President Jair Bolsonaro (PL) once again stated this Tuesday (7) that he can disregard decisions of the Federal Supreme Court (STF). During a speech at Palácio do Planalto, Bolsonaro said that the time when decisions of the STF were carried out without any discussion is gone.
According to the president, the ministers of the Supreme Court want to harm him and end up harming Brazil.
“I went from the time when ‘the Supreme Court’s decision is not discussed, it is carried out’. I went from that time. IM not anymore. Certain measures catch the eye of laypeople. It’s unbelievable. They want to harm me and harm Brazil”.
For Georges Abboud, professor of Constitutional Law of the Pontifical Catholic University of São Paulo (PUC-SP), the act of not complying with a decision of the STF can constitute political crime and disobedience.
“Any manifestation of threat to the Supreme Court, of destabilization of the three powers (Executive, Legislative and Judiciary), can also be characterized as a political crime”, says Abboud.
According to the professor, the president’s speech “is a type of coup speech, in an analysis of constitutional law”. “This type of discourse is nothing new in democracies. The Judiciary is the preferred target of these democratic destabilizations”, he analyzes.
For Abboud, the politicization of Supreme Court decisions, such as the one taken by the Second Panel on Tuesday (7) against federal deputy Fernando Francischini (União Brasil-PR), harms the work of the Judiciary.
“When it escalates to the political level, it’s a problem. It seems to me that the Supreme Court has been operating for a long time at a level of tension that would not need to operate in a democracy”, says the professor.
The professor says that the decision to reverse the deliberation of Minister Nunes Marques was already expected in the field of Law. “The act discussed in the Supreme Court was not just any act, it was a 6×1 decision by the TSE, a higher court. It was taken by judges with a lot of technical background”, he analyzes.
“The reasons mentioned in Nunes Marques’ vote, such as the jurisprudential turn and the seriousness of the conduct, were fundamentals already faced and surpassed by the TSE. Making a prognosis of the understanding of the TSE and the STF, there would hardly be such a drastic change”.
Source: CNN Brasil
