PEC amnesty default of BRL 740 million from black parties – 06/04/2023 – Power

The mobilization of political parties to approve the greatest amnesty in history for their own benefit is against the background of the fact that most of them in the 2022 elections failed to comply with the rules that stipulate a minimum transfer of resources for the candidacy of black people and women.

Official data from the rendering of accounts delivered to the TSE (Superior Electoral Court) and analyzed by the Sheet show that black and brown candidates stopped receiving R$741 million. In relation to women, non-compliance with the quota was R$ 139 million.

The Chamber’s Constitution and Justice Commission has already approved Amnesty’s PEC (Proposed Amendment to the Constitution), which forgives non-compliance with gender and racial quotas, as well as all irregularities committed by parties with public money in recent years.

The text now awaits the installation of a special commission to discuss the merits, the last step before the plenary vote. Then, to be approved, the PEC needs the minimum support of 60% of the parliamentarians (308 of 513 in the Chamber and 49 of 81 in the Senate), in two rounds of voting in each House. If this occurs, it is enacted and becomes effective, with no possibility of vetoing the Executive Branch.

Of the 33 existing parties in 2022, only the dwarfs UP and PSTU proportionately transferred public campaign funds to black and brown candidates, while Novo did not use public funds.

In the ranking of those who most failed to transfer these resources, the biggest parties are the PSDB (passed on only 39% of what it should have in relation to the Electoral Fund) and the PT (57%), acronyms that for 25 years polarized national politics.

In the case of women, only PSOL, Cidadania, MDB, PMB, PSTU, PV, Rede and Republicanos transferred funds in amounts greater than the minimum necessary.

Although the black and female population is the majority in Brazil, respectively 56% and 51% of Brazilians, according to the IBGE, the participation of women, blacks and browns in politics is very small.

In almost 40 years of redemocratization, for example, the top of the Republic had 66 men and only 4 women —a ratio of 16.5 to 1— and continues to this day to be commanded mostly by male representatives.

The implementation of affirmative actions to stimulate female participation began in the 1990s. In 1998, the obligation to have at least 25% of female candidacies in proportional disputes (City Councils, Legislative Assemblies and Chamber of Deputies) began to take effect.

In 2000, that number rose to 30%. Despite this, the acronyms did not need to distribute values ​​equally among competitors.

The Supreme Court, 20 years later, defined the need to transfer campaign funds to women in proportion to the number of candidates – that is, at least 30% of the amount.

The deliberation, however, led to orange plaintiffs, as revealed by Sheet in the case of the PSL, then the party of former president Jair Bolsonaro (PL).

Already in 2020, the TSE decided to make mandatory transfers from the Electoral Fund proportional to the number of blacks and whites, also applying the rule to the time of exposure in the media. However, irregular registrations appeared, inflating the number of blacks and browns in the Chamber.

In addition to the difficulty of inspection, especially the time of electoral propaganda, the determinations still offer “excessive autonomy of choice in the distribution of resources and insufficient legal constraints on political leaders”, says law professor and political scientist Mariana Dionísio.

“We need to have a critical view, due to the fluidity of the criteria for the formation of racial identities in Brazil. There are many candidates who declare themselves [negros] and they do not have any trait or any ancestry that identifies them as black or brown. They do it just to secure a slice of that resource allocation,” she says.

Since the 2015 ban on companies funding candidates, public coffers have become the main source of funds for campaigns. There are two funds, Electoral, which in 2022 distributed BRL 5 billion to candidates, and Partidário, which allocates around BRL 1 billion a year to parties.

The change increased the chances of success for candidacies by women and black people, says Tauá Lourenço Pires, coordinator of racial and gender justice at Oxfam Brasil. “The main campaigns end up running on self-financing, and the fund is a tool that contributes to reducing inequalities, democratizing political representation in the country.”

One of the proposals presented in the original text of the Amnesty’s PEC aims precisely at allowing parties to once again receive donations and funding from private initiatives “to settle debts with suppliers contracted or assumed until August 2015”.

“The parties are not interested in electing women. They want women candidates, they don’t want elected women,” says lawyer and political scientist Gabriela Rollemberg, co-founder of Quero Você Eleita and an activist in favor of expanding female participation in politics.

“We are talking about a pardon that goes far beyond R$ 1 billion for the 2022 elections. needs to start debating the personal accountability of party leaders.”

Gabriela defends the approval of seat quotas for women, already in the 2024 municipal elections, at a minimum level of 30%. She recalls that in 2020 no woman was elected councilor in more than 900 cities in the country.

The lack of adequate resources for the election of women and blacks falls mainly on society, says Mariana. According to her, without a fair electoral campaign, the population does not have the opportunity to meet candidates with ideas and proposals aimed at their realities.

“This brings consequences for the formulation and execution of specific public policies, consolidates the permanence of politicians [homens e brancos]as we see today, and can delay the improvement of legislation such as the fight against violence against women”, he says.

According to Tauá, civil organizations are still in contact with the Federal Supreme Court for the annulment of the PEC.

Parties remain silent or deny wrongdoing

A Sheet looked for the 10 parties that, proportionally, were the ones that most failed to pass on Electoral Fund funds to black and brown candidates. Of these, only three responded: PT, Christian Democracy and PSDB.

The PT denied having failed to comply with the quota and claimed to have correctly distributed the resources defined by the Legislation and by the Electoral Justice to the candidates who declared themselves black men and women to the party itself in the 2022 elections.

“The allocation of resources for proportional candidacies excluded the ceiling authorized for the presidential ticket campaign”, he says.

Headed by Gleisi Hoffmann, the party has supported the Amnesty PEC. She says she is in favor of quotas for women and blacks, but says that fines to parties are unfair and that the lack of regulation of the allocation of resources hinders their fulfillment.

In a note, the PSDB stated that the commitment to fighting intolerance and respect for diversity “is in the DNA of toucans” and that it will present its clarifications to the Electoral Court at the appropriate time.

The party claims to be “a pioneer in the construction of specific sectors for the construction of public policies to combat discrimination and defend diversity in all its forms, having been the first party to include in its statute gender quotas for all levels”, says text.

The DC’s national board, on the other hand, stated in a note that it had made the transfers to the states “in absolute accordance with the corresponding legislation”.

Regarding the PEC, the party states that “the amnesty in voting in the National Congress deserves to prosper, since, in the electoral legislation in relation to the rendering of accounts of the political parties, there is no possibility of rescission in relation to final and unappealable sentences “, says the text.