Afrânio: Justice stands idly by while fascism advances.

By Afrânio Silva Jardim, in Facebook

I do not wish to help legitimize this criminal justice system that has strayed from my ideals of justice; a justice system that stands idly by while fascism spreads through our institutions and our society.

RIGHT??? WHAT RIGHT??? I ALREADY APPLIED FOR MY RETIREMENT AFTER THIRTY-NINE YEARS OF TEACHING CRIMINAL PROCEDURE LAW.

1) How can I continue teaching Criminal Procedure Law with a Supreme Federal Court that will have Ministers Toffoli and Fux as presidents for the next four years?

2) How can one continue teaching Procedural Law if Supreme Court justices request to review cases with the undisguised aim of preventing the conclusion of judgments with which they disagree, even after a majority vote from their peers has already been formed?

3) How can I continue teaching Procedural Law if the requests for review by the Supreme Court justices become endless and do not adhere to any deadlines?

4) How can I continue teaching Procedural Law if it depends solely on the good or bad mood of the president of the Supreme Federal Court to bring to trial, by the plenary session, the cases that are waiting to be included on the respective agenda?

5) How can one continue teaching Criminal Procedure Law if the Public Prosecutor's Office is negotiating "new rules" of Criminal Law and Criminal Procedure Law with criminals, which they apply with the approval of the Judiciary?

6) How can we continue teaching Law if our courts' decisions allow the creation and application of "unorthodox" or "special" rules to punish defendants stigmatized by the mainstream corporate media?

7) How can one continue teaching Law if resolutions from the National Council of the Public Prosecutor's Office create and repeal criminal procedural rules, as if this administrative body were the National Congress???

8) How can one continue teaching Law if the criminal process is being replaced, in certain cases, by a contract (procedural legal transaction), according to CNMP Resolution 181 (partially replaced by Resolution 183)???

9) How can I continue teaching Law if our criminal justice system "takes sides" and has become contaminated by a furious and naive punitivism???

10) How can one continue teaching Law if a large part of the Public Prosecutor's Office has ceased to be "custos legis" and has become a fierce prosecuting attorney???

11) How can one continue teaching Law if the "Theory of Crime" is disregarded and distorted to condemn for implied malice people who caused the death of another through negligence (in the strict sense), that is, condemnation for malice even though the result was not even foreseen by the agent???

12) How can I continue teaching Law if our National Congress is about to approve a set of authoritarian legislative changes, of extreme severity and questionable constitutionality???

13) How can one continue teaching Law if the majority of court rulings and judgments are not drafted by judges, but rather by their assistants and secretaries?

14) How can we continue teaching Law if many judges and magistrates issue decisions by "copying" and pasting, via computer, sentences and judgments?
Have these rulings already been issued in other cases?

15) How can one continue teaching Law if the Police, Public Prosecutor's Office, and Judiciary are united, on the same side, acting in the so-called "fight" against crime, in total disregard for the accusatory system and the democratic criminal process??? Is the purpose of a judge to combat anything???

16) How can one continue teaching Law in the face of a justice system that is elitist, corporatist, bureaucratic, formalistic, conservative, and insensitive to the interests of the poorest segments of the population?

17) How can one believe in a democratic rule of law that depends on the decisions or approval of high-ranking officers in the Armed Forces?

18) How can one continue teaching Law if the Supreme Federal Court has begun to "legislate" and "alter" the Federal Constitution, disseminating throughout the Judiciary an excessive and compromising activism that undermines the rule of law?

19) How can we believe in harmonious social coexistence when the population elects as president of our country someone who publicly and repeatedly states that he is in favor of torturing human beings and laments that the military coup in the past did not eliminate many more young people who resisted it?

20) How can one endure so much disillusionment and anguish after so many years believing in the law and in a less unjust, more cultured and fraternal society?

21) How can one accept, in old age, living under the cloak of this obscurantism, these hypocrisies, and this absence of social generosity?