Sambodian Debate | The Freedom to Express Untruths

This much is true:

“Brazilian society stands by helpless as countless cases of baseless accusations against persons who are later, after balanced trials and a thorough consideration of the right to a defense, acquitted of all wrongdoing are paraded through the press.”

One can think of so many cases.

Conjur, Brazil’s most prominent legal affairs news service, polls the experts on what to do about it.

With these words, federal deputy Sandro Mabel justifies a bill that intends to punish journalists who publish information from confidential investigations during the pretrial phase.

Brazilian investigative journalism is essentially the laziest form of leak journalism known to man. ConJur practices it, for example. On the other hand, criminalizing a lack of due diligence is not something easily swallowed, given how hard it is to prove that it was deliberate — which is the defense most often heard. “I relied on my sources.” Without corroborating them, of course. .

That justification notwithstanding, attorney Manuel Alceu Affonso Ferreira, a specialist in press cases, calls the measure “deeply unconstitutional.” According to him, the right of journalists to sources of information is guaranteed by the constitution, and they may also maintain the confidentiality of those sources.

There was once a case of a police reporter for Globo who was paid off by the mafia to milk his police sources for information on.pending actions against the rackets.

In fact, Articles 5 and 220 say that freedom of expression and access to information can never be limited,  not even by law. Paragraph I of Article 220 specifically cites what Manuel Alceu means: “No law shall contain provisions that might restrain full freedom of journalistic information in any vehicle of public information”. 

Kassa(m)b(an)do: S. Paulo Mayor With “Mandate Revoked”

Kassab's highly effective media blitz in the 2006 mayoral race -- the mayor's reputation for truculence and crudity was addressed by the substitution of his actual likeness by a family values-friendly animated character (above) -- must have cost a fortune.

The other shoe falls this time:

• “Elektions Kourts Kould Kan Kassab”

I read it in the Estadão: Court does indeed revoke the mandate of São Paulo mayor Gilberto Kassab (DEM) for exceeding a 20% limit on illegal campaign contributions.

You read right: For exceeding a 20% limit on illegal donations.

I wish the IRS had a 20% limit on unreported income. My tax bracket would effectively fall to 19%.

Kassab remains in office pending appeal.If he prevails, prosecutors may appeal the appeal to a higher court. This here is not what you are used to from watching Law & Order.

The judge in the case admitted there may be some grounds for appeal, given a precedent established in the 2006 elections by the federal elections tribunal, which argued for the legality of the type of donation in question.

Not touched upon is the question of whether donations to the Kassab campaign by federal district governor José Roberto Arruda — currently jailed for witness tampering in a corruption probe of his administration —  might have been fruit of the poisoned tree.

The donations in questions allegedly came from prohibited sources after being laundered through an association with a different (eligible) legal status.

Silveira considerou como fonte vedada de doação eleitoral empreiteiras que integram concessionárias de serviços públicos e a AIB. A entidade é acusada pelo Ministério Público Estadual (MPE) de servir de fachada do Sindicato da Habitação (Secovi). Por lei, sindicatos não podem fazer doações a candidatos, comitês e partidos.

Judge Silveira deemed donations from public works contractors who are shareholders in public concession-holders and the Brazilian Real Estate Association (AIB). The AIB is accused by the state prosecutor of serving as a facade for SECOVI, a construction syndicate. By law, syndicates cannot make donations to candidates, committees or parties.

“Elektions Kourts Kould Kan Kassab”

Kassab's highly effective media blitz in the 2006 mayoral race -- the mayor's reputation for truculence and crudity was addressed by the substitution of his actual likeness by a family values-friendly animated character (above) -- must have cost a fortune.

For those of you angered by our Supreme Court’s recent decision on corporate financing of political campaigns, Brazilian election law, on first inspection, might seem to be far more englightened than our our own.

In practice, however, it is extremely hard to make heads or tails of the jurisprudence generated by the system, which is considered highly politicized by its critics.

