Barroso: impeachable offense is not enough to remove a president.
Brazilian Supreme Court Justice Luís Roberto Barroso stated that a crime of responsibility alone is not enough to initiate an impeachment process; according to him, the loss of political support is what ultimately triggers the process. "Impeachment depends on a crime of responsibility. But, in the Brazilian presidential system, if you look closely, it's almost impossible not to find some kind of infraction, at least of a budgetary nature. Therefore, impeachment ends up being, in fact, the invocation of a crime of responsibility, which you will always find, plus the loss of political support," he said.
247 -Supreme Court Justice Luís Roberto Barroso stated that the crime of malfeasance alone is not sufficient to initiate an impeachment process. According to him, although other governments have committed similar crimes, the loss of political support is a fundamental condition for the removal of the President of the Republic.
"Impeachment depends on a crime of responsibility. But, in Brazilian presidentialism, if you look closely, it is almost impossible not to find some kind of infraction, at least of a budgetary nature. Therefore, impeachment ends up being, in fact, the invocation of a crime of responsibility, which you will always find, plus the loss of political support," said Barroso during a lecture for students at the University of Brasília (UnB), this Wednesday (8).
The minister's statement is similar to that used by the defense of elected president Dilma Rousseff in the impeachment process. In her defense, Dilma has emphasized that the crimes of responsibility of which she is accused were also committed by other presidents without this resulting in impeachment proceedings. According to him, "reasonable and well-intentioned people" have arguments to assert whether the impeachment process against Dilma is illegitimate or not.
"I think that those who believe (the impeachment) is a coup have reasonable grounds to say that there is no clear characterization of a political crime and, in fact, power is being exercised from the point of view of those who were defeated in the elections. That is a plausible argument. The other is: the president no longer had the political support to do what the country needed, and most of society and most of Congress thought it was better to remove her," he emphasized.
Barroso also said that it is not up to the Supreme Court to take a position on the matter. "It is not the role of the Supreme Court to play the political game when it reaches this stage. This ceases to be a question of right or wrong and becomes a question of political choices. It is not the role of the Supreme Court to make political choices," he stressed.