Pacheco sees Bolsonaro encouraging attacks – 01/28/2023 – Politics

The president of the Senate, Rodrigo Pacheco (PSD-MG), affirms that the set of anti-democratic actions, which had as its apex the coup act of January 8 and the discovery of a draft to decree a state of defense, shows that there was preparation for a institutional rupture.

“I consider that this firm position of the Senate in defense of democracy is the great legacy that the Senate leaves for this historical and sad period in Brazil, in which there was a concrete intention of institutional rupture and the implantation of a dictatorship”, he says in an interview. The Sheet.

The senator says he does not want to be frivolous about making concrete accusations against Jair Bolsonaro (PL), but says that the former president has stimulated the division of Brazilian society at various times and was, at the very least, unable to contain the extremism of his supporters.

“These were avoidable behaviors for a President of the Republic and that may have stimulated this division in Brazil, to the point of having the extremism that culminated in the January 8 act.”

Candidate for two more years in the presidency of the Senate against Bolsonarist Rogério Marinho (PL-RN), Pacheco avoids associating his opponent with coup acts, but claims that it is his candidacy for re-election that “represents the defense of the rule of law and democracy” .

As mr. did you know what was happening on that January 8th and at what moment did you have a gravity dimension?

I was on a vacation trip, I was already attentive and monitoring, due to the work of the Legislative Police, which anticipated a demonstration and some assertions that there could be an invasion. On Sunday, I received a statement from our General Manager [da polícia] saying they were on the verge of breaking into the building. I immediately telephoned Governor Ibaneis Rocha inquiring about measures. He said he was looking to do the right thing with all the troops in the streets.

So I immediately organized my return to Brazil because from the first moment, when I received the first images, I already saw the seriousness of the fact. The day before, I sent a message to the governor expressing our concern. And he replied that all the troops would be in the streets, that everything would be under control, so that I would be calm. Hence my conviction that the governor, in this whole episode, may have been misled.

At that moment, Mr. did you think it was a riot movement or a coup?

Both. Evidently, in addition to the riot, the depredation, the invasion, the attack on the physical building and the moral of the Powers, it was an attack on the Brazilian nation. And of course the ramifications of what had never been seen before could be unimaginable. At that moment we didn’t rule out any possibilities.

Mr. always avoided confronting Bolsonaro for his anti-democratic speeches, saying that he preferred to fight speech over character. Now that we know in practice the impact of the former president’s rhetoric, do you think you made a mistake?

In any performance, whatever it may be, and in my case as President of the Senate, there are mistakes and successes. But what I always say is that all my actions, successful or not, were based on good intentions. I always preached pacification, the balance between the Powers. And my attitude, always reactive to anti-democratic discourse and ideas, was in the sense of not allowing them to spread in Brazil.

In the case of a Head of Power, whose obligation is to relate well with the other Heads of Powers, I believe that we have to position ourselves in relation to ideas and actions, and not take it to a field of personal criticism. This could lead to worse things, including exacerbating the already existing animosity situation.

And there was, in fact, and this is proven today, a very true, concrete, real feeling, which was not in the field of bravado in relation to anti-democratic acts and the prospect of an institutional rupture in Brazil. So much so that even a draft of the coup d’état was found. This reveals that, in addition to the consideration, there was, in some way, preparation for an institutional rupture.

And what is the role of the former president in this?

Jair Bolsonaro, President of the Republic, leader of a right-wing segment, and unfortunately he was not able to contain the extremism of his movement, [que foi] able to do things like [as que] took place on the 8th of January. I am not going to have the levity to claim any direct responsibility for the acts, because that depends on an investigation.

But, in terms of the political movement, President Jair Bolsonaro has been unable to contain the radicalism, the extremism of those who admire him. And that was the role of a great political leader who imposed himself: contain an anti-democratic spirit, contain anti-democratic actions and this radicalism that you see today, rabid, with a lot of hatred, disrespect for institutions and people.

Mr. he talks about not containing radicalism, which conveys the idea of ​​passivity, not action. Do you think he didn’t influence the movement that resulted in January 8?

I believe that President Jair Bolsonaro was unable to contain the exaltation, radicalism, extremism of groups, of his supporters. And, at times, his behavior in the Presidency of the Republic stimulated the division and separation of Brazilian society, when, for example, he attacked the Federal Supreme Court, its ministers.

So these were avoidable behaviors for a President of the Republic and that may have stimulated this division in Brazil, to the point of having the extremism that culminated in the January 8 act.