In the last presidential campaign, for example, one candidate was represented before the Supreme Elections Tribunal by his brother — a former minister (justice) of the selfsame Supreme Elections Tribunal. Some examples of jurisprudential oddities:

• TSE Clips Toucans Over Tirades, Cancels Communists
• Alckmin Campaign Accounts in Question
• The Wild and Wooly Saga of Brazil’s Election “Mini-Reform”
• Brazil: “The TSE Set The News Agenda”

Today, for example, the Folha de S. Paulo — continuing a notable pattern of prominently placing stories harmful to the public image of the current mayor, in whose election the Folha played an openly partisan role  – reports the mayor could lose his mandate over illegal campaign donations.

“Could”?

What kind of hard news story is pitched in the subjunctive mood?

Um parecer técnico contábil da Justiça Eleitoral de São Paulo indica que 33% do total arrecadado pelo prefeito de São Paulo, Gilberto Kassab (DEM), na campanha eleitoral de 2008 teve origem em fontes de doações consideradas ilegais pelo Ministério Público Eleitoral.

A technical accounting opinion from the São Paulo state elections authority indicates that 33% of the money raised by São Paulo mayor Gilberto Kassad (DEM-PFL) in the 2008 mayoral campaign originated in donation sources considered illegal by the elections prosecutor.

O laudo, concluído em outubro e obtido pela Folha, indica o risco de que Kassab seja condenado em primeira instância à perda do cargo. Em casos semelhantes, o juiz Aloísio Silveira, responsável pela ação, cassou o mandato de 16 vereadores da capital. Ele tem adotado como critério para condenar à perda de mandato contas de campanha que apresentem mais de 20% dos recursos provenientes de fontes vedadas.

The report, concluded in October and obtained by the Folha, suggest that Kassab runs the risk of being sentenced by the lower court to loss of his mandate.

The Rio DMV: Raising a Slush Fund on the QT?

Tammany Hall, HQ for the Alfred E. Smith political machine in the 1928 presidential elections.

Neuza — my wife, aka “The News”– is stressed out over our vehicle inspection for this year.

Our car came with a certificate of proper emission controls when we bought it, but now our mechanic — whom we suspect of price-gouging as the deadline looms — says it is missing some sort of box that the inspection requires be installed.

The inspector said that only a hose needed to be replaced, but the mechanic said they were likely to notice the absence of that little black box on the next inspection,  in order to justify levying the fine.

Neuza has been on the horn constantly, begging and pleading and playing the tearful maiden in distress, and finally managed to get us a second inspection slot — the first was over three weeks ago; we thought were being espertos for scheduling early — somewhere out in the wilderness of the distant Zona Norte  on the last day for inspections, trying to avoid the R$500 fine. So obscure is the location of the licensed garage that we are planning a preliminary expedition to make sure we can locate it on the day.

The inventory of inspection appointments appears to dry up progressively as the deadline approaches. It could be explained simply enough by increased demand, but we and a lot of fellow paulistanos are paranoid and suspicious.

Already last year, we found out that officers manning the immigration desk at the Polícia Federal, where my permanent residency has been mired in bureacracy for two years, were busted for alleged bribe-taking and jeitinho-providing. Not to mention that our immigration lawyer, who moonlights as a member of the state police, was busted in a scheme involving the extortion of “rent” and “security” from unlicensed street vendors in Brás.

In that light, the following item from the Estadão today only tends to feed our paranoia.

Gist: Two VPs of the state motor vehicle department of Rio allegedly ordered 1,000 certificates of compliance for “roving inspections in upstate Rio” and sold them off to political cronies in order to raise political slush funds.

ROTA: “Nostalgic for Pre-Democracy”

How much has changed since the Globo reporter’s 1992 exposé on São Paulo’s “police who kill”? It’s a fair question.

A violência da Rota, também na internet: Agência Brasil de Fato argues bitterly that ROTA, the infamous “elite” squad of the São Paulo state police, is publicly nostalgic for the good old days of the military dictatorship.

