Faced with the bluntness of evidence and the proximity of the trial of criminal action 2668, () seems to have abandoned legal strategy and was betting on all or nothing political: provoking court reactions to feed the narrative of persecution.
After years of investigations, complaint, hearing of witnesses and interrogations, Bolsonaro and the other defendants, which leaves the criminal action ready to be tried.
According to (Attorney General’s Office), Bolsonaro who sought to implement a coup and abolish the rule of law to perpetuate himself in power. This criminal organization would have adopted different strategies, such as embarrassment and violence on election day, opponent espionage, mobilization of popular and general radicalization.
It would also have built narratives of electoral fraud and bias of ministers of the TSE (Superior Electoral Court) and the (Supreme Court), articulated by social networks, with the purpose of weakening institutional controls and justifying exceptional measures, such as an intervention in court and arrest of ministers.
The evidence produced in the context of criminal action, the prosecution and the defense, corroborate these facts and reveal the severity of the crimes. Messages, testimonials, testimonials, videos, audios and a diversity of documents point out that the attempted coup and abolition of the rule of law have been underway since mid -2021, culminating in the wave of violence on January 8, 2023.
With the proximity of trial and a very likely conviction, Bolsonaro attacked the court again. Rhetoric did not bring any news to what had already been done during his presidential mandate: reinforcement of the narrative of persecution, accusations of bias of the ministers, in dissociation of the reality of facts and criminal action.
If the narratives and their purpose were not new, already revealed and documented as part of the criminal plot, the endorsement given to them was unheard of. Ideological ally and undemocratic practices, it resolved. Tariff and sanctions against ministers were presented as a retaliation to the criminal action that is being processed against the former president and other defendants.
(PL-SP) made a point of assuming the achievement of the feat and the Federal Police revealed coordination and articulation of facts between father and son, through social networks, emphasizing and resonating pressure against the Brazilian judiciary.
The explicit pressure made against the Federal Supreme Court to interrupt the course of the trial of criminal action has been politically dealt with as a threat and legally as a coercion in the course of the process and obstruction of justice, rightly.
Given the risk he came to the regular course of criminal action, Bolsonaro received precautionary measures: use of electronic anklet, obligation to collect nightly, and full on weekends and holidays, prohibition of approaching embassies and using social networks.
The precautionary measure that prohibited the use of social networks was not in a vacuum and is directly related to the specific case and characteristics of crimes in calculation, which have the systematic use of social networks to spread criminal and undemocratic narratives.
Faced with news of non -compliance, he asked the supreme clarification and promised to comply with the measures. He failed to comply with them, greeking via social networks of third parties in mobilization that celebrated the coercion against the court. Politically, a derision. Legally, non -compliance with previously imposed precautionary measures.
For the obvious non -compliance, measured even mild in the face of the risks and the fuss that the defendant has made to rise and make his trial unfeasible. Still, it generated a new wave of blackmail: amnesty, impeachment, new political and economic sanctions, all readily replicated by allies. It is a well rehearsed script. Provoke a reaction from the court and, from it, claim persecution.
They try to put the STF in a trap. If tolerate the delinquency, it will be accused of giving in to the pressures and coercion; If you adopt more serious measures, you will be criticized for revanchism and will feed the narrative of persecution.
With the proximity of the trial, the attacks against the court will be intensified. However, even with all the political tension, the Supreme has to redouble its attention and remain alien to the noise. Non -decree of pre -trial detention showed restraint and caution. The procedural deadlines of the criminal action continue to pass. Continue to perform the jurisdictional function as it has done, without revenge, no fear, is the best and definitive response to the attacks you have been suffering.
