[ad_1]
AhWhenever I read an interpretation, let’s say, falsely naive and lavajatista of an interview with Luiz Fux, now president of the Supreme Court (to do what? …), I even try to get emotional. But the sense of responsibility hits me next: “None of that, Reinaldo! Have a hard heart!”
So let’s see.
The doctor gave an interview to TV Justiça. The videos circulate. He commented on the right one: say it! – The preliminary injunction of Minister Nunes Marques that is going to “is the thing”. Excerpt from the Clean Background Law, which establishes a period of ineligibility of eight years after serving the sentence, attacks the foundations of reasonableness and proportionality. I already explained the thing to you here.
It is evident that the good legal and constitutional commandment requires that the execution of the sentence start from the second instance sentence, which is the mark that makes the person ineligible. Or, look at that, a sentence of four years becomes an ineligibility of 12. And what the Constitution provides is the suspension of political rights, in case of conviction, while the effects of that sentence last.
It is already a license to allow a law to change what the Constitution establishes. I correct myself: ineligibility beyond the time of sentence is already unconstitutional. But the Supreme Court has decided that it is not. Against the Charter. So, at least, start counting the term from the conviction.
Nunes Marques did what was fair and reasonable, given the mistake already made by the Supreme Court, which considered this coup constitutional.
The traders of punitivism and the noise of the lava became angry and demanded that Fux revoke the court order of Nunes Marques. Only he can’t. If it happens, it will have to be done in full. And he explained the impossibility in that interview:
“The new minister, Nunes Marques, within his independence, made a decision understanding that this period of ineligibility was excessive. And that, let’s say, is a question that the law itself could resolve, the Clean Registry Law, but the Law of the Clean Registry has the virtue of being a law of popular initiative “…
There is nonsense there. Or two. Nothing prevents a law of popular initiative from being unconstitutional. Second, unconstitutionalities, when they exist, are not necessarily corrected by the Legislature itself. Or there would be, for example, Direct Action of Unconstitutionality. Or it would appear to the Congress, not to the Supreme one.
Justifying the fact that he did not revoke the precautionary measure, nor could he, he stated:
“I could not reverse their decision because the appeal they presented is directed to the rapporteur. The president of the court can do a lot, but he cannot do everything. There are cases where people have their own instrument, which is called a Safety Suspension. it’s just the president. When they put a security suspension on me, I analyze it with my criteria of independence, courage and reasonableness and I decide “.
There is already an action for suspension of security against the decision of Nunes Marques. I don’t know if Fux is encouraging others to show up. I could have added, and I think this was not clear, that the appeal is inappropriate in this case.
He has so much courage and so much independence that he had the courage and independence to suspend the interview that Lula would grant Folha in 2018, precisely by accepting, in the exercise of the presidency, a Security Suspension interposed by the New Party. It happens that, according to the jurisprudence of the STF, the parties do not have legitimacy for this type of action.
It is worth saying: Fux resorted to an illegitimate action to impose censorship on the press, which undermined the stony clause of the Constitution. This is one of the reasons why I am not moved.
CONSIDERATIONS ON RACISM
These days, this giant of thought decided to compare the evil of corruption with the Jewish Holocaust. He is Jewish. Nor does he have the right to trivialize the extreme of horror to proselytize lavajetism. Nor does that origin prevent him from saying nonsense about racism. In the interview now, he stated:
“I am going to give you a peculiarity here, which is interesting, that I am a Romanian immigrant, I have white skin and I am considered honorary black number one. I have this diploma. Why? Because I fought for the cause of these Afro-descendants. I think that They have every right … Fifty percent of the Brazilian population is black. So these people have to help build Brazil. It will not be possible to build Brazil without them. They deserve this opportunity. They have courage. They have experience. They have intelligence. They need an opportunity “.
So much nonsense accumulates that it’s hard to know where to start. I begin with a question: who gave Fux the title of “honorary Negro”? What is that? Is it a moral variant of “black face”? Fux is not an immigrant. It is carioca. His parents are Romanian Jews.
All racism is hateful, but racist perspectives cannot be put in the same bag of cats. Anti-Semitism in Brazil is only residual, restricted to a few pockets of the extreme right with a fascist lean. It has nothing to do with structural racism in Brazilian society, which kills more blacks, takes them out of schools, prevents them from going to good restaurants, puts them in jail, turns them into most corpses, charges them wages.
Well, blacks have already “helped” build the country since they came by force, dividing their time between harvest and log. And they still help. Brazil needs to learn to repair historical injustices.
Furthermore, when it comes to implementing corrective measures, one should not do so with the charitable and condescending gaze of “them”, who also “have courage and experience.” Especially because, like whites and yellows, some have these two things, others do not.
The minister has to study more not to speak nonsense in this area. It is not about “giving anyone a chance”, but about creating the conditions for them to have the rights that have been denied them.
“Ah, Reinaldo, the minister groped. He wanted good things.”
Yes. When you are president of a Power you have to say good things, not pretend that you do. It is necessary to study sensitive subjects before incurring in kicking. It is necessary not to cite any Zé Mané as if they were Drummond. It is necessary not to unravel, even indirectly, the vote of a colleague, especially when that colleague is right. It is necessary not to call Sergio Moro, a partner at Alvarez & Marsal, a hero.
By the way, Minister: when are you going to comply with the law and issue your injunction that annulled the judge of guarantees, undermining democracy and the rule of law?
Fux inspires me.