On ROTA and why one tends to cross the street or duck into an adjacent doorway whenever one sees them cruising by in their sinister, hulking Toyota Hiluxes, see also

• “São Paulo’s Trooper Elite”: The Estadão on ROTA

Página da divisão de elite da Polícia Militar de São Paulo na internet resgata, com saudosismo, violência praticada durante ditadura civil militar.

Web site of the unit revives, with nostalgic fondness, the violence it practiced during the dictatorship

“Sufocado o foco da guerrilha rural no vale do Ribeira, com a participação ativa do então denominado Primeiro Batalhão Policial Militar “Tobias de Aguiar”, os remanescentes e seguidores, desde 1969, de ‘Lamarca’ e Marighella continuam a implantar o pânico, a intranqüilidade e a insegurança na Capital e Grande São Paulo. Ataques a quartéis e sentinelas, assassinatos de civis e militares, seqüestros, roubos a bancos e ações terroristas. Estava implantado o terror”.

“Once the rural guerilla in the Ribeira Valley was put down, with the active participation of what was then known as the First Military Police Battalion “Tobias de Aguiar,” the survivors and followers of Lamarca and Marighella continued, from 1969 on, to instill panic, unease and a sense of insecurity in São Paulo and the greater metro area. Attacks on barracks and guard posts, assassinations of civilians and military personnel, kidnappings, bank robberies and terrorist actions. Terror was being implanted.”

O trecho acima, que mais parece ter sido retirado de um documento escrito pelos responsáveis pelo golpe de 1964, que instaurou uma ditadura civil militar no Brasil, faz parte da página institucional na internet do 1º Batalhão de Polícia de Choque Rondas Ostensivas Tobias de Aguiar, (Rota), divisão de elite da Polícia Militar de São Paulo.

The above passage, which sounds as though it might have been taken from a document written by those responsible for the 1964 coup that installed a military dictatorship in Brazil, is part of the official Web site of the First Shock Battalion, Ostensive Patrols “Tobias de Aguiar” (ROTA), an  elite unit of the state military police of São Paulo.

Passadas mais de duas décadas após o fim da ditadura civil militar, em pleno Estado Democrático de Direito, a pagina da Rota resgata, com saudosismo, uma série de acontecimentos que envolveram a Polícia Militar e a própria Rota, a partir de 1970, quando foi criada. São citadas, por exemplo, a participação das forças do Estado na Guerra de Canudos, 1897, na Bahia, na Revolução Constitucionalista de 1932, em São Paulo, no que chamam de “Revolução” de 1964 e na “Campanha do Vale do Rio Ribeira do Iguape, em 1970, para sufocar a Guerrilha Rural instituída por Carlos Lamarca”.

More than two decades after the end of the military dictatorship, in a regime founded on the democratic rule of law, ROTA’s Web site evokes with nostalgia a series of events involving the state military police, as well as the unit itself, beginning in 1970, when it was created. It mentions, for example, the participation of São Paulo militiamen in the Canudos War in Bahia in 1987; in the 1932 Constitutionalist Revolution in São Paulo; in the so-called revolution of 1964; and in the Valley of the Ribeira do Iguape River campaign in 1970, which put down the rural guerrilla founded by Carlos Lamarca.

Veja Só: The Designated Blogger Thinks Dantas Will Go Free on Appeal

"Dantas is said to be concerned only with the lower courts, given that in the federal court of appeals and Supreme Court he could resolve everything with ease." Source: Jornal Nacional (Globo)

Reinaldo Azevedo, tropical Rush Limbaugh and designated blogger of Veja.com, seems to suggest that the conviction of Daniel Dantas on bribery charges will not hold up on appeal.

The gist of the characteristically specious argument from the Man in the Panama Hat: That Dantas was convicted “is a good thing,” but his conviction was based on spurious evidence.

Does Reinaldo Azevedo really think it’s a good thing to put people away based on bad evidence?

Veja has been accused of conducting smear campaigns and printing disinformation that tended to support the theses of the Dantas defense. These accusations are not without foundation.

