Illegal wiretapping has been common in Brazil.

By Claudio Julio Tognolli_247 – One of the basic axioms of bioethics can well serve as a foundation for the way Brazilian journalism has dealt with illegal wiretapping. In medicine, it is often said that the doctor uses "consequential ethics": he will do everything possible as long as the ultimate consequence is saving the patient. Journalism considered serious, and let's say with some ethical flexibility, usually claims that it will do everything as long as the subject is of public interest.

We are not irrevocably safe from the use of wiretaps deemed illegal. But, without resorting to the axioms of bioethics, Brazilian journalism has always defended the use of illegal wiretaps when they served to revitalize democracy. The reader may view with suspicion the vast defense that our journalism has made of illegal wiretaps. And may think that the journalist who defended them has something in common with Veiga Filho, the editor and character of the writer Lima Barreto, who wrote and published in the newspaper himself the reviews of his poems.

The following will send shivers down the spine of a legal scholar: but the publication of two illegal wiretaps did a great deal of good, thank you, for Brazilian democracy. Let's look at two cases: the vote-buying for the amendment allowing the reelection of former president FHC and the wiretapping case at BNDES. The authors, respectively Fernando Rodrigues, from Folha de S.Paulo, and Guilherme Barros, now at Portal IG, were vilified, "faute de mieux," by the ethics police. It was alleged that the Brazilian Constitution was being torn apart when the press decided to publish tapes in which the reporter did not participate in the conversation. But the fact is that without the work of Rodrigues and Barros, Brazil would have been a worse country.

Folha de S. Paulo even published numerous editorials defending the use of illegal wiretapping. And, on May 14, 97, Folha de S. Paulo published the following petition of principles: “Folha received new recordings the night before last regarding the sale of votes in favor of the reelection amendment. More detailed, these conversations now involve members of the federal government. In addition to Congressman Ronivon Santiago (PFL-AC), another parliamentarian tells the same story of vote buying. It is Congressman João Maia (PFL-AC).”

The person who made the recordings, identified only as "Mr. X," provided Folha with all the details about the tapes. The report knows when, how, and under what circumstances the tapes were recorded. This information will not be disclosed to protect the person's identity. As in yesterday's report, the excerpts presented today are also part of recordings made over several months, on various occasions.

These conversations all took place after the first-round vote on the reelection amendment in the Chamber of Deputies on January 28th. Below, Folha has selected the most relevant excerpts from the new recordings, preceded by a brief explanation.

The wiretaps at BNDES that brought down, in 1998, the then Minister of Communications, Luiz Carlos Mendonça de Barros, and part of the bank's top management, during the privatization of the Telebrás system. It was thanks to Guilherme Barros that Brazil learned that "Mendonção" was plotting to put Telecom Italia in charge of Brazilian telephony – which is now being investigated for having invested 120 million euros in espionage services, including in Brazil, to eliminate its competitors.

Today Rupert Murdoch is on trial. The phone hacking scandal involving him became known worldwide following the case of Milly Dowler, a 13-year-old English girl who disappeared in 2002 and whose phone calls were tapped by the News of the World. Later, Milly was found dead, and the phone hacking scandal led to the dismissal of Rebekah Brooks, who was the head of reporting at the News of the World at the time.

We have a fundamental difference from the Brazilian model: Murdoch employed police officers, paid for the tapes – and the matters he snooped on were not of public interest.

If I were given a tape of public interest, illegal, and in which there was no financial transaction involving this reporter, I would publish it, obviously. In fact, it was with this thought in mind that I published, in Folha de S. Paulo and Notícias Populares, and broadcast on Jovem Pan radio, the tape that opened the Nike CPI (Parliamentary Commission of Inquiry). In it, the player Edmundo recounted how Nike selected the Brazilian national team. I received the tape as a gift. It was Edmundo's voice. That was enough for me.

Without the consequential ethics of medicine, our journalism would fare poorly. And the country, worse still.

Learn more about the story behind my ribbon below:

http://veja.abril.com.br/190898/p_096.html