This week, Brazil’s Supreme Court (STF, in Portuguese) resumed the trial of the indictment of the so-called “nucleus 4” of those involved in the January 8 coup attempt, which occurred in 2023 in Brasilia days after President Lula took office for the third time. According to the Attorney General’s Office (PGR, in Portuguese), this group was responsible for spreading disinformation about the electoral process in the country and for virtual attacks on Brazilian institutions. For political scientist Vera Chaia, PhD from the University of São Paulo (USP) and professor at the Pontifical Catholic University of São Paulo (PUC-SP), the group represents a key point in the coup attempt.
“What strikes me about this ‘nucleus 4’ is the strong presence of the army,” she said in an interview with Conexão BdF. “The hands of the coup are there. What they did was a whole process of disinformation, of threatening those who didn’t the coup, and very well-planned disinformation propaganda to destabilize democracy,” she said. Chaia believes the Supreme Court will maintain the pattern of previous judgments, based on the PGR’s formal accusation.
At the same time as the Supreme Court is judging of the coup’s nucleus, Bolsonaro ers in the Chamber of Deputies are articulating a new version of the amnesty bill to help those involved in the attacks on the headquarters of the three branches of the Brazilian government. The proposal, which is facing resistance to being included on the agenda, has now been given an alternative draft providing for more lenient sentences for defendants considered to be of lesser importance.
Chaia harshly criticized the proposal: “It’s not up to parliamentarians to play this kind of role; it’s up to the Supreme Court. […] This justifies impunity. If the amnesty bill or the proposal to review the sentences is approved, it will open the door for people to do anything ‘because my friend in Congress will solve it’. I don’t think that’s the way we should go.”
According to her, the movement is unconstitutional. “It wasn’t the government that boosted polarization and acted more aggressively, but the opposition, a fierce opposition that used violence to keep or bring back former President Jair Bolsonaro. As a result, the Supreme Court’s judgement must continue to appease the country. Reviewing sentences of any kind is not up to parliamentarians, and I even consider it unconstitutional,” she added.
‘Hyper-opposition’ uses Parliamentary Commission of Inquiry to destabilize the government
Vera Chaia also commented on the recent crisis in the Ministry of Social Security, which culminated in the fall of Minister Carlos Lupi amid allegations of fraud in the National Institute of Social Security, also known as INSS. The political scientist believes that a Parliamentary Commission of Inquiry (I, in Portuguese) led by the opposition to investigate the scandal focuses on wearing down the government of President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva (Workers’ Party), rather than investigating what happened.
“We’ve never had such a well-organized opposition. There is a very strong ‘hyper-opposition’, which has all the power in its hands because it blackmails the Executive itself. We are following the enormous power of the Legislative in exchange for positions, approvals of proposals and negotiations,” she highlighted.
As a result, Chaia fears that the commission’s work will only focus on the period of the current government, even though the cases began during the istration of former President Jair Bolsonaro (Liberal Party). “They will probably start investigating the period after President Lula took office and may ignore that it all started during the previous government.”
The professor also says that the delay in taking action was an aggravating factor in the crisis falling on the current government. “Minister Carlos Lupi was very slow to act, and his replacement by Wolney Queiroz, the ministry’s number two, doesn’t solve the problem. The idea is that the plot can continue,” she criticized. For her, the lack of transparency is what weakens management the most. “The Attorney General’s Office had to file the complaint. The executive branch should have followed this closely from the start.”
“In the end, the most vulnerable pensioners, the poorest, those with health problems or disabilities, are the ones who suffer the most. That’s really sad. Meanwhile, we see ments for individual retirement plans on newspaper front pages, showing that there is already a dispute for this audience,” she concluded.