The most astonishing of these smear campaigns was a phony “dossier” published in Veja in May 2006 accusing past and current directors of the federal police (and the president of Brazil) of having bribe-stuffed offshore bank accounts.

They don’t.

See

• Nassif, In Disbelief: “The Phony Dossier,” or, Ecce Veja

Avezevdo:

A condenação do banqueiro Daniel Dantas a dez anos de prisão por corrupção ativa merece comemoração. É o primeiro dos processos criminais a que ele responde que logrou chegar a uma sentença – furando a muralha de liminares e outros recursos do sistema penal brasileiro que faz a alegria dos bons (e caros) advogados.

The sentencing of Daniel Dantas to ten years in prison for bribery is worth celebrating. This is the first of the criminal trials that he has faced that has resulted in a verdict — piercing the wall of injunctions and other weapons in the arsenal of Brazilian criminal law that give so much joy and comfort to competent (and) expensive attorneys.

O banqueiro é um personagem que, nos últimos anos, esteve por trás, quando não no centro, de nove entre dez escândalos político-financeiros que eclodiram no país. Sua condenação não deveria, porém, ser maculada por um comportamento que, no Brasil, vem se tornando perigosamente recorrente: aquele que, a pretexto de contemplar “os desejos e aspirações do povo”, acaba resvalando para excessos que beiram a arbitrariedade e que, no fim, ameaçam comprometer a eficácia do Poder Judiciário.

The banker is a figure who in recent years has been behind, if not in the middle of, nine out of ten political and financial scandals that have broken out in Brazil. His condemnation should not, however, be tarnished by conduct that has become dangerously common here in Brazil: An appeal to “the desires and aspirations of the People” that winds up underwriting excesses that verge on arbitrary justice and which in the end threaten to undermine the efficacy of the judicial branch of government.

The phrase in quotes refers to a speech given by the judge in the case which was widely used in the certain sectors of the press to describe him as “Nazi-inspired.” See

• The Authoritarian Temptation of Dr. Fausto: “Dantas Judge Is Nazi-Inspired”
• Dantas Judge: “Dr. Fausto Is Not a Nazi”

Do ponto de vista técnico, é quase um milagre que a Justiça tenha encontrado elementos sólidos para condenar Dantas.

From the technical point of view, it is almost a miracle that the court was able to uncover solid evidence to find Dantas guilty.

Dantas’ Inferno: “Fall of an Opportunist”

The legal woes of the Economist's opportunist: Infographic by the Folha de S. Paulo. Click to zoom (then learn Portuguese)

One of the weirdest things about Brazilian journalism is the fact that it still lends credence to what U.S. newspapers, and especially the New York Times, have to say about this country.” –Kenneth Maxwell, in an op-ed in the Folha de S. Paulo

Oportunista caiu, diz ‘Economist’: An opportunist has fallen, says the Economist.

The Brazilian press — in this case, the Estado de S. Paulo — covering the world press covering Brazil.

The Limey Dismal Scientist seems to have gotten the story just about right, I reckon.

A revista britânica The Economist deu destaque na edição desta semana à condenação de Daniel Dantas. Em reportagem intitulada “A queda de um oportunista”, o controlador do Opportunity é tratado como banqueiro talentoso “que lucrou operando no espaço obscuro em que negócios e política se misturam no Brasil”.

The British magazine The Economist gave prominent play in this week’s edition to the guilty verdict against Daniel Dantas. In a report headlined “The fall of an opportunist,” the Opportunity founding partner is described as a talented banker “who made his money operating in the grey area where business and politics mix in Brazil.”

Yes, I know it is absurd for me to be retranslating a translation of the original Queen’s English.

Dantas Judge: “Dr. Fausto Is Not a Nazi”

Dr. Fausto

Luis Nassif reproduces a public statement from Fausto de Sanctis, the São Paulo federal court judge in charge of the Satyagraha case, in which banker Daniel Dantas of the asset manager and former investment bank Opportunity is criminally charged.

