The political confrontation with government supporters, following the episode of deputy Glauber Braga (PSOL-RJ), forcibly expelled from the plenary for trying to obstruct the work, was just another scene of wear and tear for the President of the Chamber, Hugo Motta (Republicanos-PB). According to Centrão and right-wing leaders interviewed by GLOBO, Motta recently made decisions without first informing party representatives and without measuring the impact of his actions on an already tense environment.
The reaction of government parliamentarians in plenary session this Tuesday – with the interventions of Lindbergh Farias (PT-RJ), Erika Kokay (PT-DF) and Tarcísio Motta (PSOL-RJ) – was accompanied by veiled criticism from other political forces: the appreciation of a management error and a lack of coordination.
In addition to putting the Dosimetry project on the agenda, Motta also decided to vote, on the same day, for the persistent debtor and to move forward, this week, with impeachments of great political repercussion.
For leaders, the president tried to please both the government and the opposition and ended up creating an unpredictable environment.
The prevailing perception is that Motta underestimated the risk of the climb and overestimated his ability to control the session, producing the chaotic scenario that played out throughout the afternoon.
Motta only announced on Tuesday that he would not take vacation without voting on dosimetry and that he would not leave while awaiting disciplinary proceedings against Carla Zambelli, Glauber Braga, Alexandre Ramagem and Eduardo Bolsonaro.
People say he was pressured on social media to move forward with the revocations and understood that yesterday could be a show of leadership.
The problem, according to the parliamentarians who moved between the Presidency office and the Green Room, is that this strategy was not shared, causing surprise in the morning collegiate meeting.
Base leaders claim to have learned of the maintenance of dosimetry and the inclusion of the persistent debtor “almost at the same time as everyone else”.
A leader very close to the top of the House said that Motta failed to build and failed to align, which boosted morale and culminated in the Glauber episode.
How the episode with Glauber degenerated
At the risk of being indicted, Glauber Braga occupied the presidential chair for about an hour, to protest against the simultaneous advancement of dosimetry and disciplinary processes. He accused Motta of partial conduct and said he would stay there “until the limit of his strength.”
Faced with the parliamentarian’s resistance to leaving his post, Motta ordered his removal by force.
Legislative police officers carried him by the arms, amid shoving and accusations of assault against the deputies who tried to intervene. The TV Câmara signal was cut and journalists and advisors were expelled from the podium, a measure which further inflamed the atmosphere of the plenary.
The scene immediately gave rise to a comparison: in August, when Bolsonaro supporters occupied the board, there was no similar response and to date none of them have been punished. For leaders aligned with the government, the difference in treatment has aggravated attrition:
— There has been violence against the parliamentarians who are currently in charge, which carries the violence propagated by Your Excellency — declared Erika Kokay.
Lindbergh Farias also directly criticized the Speaker of the House:
— Your Excellency loses the conditions to continue to exercise the presidency of this Chamber.
The episode reinforced another assessment that has been circulating among leaders since August: that Motta, despite his position, is operating with an extremely small political group. MEPs cite Isnaldo Bulhões (MDB-AL) and Luizinho (PP-RJ) as the only ones to have permanent access to their decisions.
For leaders, this lack of support helps explain why the president destabilizes in moments of crisis, as in the scene in which he ordered the TV Câmara signal to be cut and authorized the withdrawal of the press from the platform, a decision that government leaders described as “unnecessary” and “aggravating the conflict.”
Motta’s position differs from his actions in August, when Motta faced his first major test: the Bolsonarista mutiny, articulated after the PL’s vain attempts to direct measures in the interest of the opposition.
At the time, Motta had spent 30 hours paralyzed, a move that leaders interpreted as a display of fragility and lack of control of the plenary.
Shortly after, the Blindagem PEC was defeated, when the Senate blocked the advancement of the proposal supported by the Centrão parties.
For parliamentarians who closely follow the negotiations, this episode reinforced the perception that the Speaker of the House has not yet found his own rhythm of articulation, alternating advances and retreats without a clear line of direction.
About The Author
