The lawyer and teacher Ives Gandra Martins criticized, in an interview with VEJA, the decision of the Federal Supreme Court (STF) to condemn the federal deputy Daniel Silveira (PTB-RJ) to eight years and nine months of imprisonment, in a closed regime, for crimes of threat to the Democratic State of Law and coercion in the course of the process. Despite recognizing that there was a breach of parliamentary decorum on the part of Silveira, who cursed and threatened STF ministers in a videoconference, the jurist said that the penalty is excessive, based on a repealed law and that the case should have been analyzed by the Legislative Power. Gandra Martins was one of the jurists who met with the president Jair Bolsonaro last Thursday night, the 28th, to discuss the pardon granted to Silveira.
For the jurist, article 53 of the Constitution, which provides that “deputies and senators are inviolable, civilly and criminally, for any of their opinions, words and votes” was disrespected by the STF’s decision to order Silveira’s arrest. “I understand that the competence to punish him for lack of parliamentary decorum undoubtedly belongs to the Chamber. No other Power can interfere in this decision except the Legislative Power”, said Gandra Martins. “Article 53 of the constitution declares that the parliamentarian is inviolable by any words. He only said words, he didn’t take up arms, he didn’t take to the streets to provoke the STF. In my view, this process started wrong. The Chamber of Deputies would have had to file a case against him and punish him for lack of parliamentary decorum, even with the loss of office because of that.”
In his opinion, Bolsonaro only granted the pardon to Silveira because the punishment would have been “excessive” by the Supreme Court. He calls for more harmony between the three powers. “Without going into the merits of the pardon, the president granted it because he understood that the punishment was excessive. And it’s up to him to give the pardon. The Supreme Court cannot prevent the issue of pardon. Now, if the Chamber takes another different measure and decides to make Daniel Silveira ineligible for lack of parliamentary decorum, the president will not be able to do anything about it,” he explains.
“When the Supreme Court decides that the citizen for a mere demonstration, however crazy, has to be punished by eight years in prison, obviously his decision must be respected, but it is a folly. We had people in Lava Jato, corrupt people, drug traffickers, being released by the STF. Several other decisions of the Supreme Court were not as severe as the application of this penalty for a mere manifestation of a deputy”, says the jurist.
Regarding Silveira being nominated as a member of the Constitution and Justice Commission, in addition to being elected vice-president of the Public Security and Combating Organized Crime commission, Gandra Martins was against it. “This signals that he will hardly be punished by the Chamber for lack of parliamentary decorum. By his statements, which evidently exceeded a threshold for a parliamentarian, parliamentary decorum was broken and he should be restrained by the Chamber,” he stated. Despite efforts to remove federal deputy Daniel Silveira from the CCJ, PTB leader Paulo Bengston assured the Radar columnfrom VEJA, that the parliamentarian condemned by the STF will continue in the main commission of the House.
Continues after advertising
Copyright © Abril Mídia S A. All rights reserved.
Quality and reliable information, just one click away. Subscribe SEE.