This week, de Sanctis is expected to render a verdict on bribery charges against Dantas and his codefendants. Later, an indictment on money laundering, tax evasion and financial fraud is expected from the federal prosecutor.

Also this week, two petitions to remove de Sanctis from the case are scheduled to be heard, one in a federal appeals court and one in the National Justice Council, where a federal lawmaker named Jungmann has called for disciplinary action against the judge for alleged insubordination to decisions by the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court which freed Dantas from preventive custody. On Jungmann, more in a minute.

Reinaldo Azevedo of Veja, Elio Gaspari, and the editorial pages have all recently implied that De Sanctis is Nazi-inspired because he cited jurist Carl Schmitt in a recent speaking engagement in Rio de Janeiro.

I tend to expect better of Gaspari, a brilliant historian and journalist.

See

• The Authoritarian Temptation of Dr. Fausto: “Dantas Judge Is Nazi-Inspired”

De Sanctis issues a public statement, as follows:

Com relação às últimas publicações acerca da Satiagraha, notadamente sobre reunião na Polícia Federal logo após a deflagração da investigação inicial, cabe-me esclarecer o seguinte:

With respect to recent publications about the Satyagraha (Dantas) case, most notably about a meeting held at the Federal Police after the initial round of arrests in the case, it is my duty to offer the following clarifications:

Veja magazine published a highly selective excerpt from the transcript of that meeting this weekend and suggested that the lead investigator in the case is heard “admitting” — according to Veja, as well as Noblat of O Globo and Josias de Souza of the Folha de S. Paulo, who parroted the meme — that he bugged the Supreme Court in order to obtain information on habeas corpus petitions filed by Dantas.

De Sanctis denies this:

Todas as informações obtidas por ocasião do cumprimento das primeiras decisões judiciais são fruto de interceptações telemáticas e telefônicas, exclusivamente das pessoas investigadas. Nada mais;

All information obtained through compliance with initial judicial rulings are the fruit of electronic and telephone intercepts targeting investigation subjects exclusively, and no one else;

Dantas’ Inferno: Daniel Deposed On Bribery Allegation

Daniel Valente Dantas. Graphic: Veja magazine, May 2006, when it reported: “Daniel Dantas has a list that may show illegal offshore bank accounts controlled by the president and party bigwigs.” Veja had plenty of evidence that “almost certainly does not” was the word to use instead of “may.” Ecce Veja.

STJ nega pedido de cancelamento de audiência para ouvir Daniel Dantas: Attempts to obtain a writ of habeas corpus that would prevent banker Daniel Dantas from having to testify today at a hearing on allegations that he and associates attempted to bribe a federal police agent fail, reports G1/Globo.

O Superior Tribunal de Justiça (STJ) negou liminar ao banqueiro Daniel Dantas, que pedia a suspensão da audiência de interrogatório e instrução da 6ª Vara Criminal Federal de São Paulo, marcada para a tarde desta quarta-feira (22). A decisão, do ministro Arnaldo Esteves Lima, obriga Dantas terá de comparecer a audiência, prevista para começar às 14h.

Gist: The federal appeals court has ruled that Dantas has to show up at the hearing, which starts at 2 p.m. local time today.

Speculation is that Dantas could, in theory, be ordered arrested by the presiding judge in the cause. Dantas’ attorneys tried, and failed, to force the judge to recuse himself from the case.

A report from the Estado de S. Paulo early today provides the background to today’s developments:

SÃO PAULO - O sócio-fundador do grupo Opportunity, Daniel Dantas, alvo maior da Operação Satiagraha, participa hoje de audiência de interrogatório e instrução na 6ª Vara Criminal Federal de São Paulo à qual também deverão comparecer Humberto Braz, ex-presidente da Brasil Telecom, e Hugo Sérgio Chicaroni, todos denunciados por suposto crime de corrupção ativa – a Procuradoria da República acusa o controlador do Opportunity de ter tentado subornar com R$ 1,18 milhão o delegado Vitor Hugo Rodrigues, da Polícia Federal, em troca do arquivamento do inquérito sobre atividades do grupo.

