Scholarship holder at the head of the CCJ of the Chamber was a student of Olavo – 03/08/2024 – Power

Elected to head the Chamber’s main committee, deputy Caroline de Toni (PL-SC) is part of the most radical wing of former president Jair Bolsonaro’s party. She was a student of the philosopher Olavo de Carvalho, a Bolsonarist guru, and had already had her bank secrecy broken by STF (Supreme Federal Court) minister Alexandre de Moraes.

Caroline was elected on Wednesday (6), by 49 votes in favor and 9 blank votes, to head the CCJ (Constitution and Justice Commission), through which all matters in the House are processed. The choice occurred under criticism from government parliamentarians.

After the new president of the collegiate was announced, Caroline stated that she views the position with responsibility and that she will “manage with transparency, balance and listening to all parties”.

“The parameters of our action will be established in two very specific standards: in the Federal Constitution and in the Chamber’s internal regulations. Therefore, we will not have surprises or innovations, we have this conservative spirit of being able to comply with these standards”, said the deputy.

Born in Chapecó (SC) and graduated in law, Caroline was elected for her first term in the Chamber in 2018 and re-elected in 2022 — the second time, she was the federal deputy with the most votes in her state.

On social media, she describes herself as a defender of life, freedom, family, agribusiness and public safety. She was also the author of one of the first impeachment requests presented against former president Dilma Rousseff (PT).

An ally of Bolsonaro, Caroline harshly criticizes Lula (PT) and the government. The deputy signed the president’s impeachment request for his statements comparing the Israeli military offensive in Gaza with the Holocaust and attended an event called by Bolsonaro on Avenida Paulista, in São Paulo, on the 25th.

A member of the FPA (Agricultural Parliamentary Front), Caroline was a full member of the Chamber’s MST CPI last year, in which she fought several clashes with government parliamentarians and participated in proceedings in the states.

In addition to her work on matters dealing with agribusiness, she defends issues that are dear to Bolsonarism, such as making the use of firearms more flexible and banning abortion.

This week, the deputy took to social media to criticize France’s decision to include women’s freedom to have an abortion in the Constitution. “France celebrates the killing of innocents!” she wrote.

Caroline defends in the Chamber a bill that prohibits abortion in Brazil in any case, the so-called Statute of the Unborn.

Last year, she was one of 36 parliamentarians who voted against the Executive’s bill that obliges companies to pay the same salary to men and women who perform the same functions.

On social media, the parliamentarian has also criticized the actions of STF ministers. It reinforces the chorus of opposition parliamentarians who complain about the Federal Police operations that recently targeted PL deputies.

In December, he criticized Flávio Dino’s approval for a vacancy on the STF, classifying it as “regrettable”. “Sad day for Brazil. More than ever we will need to fight for freedom and morality in our country, as it has been dragged into a hole from which it will be increasingly difficult to get out,” he wrote online.

In June 2020, at the request of the PGR (Attorney General’s Office), minister Alexandre de Moraes, rapporteur at the STF of the investigation investigating anti-democratic acts organized by Bolsonaro supporters, ordered the breaking of the banking secrecy of ten federal deputies — among them the new president of the CCJ.

At the time, she stated that she learned about the breach of confidentiality through the press and said that there was no fact or legal basis that justified the measure. “I no longer have any doubt that we are living in a state of exception,” she wrote on social media.

In her speech on Wednesday, however, Caroline did not directly criticize the Supreme Court, but cited what she classifies as “judicial activism”.

“We often complain, and rightly so, about judicial activism. But we forget to be self-critical, because we, in the Legislative Branch, often in our eagerness to respond to society’s desires, have excessive legislative work and this mentality of wanting to Regulating absolutely all acts of civil life is harmful to society”, he said.