We are witnessing a dangerous deepening of disputes between Powers. On the one hand, an empowered Legislature that, unlike the rules of parliamentary regimes, does not submit to dissolutions and formation of new cabinets — nor to the calling of elections by the head of State. It is an unburdened parliamentarism, which threatens, blackmails and tumults, as it did in the episode of the Supreme Court nomination.
On the other, one willing to intensify the political and institutional dispute in an explosive manner, as he attests, in alleged defense of the court against opportunistic offensives by the Legislature regarding the impeachment of magistrates.
We already know about the decadence of Congress and that Congress has moved up the ranks thanks to factors such as electoral and party funds, the advent of mandatory amendments and the deplorable outsourcing of power carried out by the government of Jair Bolsonaro, today, fortunately, imprisoned for a coup plot.
The Supreme Court, in a context of the ineffectiveness of the PGR under Bolsonaro, with the parliamentary complicity of the physiological and radical right, was crucial in defending the population during the pandemic and the Rule of Law threatened by the coup in power. Under heavy fire, he took risks with questionable decisions.
The fact that Parliament was the historical institution that contrasted with monarchical absolutism does not tend to favor it in current assessments of the risks of tyranny. Political thought, however, contemplates the idea of parliamentary tyranny, when parties and groups take control of the institution to impose laws of their interest and create what would appear as a dictatorship of the majority.
In Brazil, under the hegemony of a nucleus of congressmen who make their political career a platform for patrimonialism, occupying positions, rigging public bodies, serving spurious lobbies and personal enrichment, and the Chamber feel free to legislate in their own defense and challenge and launch threats to other Powers.
This parliamentary group is united today around a delinquent reactionary agenda in reaction to Lula, who commands the Federal Police and demonstrates renewed chances of electoral success. But it is above all against the scope of STF decisions based on PF investigations that the parliamentary majority defends itself. Significant sectors of Congress, it must be said, give the impression that they are not only influenced by, but that they themselves are organized crime.
Attempts to restrict the actions of the PF and the Justice system are well known. Hugo Motta, president of the Chamber, protects deputies convicted in flagrant defiance of the Supreme Court. Analysts consider Alcolumbre’s tawdry reaction to Messias’ appointment as pressure in defense of allies exposed by the .
Gilmar Mendes has reason to fear attacks from Congress and even arguments for his decision, but the monocratic measure could not be more unfortunate.
On the eve of the election period, calls for restraint are not echoed. We can only hope that the end of year festivities provide time for some reflection. It will be?
LINK PRESENT: Did you like this text? Subscribers can access seven free accesses from any link per day. Just click the blue F below.
