Commentator José Eduardo Cardozo and journalist and former senator Ana Amélia Lemos discussed, this Friday (7), in The Great Debate (Monday to Friday, at 11pm), whether the Anti-Terrorism PL is efficient or innocuous against crime.
Ministers of the STF (Supreme Federal Court) come to Brazil. The assessment is that the initiative has a political nature.
Cardozo believes that the project is harmless.
“If you read the anti-terrorism law you will see that it adds two things in relation to criminal organizations. The first is that in terrorism I can start the investigation before the criminal act begins. […] This changes absolutely nothing for criminal organizations because they already exist as such and must be investigated,” he said.
“The second point is that the anti-terrorism law says that the competence to investigate acts of terror lies with the Federal Police and excludes the competences of the states. Is that what we want? for the states not to investigate? Frankly, whoever says this has not read the law”, he continued.
Ana Amélia understands that the problem goes beyond the formulation of laws.
“I regret this fury that we are experiencing in the Brazilian Congress and the casuistry that involves in times like these when parliamentarians of all persuasions rush in to save a situation that will repeat itself in the country”, he defended.
“Parliamentarians are taking advantage of a pre-election period, after an event like this that moved the country. […] After all this, it is clear that Congress moves to produce a law that it wants to toughen, but there are judges and ministers who release drug dealers, give habeas corpus to drug dealers, so what is the point of a tough law if there is a higher authority that gives habeas corpus to a drug dealer”, he continued.
