Scammers: Bolsonaro’s vetoes make it difficult to punish the military – 01/22/2023 – Politics

Former President Jair Bolsonaro (PL) vetoed parts of the Law of the Democratic State of Law that could, among other effects, aggravate the sentence of military personnel or parliamentarians who participated in or promoted the coup acts on January 8, in Brasília.

The Democratic State Law was approved in Congress to replace the National Security Law, inherited from the military dictatorship. The new device came into force in 2021, amid an escalation in Bolsonaro’s coup statements, which even cast doubt on the holding of the 2022 elections.

Congress approved the new legislation, which was later sanctioned by the president, but with five vetoes that spared the military, politicians and propagators of fake news.

In the view of experts interviewed by the Sheetthe text, if the excerpts were not rejected, could help frame the coup leaders involved in the invasion of the three Powers, on the last day 8.

Among the vetoes, the articles that increased the penalty when crimes against the rule of law were committed by military or other public agents, including the loss of rank and position or function, respectively, were overturned.

“The issue is simple: there was the act of trying to carry out a coup. If it is military, for example, [a lei] it could increase his sentence and even have other consequences, such as the loss of a patent”, says former Rio Grande do Sul attorney Lenio Luiz Streck, who worked on the creation of the new law.

In the case of parliamentarians, they could not lose their mandate, but rather, if the veto did not exist, have the punishment increased – the rejected text provided for a one-third increase in the penalty for crimes committed by public agents and a half increase for military personnel.

“The text speaks of loss of function or position. The loss of mandate would still be for the tables of the Legislative Houses to decide, which is a constitutional provision”, ponders Fabiana Santiago, professor of law and author of a book on the Security Law National.

“A military [envolvidos na invasão] proved the non-commitment to democratic institutions, as well as the civil servant. Of course, there may be administrative processes, but it’s a more complicated path. With application of the criminal law, it would be a sanction much more consistent with the seriousness of the conduct”, adds the professor of constitutional law at PUC-SP Georges Abboud.

Another veto was the section that provided for punishment of up to five years, plus a fine, for anyone who promoted or financed “a campaign or initiative to disseminate facts that they know to be untrue, and that are capable of compromising the integrity of the electoral process”.

Streck understands that, in the absence of a veto, the text could frame those who encouraged the acts, including parliamentarians – provided that through lies related to the elections.

Abboud adds that both fake news and attacks against parties made during the electoral process can be considered as compromising the integrity of the elections, but also false news about the TSE (Superior Electoral Court), the president-elect or the ballot boxes, for example, even after the end of voting.

“Compromising the integrity of the electoral process does not seem to me to be just something aimed exclusively at carrying out the vote. It is also the dissemination of news that generate revolt or non-acceptance of the results of the polls”, he said.

Santiago agrees, and claims that, were the device limited to the time frame of the electoral period, it should be within the electoral legislation, not the Penal Code.

She considers, however, that the application of this article —if it had not been rejected—, would still have to be debated, as it is not clear whether only those who produce false content or those who propagate them are punishable.

“As much as the purpose of the norm is not to punish those who reproduce the content on the networks, this person is essential for the configuration of the damage to electoral health”, he says.

Another vetoed passage gave the right to political parties to file an action in case of inertia or request for archiving by the Attorney General’s Office (PGR) in the face of a lawsuit — hallmarks of the body during the Bolsonaro government, when its maximum authority , Augusto Aras, asked to close the inquiry into anti-democratic acts.

Both lawyers claim that, if the vetoes are overturned by Congress, those who used fake news to promote the coup act on the 8th or participated in the invasion of the three Powers can no longer be framed in these articles as the law could not retroact.

The theme came into the sights of Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva’s PT, which will work for Congress to guide the analysis of Bolsonaro’s vetoes in the first 30 days of the next Legislature – the vetoed excerpts would become law from the moment of an eventual overthrow.

Since the week of the invasion of the three Powers, party deputies studied proposing a bill to amend the text of the Democratic State Law with the aim of toughening the punishment of deputies or senators who participated in or supported anti-democratic acts such as those of January 8 , which would include the provision of ineligibility.

At the same time, parliamentarians of the acronym understand that it is best to let the Judiciary act against the coup plotters and focus legislative actions on vetoes and the opening of possible administrative proceedings in the Ethics Council.

“We can’t keep inventing things either. If the Judiciary, the Public Ministry and the police don’t need it, it’s unnecessary [promover mudanças na legislação]a waste of time in a country that has to take care of jobs, education, health,” he told Sheet the leader of the party in the Chamber, Zeca Dirceu (PT-PR).

The PT and the Psol filed complaints with the PGR against parliamentarians, elected or in office, who were related to the acts. The mayor, Arthur Lira (PP-AL), has already stated that he does not see enough elements for the Attorney General’s Office to ask for the conviction of the congressmen.