Janio: Gilmar acts as if he can disrespect anyone.
Columnist Janio de Freitas criticizes in an article the recurring actions of Supreme Court Justice Gilmar Mendes; "Gilmar Mendes acts, with indifferent confidence, as someone who can defy whatever he wants and disrespect whomever he wants – and nothing happens to him. Not that he enjoys legal or moral cover for doing so," he says; "Starting with Gilmar Mendes, it is becoming clear that, worse than a minister-magistrate without limits, is not finding among his peers anyone who seeks to impose on him the ethical and functional limits to which, as principles, he is subject," Janio concludes.
247 - In your column this ThursdayJanio de Freitas offers a rather negative analysis of the actions of Supreme Federal Court Justice Gilmar Mendes.
"Besides his role as a voluntary advisor to the accused Michel Temer, Minister Gilmar Mendes provides him with another service, of equal or greater utility: he has surpassed him in the dual role of most commented on and disapproved figure. This dishonor, however, is due much less to his activity as a politician and ideological tutor than to the way he uses his magistracy against the Judiciary."
To such an extent is Gilmar Mendes embodying the idea of judicial abuses that the condemnation goes too far and causes damage to the Judiciary and in particular to the Supreme Federal Court itself.
Gilmar Mendes acts with indifferent confidence, as if he can defy anyone and disrespect anyone – and nothing happens to him. Not that he enjoys legal or moral cover for it. Rather, he relies on the lack of an answer to the question that is most often heard and asked: is there no one, or nothing that can be done, against this anything-goes approach?
Starting with Gilmar Mendes, it is becoming clear that worse than a minister-magistrate without limits is not finding among his peers anyone who seeks to impose upon him the ethical and functional limits to which, as principles, he is subject.
Even more shocking is that this stark contrast of lack of restraint and inaction occurs within a group of people dedicated to determining whether others' actions were flawed or not. And, if they were, to condemning the perpetrators. Even sending them to prison.