At the age of 80, and two decades after being involved in what became known as the 2005 scandal, () will contest the elections to try to return to the Legislature.
In an interview with Sheethe says he is optimistic about the possibility of (PT) being re-elected president, even with the opponent () .
“The PT has something to present. It gave the country institutional instability. It gave low inflation, growth, kept Brazil out of international conflicts, managed relations with the USA well”, he says.
In case of defeat, he states that “Lula will lead the country” in opposition, since Flávio, even elected, would not be “up to” the challenge.
Dirceu also states that, if it takes revenge, it will lead the country to reforms that are already proving to be unpostponable — or, as he says, to a “general tidying up brake”.
He includes in this the need for the (Federal Supreme Court) to reform itself. “When a survey shows that 70% of people want the Supreme Court to change, the court has to do some self-reflection. It’s a mistake,” he says.
“The Supreme Court does not need to be afraid of debating with the country”, he says, stating that, if this does not happen, a majority could form in Parliament to impose these changes on the court.
“It’s going to be worse”, says the former minister.
The government’s disapproval increased and Flávio Bolsonaro supported Lula in the polls. Could the PT lose the elections?
In 2014, 2018 and 2022 it was also like this [com o vencedor começando atrás nas pesquisas].
There is nothing new. The government was on the rise. The agenda of tax reform and the BBB [cobrar impostos de bancos, bets e bilionários] had broad support from public opinion, as well as the debate on [escala de trabalho] 6×1.
These were issues that were catching on, along with the defense of our sovereignty. But the cases of [Banco] Master and INSS [de descontos indevidos de aposentados] and the attempt to involve Fábio Luís in it [filho do presidente Lula] ended up changing the country’s agenda.
Scandals overcame everything.
Yes. And we are going to contest this election to discuss Brazil’s problems or, again, to?
O [ex-presidente] Janio [Quadros] would put an end to corruption, [Fernando] Collor was going to end corruption, the [Jair] Bolsonaro too. The military dictatorship said it was against corruption. And it did what it did.
I truly believe that we are capable of resuming the agenda that interests the country.
Do you really believe it will be possible to change the subject?
It has to change. Brazil has much more serious problems to face and resolve, such as war, the dismantling of Petrobras, public security, education, science and technology.
The world is changing and the country needs to chase the technological revolution. Either we debate the country’s problems, and each candidate presents their proposal, or we will deceive Brazil that our main problem is corruption.
Didn’t President Lula also encourage this agenda when he said, for example, that he wanted to reach out to the “corruption tycoons”?
I’m not going to judge what Lula said.
I want to debate: who is the candidate we are going to face? Are we going to put Brazil in the hands of Flávio Bolsonaro, who will hand over our natural resources to Trump? What will open access to rare earths to the USA? What will free big techs?
Are we going to return to the exclusive US orbit? Brazil is a power, one of the largest countries in the world. Is Flávio Bolsonaro up to governing the country in this global crisis? Lula has already shown that he is.
We have to make this agenda prevail, with a ten-year development project for the country.
In addition to Flávio Bolsonaro, the campaign must have candidates from a possible third way.
Say that the [ex-governador de Goiás] [lançado pré-candidato pelo ] It’s the third way…[rindo] he is to the right of Flávio Bolsonaro.
And Flávio now wants to be. But he is the son, nominee and representative of Jair Bolsonaro.
Most likely they will lose, because we are in government. They are the ones who have to beat us.
Bolsonaro was in government in 2022 and lost to Lula. And Flávio is showing that he will not be an easy candidate to defeat, as the PT said.
It’s not easy to defeat anyone in today’s world. Only Trump is heading towards a defeat, which he deserved. In Latin America, all elections have been very balanced.
But the right has the advantage. He governs Argentina and has just won in Chile.
But in Chile they don’t have the Chamber and the Senate. In Argentina, it is also very difficult to achieve this majority.
We are living in a period of growth of the extreme right in the world, but it is not invincible.
We cannot enter into a perspective that we are not strong. We are very strong. We have already won five elections in Brazil.
Is there any possibility of replacing Lula as candidate?
Zero. Zero. Haddad is running the campaign as a candidate for government. I’m going to leave here to have lunch with his committee, in fact.
But, if Lula loses, and Haddad is also defeated in SP, won’t the PT’s situation get complicated? Isn’t the left left without a viable reference for the future?
I don’t believe in that hypothesis. But, if it happens, we at PT have already shown that we are capable of surviving.
First: we are democrats, we respect the result. Second, we oppose and win back the government. Dilma suffered a blow. Lula was arrested. We were able to resist, contest the elections and re-elect the president.
Believing that we, because of a defeat, will not be able to continue a project does not correspond to the facts.
Lula [mesmo derrotado] will lead the country. Because I don’t believe that Flávio Bolsonaro, even elected, can do this. Brazil is heading towards an institutional crisis. Some reform will have to be done.
Is Brazil heading towards a crisis or is it already immersed in it, with the case of and being its most evident face?