Mr. will run for the presidency of the Senate with a former minister of the Bolsonaro government. What role did Rogério Marinho play in this context of radicalization and extremism?

I prefer to talk about my image, my purpose. My candidacy represents the defense of the rule of law and the strengthening of democracy in the country. It is the candidacy that believes in electronic ballot boxes, in science, that respects peers, that seeks to unite the country, that seeks to respect other institutions, that seeks to establish limits through legislation and not revanchism, retaliation against another Power.

And those political characters who have been created in recent years from this right-wing extremism, who are characters without commitment to results, to solutions, and who just want to get likes on social networks, will surely find their way: they will be unmasked, some even arrested because they attack democracy and the rule of law.

In the heat of January 8th, government supporters managed to get signatures for a CPI, but now they realize that it could hinder the beginning of Lula’s government. What did mr. will do?

If there is one fact that would justify a CPI, it is this attack against democracy to identify who financed, collaborated, acted directly or indirectly. I consider that there is a determined fact, that it is a robust fact, of great magnitude, that would justify a CPI, so that, with a sufficient number of signatures, the commission is absolutely relevant.

If, from a political point of view, there is a conclusion that a CPI at the beginning of a government might not be a good path, this is a political construction that will have to be done not by the President of the Senate, but by all leaders.

That is, if the government wants to kill the CPI, it should withdraw signatures and not depend on you. to secure the installation.

Either remove the signatures or eventually read [o requerimento], there is no indication of members for the commission. And then there is the option of not installing, which is a political, legitimate option that has already happened several times. But I feel that, as it stands, there’s nothing I can do about it. It is not up to the President of the Senate to make this judgment of avoiding the CPI.

What do you consider the main hallmark of your management?

The greatest work of the Senate in these last two years was the defense of democracy, of Brazilian institutions, of the Senate not having allowed itself to adhere to a speech questioning the Electoral Justice, of electronic ballot boxes. That we said at all times that the result of the ballot box would be respected and that, on January 1st, the president-elect, whoever he was, would be sworn in.

I believe that this firm position of the Senate in defense of democracy is the great legacy that the Senate leaves for this historical and sad period in Brazil, in which there was a concrete intention of institutional rupture and the implantation of a dictatorship in Brazil. Even with concrete action, which was the approval of the Rule of Law Law, replacing the National Security Law, which today allows those criminals who invaded Congress not to be framed only in the crime of damage or something like that.

How will the Senate’s relationship with the government be, considering that the PSD is from the base and one of the main allies of Mr. in MG, Alexandre Silveira, is a minister?

I hope it will be a relationship of harmony, respect, but independence between the Powers. The president will seek to have the necessary base in the Senate to approve the matters and, within that base, we will build solutions for the country. But something that is my profile, which is my temperament, which is respect for everyone.

So obviously, as it was in this legislature, I will also respect the opposition a lot. There will be uniform treatment for all senators. The role of the President of the Senate cannot be that of a government base or a government leader. Nor can it be an opposition leader. I shall arbitrate and be the magistrate of the country’s solutions. So, everything that comes from the Executive as something possible and likely to improve people’s quality of life, we will willingly do.

Was this arbitration and this diplomacy often confused with a lack of positioning, being on the fence?

I think that, in all themes, I had positions. Sometimes they were not the expected positions. Or the way it was supposed to be. But then I can’t do [nada], it is impossible to please everyone. But I always had my positions, and they were always guided by the defense of the Legislative Power and the defense of the Senate. We will hold our positions.

And that way, which some say is the way from Minas Gerais, you’re saying it’s a diplomatic way, that way will continue because that’s my profile, that’s my temperament, that’s my way. And it’s not on the fence. Sometimes we have to be above the wall and look for the solution, and not throw gasoline on the fire, pouring water on the boil is better.

Mr. even announced a plan to approve the tax reform in six months, which did not happen. Why is the situation different now?

Because now we have a concrete statement from the federal government that it wants to carry out tax reform. Congressional PECs never had explicit support in the previous government. And it is fundamental in tax reform to have the explicit support and clarity of what you want from the Executive, which is the Power responsible for the collection. The Legislative Power is obviously the one who decides, but this needs to be done hand in hand with the Executive Power.

X-RAY

Rodrigo Pacheco, 46
Born in Porto Velho (RO), but raised in Passos (MG), Rodrigo Pacheco (PSD) is the current president of the Senate and seeks re-election on February 1st. Criminal lawyer, he was elected federal deputy in 2014 and president of the CCJ (Constitution and Justice Commission) of the Chamber. He was elected to the Senate in 2018, where he became leader of the DEM bench, his former party.