In the House by immediately giving in place, the deputy argues in prior defense that the accusation against him does not correctly reproduce “the facts” and at the Board of Directors.
Van Hattem is the target of representation presented at the Ethics Council by PT leaders (RJ), PSOL, Talíria Petrone (RJ), and PSB, Pedro Campos (PE). They request their participation in the demonstration against that of the former president (PL).
The prior defense was sent to the Chamber of the House. The deputy’s main argument to ask the representation to be rejected is that it does not correctly describe the facts and “seeks to penalize it for something absolutely legitimate and legal to take seat in the chair for the deputy and the other 511 parliamentarians.”
Van Hattem states that “he did not even sit in the chair of the president of the House of Representatives, having actually occupied the chair that any federal deputy can use to settle.”
“As we can see from the video, the federal deputy now represented did not make any impeding movement of access and immediate exercise of the functions of the Mayor Hugo Motta, since he was sitting in an armchair for federal deputy,” he says.
In the images, you can see Motta approaching the board, but giving up seeing her busy and turning around. Only in a second moment, pushed by allies, he assumes his place, with the departure of Van Hattem and other deputies who were there.
The parliamentarian of the new says he did not “anything illegal”, because he was “simply in the exercise of the parliamentary mandate that guarantees him to sit in an armchair for deputy”.
He defends the protest of pockets under the concept of meeting rights and states that the occupation of the board of directors was a regular exercise of obstruction.
Moreover, he says that there was no previous legal basis to frame physical obstruction as a potentially illicit activity, when extrapolating the limits of the regular prerogatives – a project of resolution in this regard was presented on the 19th.
This Thursday (21), the new came with representation in the House Ethics Council against Lindbergh for breach of parliamentary decorum when presenting criminal news with the PGR (Attorney General of the Republic) against opposition parliamentarians who have legitimately and regularly exercised their right of physical obstruction without violence.
Gift Link: Did you like this text? Subscriber can release seven free hits from any link per day. Just click on F Blue below.