Opportunity founding partner Daniel Dantas, the major target of the investigations in Operation Satyagrapha, will testify under oath today in the 6th Criminal Bar of Sao Paulo, at a hearing at which Braz, former president of Brasil Telecom, and Chicaroni, accused along with Dantas of paying a R$1.18 million bribe to federal police agent Vitor Hugo Rodrigues in exchange for quashing a federal probe of the group, are also scheduled to appear.

Luis Nassif: The Supreme Court Correspondence

"To Heck With Ethics." The Chief Justice called the article on his alleged conflicts of interest "hired-assassin journalism." But Leandro Fortes is an honorable man.

Did someone bug the Chief Justice of the Brazilian Supreme Court?

It has been widely reported that the Brazlian National Intelligence Agency did, but because the evidence is slim to nonexistent, the message is ambiguous — and the messenger even more so.

Brazilian economic and business commentator Luis Nassif has been carrying on a fascinating online colloquy with the press office of the Brazilian Supreme Court recently on the subject.

I say “fascinating” because it is unusual for a public institution — much less the Supreme Court! — to engage in an open debate in a public space — much less with a mere “blogger”!

(Nassif is, of course, actually a seasoned professional: He also works as a TV commentator and syndicated columnist, and runs a seminar and news-service business of his own. But it is as a “blogger” that he has gotten the most attention lately.)

It is testimony, I suppose, first of all, to Nassif’s perceived influence as an “opinion maker.”

But try to imagine this as well: Chief Justice John Roberts makes an intensive round of press appearances claiming that They are out to get him, and that just because the FBI and Secret Service can find no evidence of malign actions by Them does not mean anything. The FBI and Secret Service could well be in it on it. [Cue theme music to The X-Files].

Justice Roberts might as well be wearing a tinfoil hat, you might be tempted to conclude. (It might be easier to imagine this if you pictured Clarence “High-Tech Lynch Mob” Thomas rather than the poker-faced and highly decorous Roberts.)

But something analogous is going on here in this intense information campaign being carried out by the Brazilian John Roberts.

You might conclude from this behavior that Brazilian judges do not get taught in judge school that ex parte remarks and colloquies tend to undermine the majesty of the law and create the impression of conflicts of interest.

But I am told by my sources that you would be wrong. There is a perfectly good Portuguese translation for the phrase, “Do your talking from the bench.” And judges are instructed, under the enabling legislation for the judicial branch, to follow it. Some feel they should not have to, though.

The specific context for the following: Nassif had noted a news item that raised the possibility that the Chief Justice of the Brazilian Supreme Court had himself been the source of a number of uncorroborated rumors (published in Veja magazine) that the Supreme Court was being illegally bugged, Nixonian plumbers-style.

Nassif raised the suspicion that the Chief Justice — a controversial figure for various reasons — had planted these rumors as part of some sort of a crude, preemptive disinformation campaign designed to position him as a victim.

A reader today takes the time to summarize the debate.

I translate for my running notes on the whole byzantine affair.

Esse jogo de perguntas e respostas em posts diferentes ficou confuso. Tomo a liberdade de organizar um trecho e repetir alugmas perguntas não respondidas.

This back and forth [between Nassif and the court spokesperson] has gotten confusing. I have taken the liberty of organizing a selection from the conversation and repeating some questions that have yet to be answered.

Nassif perguntou:

Nassif asked:

1. Quais as evidências que levaram o presidente do STF, Gilmar Mendes, a levantar a hipótese de grampo em diversos Ministros ou mesmo uma conspiração de tomada de poder – conforme reportagem de antes de ontem do jornal “O Valor”, do jornalista Raymundo Costa?

1. What was the evidence that led the Chief Justice to raise the hypothesis that various justices of the Court had been bugged, or even that there was a conspiracy to seize power, according to a report by Raymundo Costas, published the day before yesterday by Valor Economico?