and said he would solve the problem, because “today I feel woman: Mrs Nicole.”
Ironizing, he followed: “Women are losing their space to men who feel women. For you to have the idea of the danger of all this, they are wanting to put the imposition of a reality that is not reality.”
The decision emphasizes the use of wig and speech as characterizers of transphobic discourse.
“The absence of explicitly offensive terms does not denature the discriminatory imprint of discourse, evidenced from the use of a wig to mock the gender transition through which transsexual individuals pass to the spread of the idea that the existence of trans women put rights such as the safety and freedom of cisgender women,” says Priscila Faria da Silva.
The action was presented by the Brazilian Association of Homotransaphanting Families. In the petition, the entity still asks the deputy to retract, which was denied by the sentence.
About this point, the magistrate states that, even if it is the role of the judiciary to curb conduct that undermine fundamental values and interests, it is not, on the other hand, to impose that it manifests that it does not agree.
“In this same way on ideas, imposing that the defendant elaborates and implement public policies for the LGBT community, when this is not the social interest he intends to defend in the exercise of the legitimately achieved mandate, would give rise to the same democratic principles that is taking care of the recognition of collective damage,” he says.
Nikolas’ defense said in the process that the demonstration is supported by parliamentary immunity and that the constitutional text allows parliamentarians to express themselves freely, not necessarily formal, and even through gestures and gestures if they wish.
“I point out to have manifested the way in question in order to draw the attention of the Brazilian people to something that, from their perspective, is extremely serious, which is within the lidimo exercise of freedom of expression,” says the defense, according to an excerpt transcribed in the court decision.
Nikolas denies that speech has characterized hate speech and inflated listeners attacking, from any angle, the LGBTQia+community. According to him, he only led his debate his point of view and understanding of the value that should be conferred to women.
