Cardozo criticizes Aécio's "convulsive desperation"
Speaking about the TCU's decision that deemed the delay in transfers to government accounts irregular, the Minister of Justice, José Eduardo Cardozo, said that Aécio Neves's stance was "strange" in using a procedure that has been in place since 2001, that is, under FHC's administration, to try to "find a fact to justify an impeachment request"; "There is a convulsive desperation to find a fact for an impeachment request. There is no fact whatsoever that could justify an impeachment request in this case," he stated; for him, the opposition's attitude is "pathetic"; the minister stressed that the procedure is not "unprecedented".
247 - The Minister of Justice, José Eduardo Cardozo, stated this Friday, the 17th, that there is a "convulsive desperation" from the opposition to "find a fact that could justify an impeachment" against President Dilma Rousseff. The minister was speaking at a press conference about the TCU's decision that deemed the government's accounts irregular.
"There is a convulsive desperation to find a basis for an impeachment request. There is no fact whatsoever that could justify an impeachment request in this case," said Cardozo, calling the opposition's attitude "pathetic." According to him, even if the act is considered irregular, it cannot be attributed to President Dilma.
According to Cardozo, the position taken by the opposition candidate, Senator Aécio Neves (PSDB-MG), is still "strange," as he uses a procedure that has been in place since 2001 to try to "find a fact with an impeachment request," since it is not an "unprecedented" procedure, but one that has been occurring since 2001, also during the government of former President Fernando Henrique Cardoso.
The TCU (Brazilian Federal Court of Accounts) considered that the delay in transfers by the Dilma Rousseff government violates the Fiscal Responsibility Law. Cardozo said he has "absolute conviction" that, when the government's reasons are presented to the court, this will allow the ministers a "reflection" and "a new understanding" of the facts.
"This decision by the TCU (Federal Court of Accounts) was made without the government authorities being heard. There has not yet been the procedural opportunity in which the right to a fair hearing and full defense could be exercised. The decision was made without the administrative bodies being able to express their understanding and comprehension," he stated.