By 25 votes to seven, with two abstentions, the plenary of the Curitiba City Council voted, this Tuesday (21), for the impeachment of the councilor Renato Freitas (EN). The plenary approved a draft resolution of the House Ethics Council, which recommended the loss of mandate for disturbance of religious worship and political demonstration inside the Church of the Rosary, on February 5, during protests against the violent death of two men. black. The revocation of the councilor’s mandate still needs to be ratified in the second round vote, scheduled for Wednesday (22).
SEE HOW THE COUNSELORS VOTED
The vote on the resolution took place in a special session this Tuesday afternoon, after the judge Patricia Bergonse, of the 5th Court of Public Finance of Curitiba, revoked, last Monday (20), its own preliminary decision that prevented the holding of the session initially scheduled for May 19. Bergonse conditioned the holding of the plenary session to the conclusion of the Inquiry conducted by the Internal Affairs of the Chamber on racist email sent to Freitas with the councilor’s email address Sydney Toaldo (Patriot), rapporteur of the ethical process against PT, appearing as sender. With the conclusion of the investigation, indicating that the email was not sent by Toaldo or anyone in his office, being the result of a fraud, on a server in the Czech Republic that allows tampering with the sender, the judge authorized the vote.
As soon as he became aware of the court decision, the mayor, Tico Kuzma (Pros), scheduled the extraordinary session. Freitas’ defense alleges that legal deadlines were not met, arguing that she had not even been notified of the reversal of the injunction and that her client was also not notified 24 hours in advance about the appointment of the session. On Tuesday afternoon, neither Freitas nor any legal representative of his defense attended the session.
Legal uncertainty regarding the deadlines for voting on the loss of the councilor’s mandate was raised by councilors Professor Euler (MDB) and Dalton Borba (PDT) during the session. But the president of the House, Tico Kuzma, assured that he was legally grounded to hold the vote this Tuesday and that all legal deadlines were respected.
Before the vote, four councilors opposed to the impeachment of Freitas manifested themselves in the discussion of the draft resolution. Dalton Borba (PDT), once again, addressed the legal issue and the risk of the process, once again, ending up in court due to deadlines that, according to him, were not being respected. teacher Josete (EN) said that there was no breach of decorum in Freitas’ act: “Why does councilor Renato Freitas need to be impeached? For an act of protest that took place all over Brazil that day, against the structural racism of our country, in the Church of Rosário dos Pretos? Where no one committed any violent act and did not damage any church objects. There is nothing, in this act, that constitutes a breach of decorum”. Carol Dartora (PT) attributed the impeachment of Freitas to structural racism in the Chamber of Curitiba. “Curitiba is witnessing, today, an attack on democracy provided by this House through a spectacle. A spectacle of suffering, of hatred, of public slavery, which opens up the invisible and insurmountable barriers of the structural racism that we live in this city. The mandate of Renato Freitas, elected representative with 5,000 votes for the periphery and the black community of the city, is suffering a coup, an explicit act of silencing the voice that the people chose to represent him”.
Member of the Ethics Committee and author of a separate vote to close the case, Maria Leticia (PV) said that, in the evidence and testimonies collected in the process, there were no reasons for the impeachment of the councilor. “I participated in the entire process and it is very difficult for me to understand how we ended up here. No evidence was produced to justify what is being asked and I am sorry for all colleagues who are ignoring this. that is to do politics, sending the message that politics is for few. The documents are there, they are public and anyone who reads the reports realizes that there was no invasion of the church, there was no partisan demonstration within the church by councilor Renato, he was not the “owner” of the demonstration and, therefore, cannot be held responsible for acts of third parties, and there was no interruption of worship, since the mass had already ended”.
Maria Letícia was hit by Denian Couto (Podemos), the only councilor in favor of the impeachment of Freitas who spoke before the vote. “I am a member of the Ethics Council, I analyzed each piece of evidence and heard all the witnesses and I have no doubt that we are facing a case of breach of parliamentary decorum. There was a break in the basic line of how a councilor should behave, and the images are clear. The demonstrations I heard before are an attempt to create a narrative that this Chamber is persecuting a young black councilor. It is a strategy of creating a false fact to justify the unjustifiable”.