), formally discarding summary punishment of suspension of the mandate for the case of the pockets.
In the order of Friday (8) in which he sent the representations to the Corregedoria of the House, Motta uses the act of the table of 37 of 2009, which regulates ordinary procedures of the agency, not the act of table 180 of 2025, which deals with the precautionary suspension of the exercise of the mandate of parliamentarians.
The decision represents a political defeat by Motta, who was unable to support at the Board of Directors, composed of him and six deputies, to suggest the suspension of the mandate of the amotinas for six months.
The Chamber Corregedor, Diego Colonel (PSD-BA), confirmed to Sheet which will use the ordinary rite for case analysis, not the summary procedure.
With this, the accused will have a defense period of up to five days after being notified. The corregedor will then give a new opinion to the table, which will then decide whether or not to send the cases to the Ethics Council, also for regular processing.
Normally, normal representations against parliamentarians in the council last months. In the collegiate, consisting of 21 deputies in proportion to the size of the parties in the House, there is a possibility of filing or punishments ranging from warning to cassation.
Behind the scenes, however, Motta’s defeat in an attempt to suggest the summary suspension of the mandates is seen as a strong sign that there will hardly be party support for severe punishments in the board. There are in this collegiate, for example, four parliamentarians who participated in the riot.
The punishment summary rite was created in the management of Arthur Lira (PP-AL) to try to contain the low-end episodes and threat of physical aggression in the house.
He has already resulted in the suspension of (Avante-MG) and for three months-first because he involved a confusion against pockets during a speech by Nikolas Ferreira (-MG) and the second for making offensive statements against Minister Gleisi Hoffmann (institutional articulations).
The chamber table is formed by Motta, Altineu Côrtes (PL-RJ), Elmar Nascimento (União Brasil-BA), Carlos Veras (PT-PE), Lula da Fonte (PP-PE), Delegate Katarina (PSD-se) and Sérgio Souza (MDB-PR).
“Changing the procedure now, precisely in one of the most serious episodes against Parliament, makes room for questions about coherence and isonomy. There can be no shield, impunity and selectivity: those who prevented the functioning of the house should be immediately removed to protect democracy,” PT’s leader Lindbergh Farias (RJ) has protested on their social networks.
In order to have the possibility of summary punishment, Motta would have to raise support at the table until Wednesday (13) to, regardless of the conclusions of the Corregedoria, send the cases directly to the Ethics Council with the removal recommendation. This is because the act that deals with summary punishment gives the table action of up to five business days after the occurrence of the fact.
This hypothesis, however, is considered null by parliamentarians.
The table sent to the Corregedoria representations of parties against 14 Bolsonarist parliamentarians, Zé Trovão (PL-SC), Marcel Van Hattem (Novo-RS), Marcos Pollon (PL-MS), Julia Zanatta (PL-SC), Paulo Bilynskyj (PL-SP), Cavalcante (PL-RJ), Nikolas Ferreira (PL-MG), Zucco (PL-RS), Caroline de Toni (PL-SC), Carlos Jordy (PL-RJ), Bia Kicis (PL-DF), Domingos Sávio (PL-MG), Marco Feliciano (PL-SP) and Allan Garcês (PP-MA)-that, along with (PL).
Pollon and Sávio are full members of the House Ethics Council. BILYNSKYJ is alternate.
In addition to them, there is also a representation of the PL against Camila Jara (PT-MS), accused of assaulting Nikolas Ferreira during the riot.
Thunder, Van Hattem and Pollon were among the main obstacles that between his office and the resumption of the command of the house.
The first to stop the passage of the president of the house with his leg, while the other two refused to leave the table when the parliamentarian approached his chair.
The confusion represented the most troubled public episode of the six months in which Hugo Motta commands a.
Us, he threatened, was removed to the bottom of the plenary table by the push and showed clear embarrassment after, finally, being practically thrown back in the chair of president by allies.
According to allies, it was publicly exposed in a messy attempt to recover the chair of the Plenary’s presidency, when it almost retreated from the intent, it only managed to reach the post through an agreement sewn by its predecessor, Arthur Lira, and was not able, at a key time, support at the Board of Directors to affirm his authority and punish mutties.
Parliamentarians said he was at high risk of losing the governance of the house and assessing that the episode endangers the conduct of work and reelection plans for office in 2027.
A Sheet He sought the advisory of the Chamber’s presidency and awaits a position on the decision of the deputy to rule out the application of the summary suspension penalty in the case of the riot.
