Rapporteur in the amendment that 24 years ago, former Senator José Fogaça (MDB-RS) described that of an inexplicable setback and argued that the current text already ensures freedom of expression of deputies and senators.
The PEC was, after being last week.
Among the controversial points of the text was that parliamentarians could only be investigated and arrested after the congressional voting in secret vote, and extended this protection to party presidents. One of the arguments used by former president supporters (PL) was that of freedom of expression.
Fogaça estimates that the current constitutional text already provides for this guarantee. “The structure that was assembled, the set of guarantees, the protection of the right of manifestation … The freedom of expression of senators and deputies is entirely guaranteed in the model we have today,” he says. “This setback is inexplicable.”
He recalls that the amendment he reported revolved the text of that gave congressmen the power to authorize criminal proceedings of colleagues. “But a problem arose over time, which was the fact that there was no deadline. In general, the presidents of the houses did not vote,” he recalls. “Even if they put it, parliamentarians did not give quorum and the matter was never examined.”
Fogaça recalls that instituting the secret vote would also be a setback. He remembers, when then -Senator Antonio Carlos Magalhães hinted that he had accessed the sensitive information on how the senators voted at the secret session that, in June 2000.
“There was when the secret vote was completely deplorable, which should not be adopted more and should be banned in these cases of voting in relation to a member of the National Congress,” he says.
The former senator also comments on the possibility of protection of party presidents. “It’s not elected, it has no direct participation in the decision issues. It’s a completely unreasonable thing, right?” He says.
He also states that he would not make any change in the constitutional amendment today in force. “First because the greater risk of changing is setback. Now we realize this. You open this possibility of setback, especially in the House of Representatives,” he says. “I think the mechanism that was created was very thought, much discussed. I think it is perfect.”
Gift Link: Did you like this text? Subscriber can release seven free hits from any link per day. Just click on F Blue below.