We have to have coolness and serenity to discuss a political and institutional reform in Brazil, which distributes income, which implants party loyalty.
Public opinion has changed. The one with 5 million people is gone. Today, if the ceiling falls here in this interview, in five minutes, 60 million, 80, 100 million people will know. It is with this public opinion that we have to dialogue.
The STF was dragged into the crisis. How do you see the wear and tear on the court?
We have to reaffirm the role of the STF in defending the democratic rule of law, which will be recorded in the history of Brazil.
Another issue is the reform we have to make, given the evidence. When a survey shows that 70% of people want the Supreme Court to change, the court has to do some self-reflection. Ignoring public opinion is a mistake.
The ideal is for the Supreme Court to carry out a self-reform, as it already did in the case of penduricalhos [pagos a juízes]. Will not show weakness. He will show that he is in tune with the country’s feelings.
And is this feeling against democracy, against the powers of the Supreme Court? No. It’s a feeling for change.
It is necessary to debate, for example, the adoption of a code of ethics. Does a minister need to have a term of office or an age limit to be on the STF? What are the restrictions for being a partner in a company?
The Supreme Court does not need to be afraid of debating with the country. Transparency is in the Constitution.
But does the STF have to bow to public opinion, being a counter-majority court?
They are totally different things.
The Supreme Court cannot submit, for example, to the call for the death penalty in Brazil. You do not have to submit decisions and sentences to public opinion, as the Bolsonarists want.
When I was convicted of corruption, even though I was innocent, I accepted the decision and served my sentence. I didn’t flee the country. I appealed the sentence and, after the elections, as the law allows, I will ask for a criminal review of my case.
I respected the court. Now, as a citizen, I have the right to demand transparency from ministers. It’s the feeling of society.
But would the STF really be the country’s biggest problem today, or is the criticism exaggerated?
All Powers must undergo reform.
Will the Legislature follow? And you think nothing will happen? That the house won’t fall? Soon, 93 parliamentarians will respond to a police investigation. Every day [vão ocorrer] search and seizure at parliamentarians’ houses? Don’t people in their cities realize when there is unjustifiable enrichment?
The Executive also has to undergo administrative reform.
Do we want democracy to be demoralized and an authoritarian regime to be justified in Brazil? Don’t we? So let’s preserve democracy by reforming whatever is necessary.
Is Lula right when he criticizes STF ministers, saying, for example, that he should leave the court?
I never heard that from his mouth.
Many people have already heard it.
I don’t see that the President of the Republic can ask Dias Toffoli or him to take leave. It would be an intervention by the Executive in the Judiciary.
And the problem is not individual. It belongs to the Supreme Court, which needs to reform itself.
Soon a majority will be formed and it will be reformed by Parliament. It will be worse.
And it is no longer possible to say: “If you criticize the Supreme Court, you will weaken the Supreme Court.” The king is naked.
Brazilians want to discuss whether or not there will be a code of ethics and what limitations magistrates should have.
Ministers understand that it is not possible to discuss reform at a time when the STF is under attack.
The extreme right will propose measures against the Supreme Court to the electorate, and we will defend the Supreme Court without proposing any changes? We will lose. Is this what they want?
The right is only silent today because it fears the Daniel Vorcaro case.
Could his denunciation affect the government or the PT of Bahia?
I don’t see how it can reach the government. It could perhaps bring strain on the political dispute because of [da contratação, pelo Master] by Guido Mantega, by [ex-ministros de governos de Lula]. But this does not mean that these people are linked to any crime.
There is an attempt to politically hijack this agenda and throw the scandal onto the government’s shoulders. The person who gave the letter patent to Master, which started this whole process, was the Central Bank during the Bolsonaro government.
And how do you see Daniel Vorcaro’s plea and the possibility of him receiving benefits from the courts?
They turned Vorcaro, in the news, into the most abominable criminal in the country’s history. Then he makes a statement and is forgiven? Does society accept this?
The institution of whistleblowing, as it stands, raises this moral doubt. And there is something very scary about the case: Vorcaro decided to make a statement because he was placed in a maximum security prison. Isn’t this psychological torture?
Denunciation is criticized, but there is an expectation that, with it, many crimes will be solved.
Vorcaro’s collaboration can reveal the importance of starting a reform process in Brazil.
The country is in need of a general tidying up brake. We would need a pact between business, workers and all political forces, to decide how to lead the country in the next ten years, in the face of technological changes, war, and the coming storm.
At some point we will have to refound the Brazilian State. But I don’t see most people in the country doing that today.
José Dirceu, 80
Born in Passa Quatro (432 km from Belo Horizonte), he graduated in law and was a student leader during the military dictatorship. He is one of the founders of the PT and was president of the party from 1995 to 2002. He was elected state and federal deputy, and headed the Civil House from 2003 to 2005, in the first Lula government. He was revoked and condemned by the STF for involvement in the monthly allowance.
