Minister Gilmar Mendes stated this Tuesday (June 29, 2021), that when analyzing the current Brazilian presidential system, he realizes that the country “naturalized” impeachment and what is needed “make sure the medicine doesn’t kill the sick“.
The statement was made during the debate. “Justice and Democracy – The view of Justice, the Public Prosecutor’s Office and Advocacy”, promoted by the Conjur website, with the participation of the Attorney General of the Republic Augusto Aras and the lawyer Marcus Vinicius Furtado Coêlho, former president of the Federal Council of the OAB. With information from the newspaper OGlobe.
Gilmar stated that the banalization of the impeachment is a consequence of the loss of political support in Congress and should lead to reflection and dialogue on the “apparent imperial presidentialism” in Brazil. The minister said that there is a very strong presence of Congress on vital issues.
“We have somehow naturalized impeachment, making it almost equivalent to a vote of no confidence. [Se] the president lost the conditions of governability, so the solution is the interruption of his term”, said the minister who is about to become the dean of the STF.
He commented on the debate regarding the call “secret budget” and the participation of Congress in management issues. “Considering the instability that marks our post-88 presidentialism, wouldn’t it be a case of maintaining the presidential regime, but with a different profile, in which president might have a power of moderation?”.
The minister commented on the challenges that the democratic model faces around the world and defended a discussion on the change and adequacy of the government system. “Against anyone, but in favor of an improvement of the system, an open game, so as not to affect any current mandate. It is a construction that has to be done with the continuation of the improvement of the electoral political system“.
For him, the Brazilian model has to adopt the “constructive no-confidence vote“.
“You only overthrow a government by putting another in its place. Because otherwise we run the risk of repeating what was the tragedy of Weimar, which leads to the collapse of democracy. We have to ensure that the medicine does not kill the patient“he concluded.