Convicted by the Supreme Federal Court (STF) in the criminal action of coup plot, federal deputy Alexandre Ramagem (PL-RJ) defended himself in the process that could lead to his dismissal, asking that the Chamber of Deputies does not automatically comply with the decision of the Court, maintains its mandate and authorizes the exercise of the mandate through remote voting, including in the case of parliamentarians imprisoned or abroad.
The statement was presented to the House Board of Trustees as part of the process that deals with the loss of his parliamentary mandate. In the document addressed to the President of the Chamber, Hugo Motta (Republicanos-PB), Ramagem maintains that it is up to the Legislature to “decide”, and not only to declare, the indictment of parliamentarians found guilty of criminal offenses, as provided for in article 55 of the Constitution.
Former director general of the Brazilian Intelligence Agency (Abin) in the government of Jair Bolsonaro, Ramagem was sentenced to 16 years in prison for the crimes of criminal organization, attempted abolition of the democratic rule of law and attempted coup d’état. The Attorney General’s Office stressed that he was part of the core that used state structures to spy on opponents and launch attacks on the electoral system, in support of the putschist strategy that was being put in place around the president at the time.
Despite the defense offensive, the assessment which predominates today at the top of the Chamber is that the loss of the mandate must be formalized by an act of the Board of Directors. Behind the scenes, leaders report that Hugo Motta is working on the hypothesis of avoiding the plenary to reduce the risk of a new institutional clash with the Supreme Court.
However, the trend is for the decision to be taken at the beginning of 2026. Parliamentary recess and the accumulation of sensitive issues at the end of the year have led the Presidency of the House to assess that the file should only be dealt with when work resumes, which pushes the definition of Ramagem’s mandate to the next legislative year. The main argument in favor of the postponement is the fact that the MP has not yet reached the limit of absences which would make the loss of his mandate mandatory.
In his response to the House, the MP says he is a victim of political persecution and describes the STF judgment as null and void. According to him, the conviction on which the request for revocation is based results from an “exceptional procedure”, marked by violations of regular legal and legislative procedures.
“The process carried out in this exceptional context is null and characterizes, by premise, an obvious political persecution. And it is from this persecution that the final criminal conviction arises,” Ramagem said in the document.
One of the central axes of the defense is the direct criticism of the rite adopted by the Board of Directors. Ramagem maintains that the Chamber cannot remove the measures provided for in the Internal Regulations, such as the prior analysis by the Constitution and Justice Commission (CCJ) and the vote in plenary, under penalty of violating popular sovereignty.
“The parliamentary mandate belongs neither to Parliament nor to the Board of Directors. It belongs to the people, who delegate it to universal suffrage”, he wrote, affirming that any procedure which leads to the extinction of the mandate without strict respect for the constitutional rite “converts a democratic instrument into a mechanism of political exclusion”.
In addition to challenging the procedure, Ramagem asked the House to recognize the possibility of maintaining the warrant even in the event of arrest. He argues that with the digitalization of legislative work, voting and deliberations take place mainly electronically.
“Today, voting is carried out mainly via an Internet application. Thus, even a person imprisoned in a closed regime can act, provided that they have guaranteed access to the necessary systems,” the text says.
The MP also maintains that parliamentarians who are abroad should guarantee the right to vote and participate in legislative activities. Ramagem has been in the United States since September and is considered a fugitive by Brazilian justice. Minister Alexandre de Moraes has already ordered the opening of an extradition request.
In his defense, Ramagem describes himself as a “political exile” and asserts that physical absence does not make it impossible to exercise his mandate. “The parliamentarian is free, even if he is in another country, and is therefore fully capable of exercising his mandate,” he writes.
About The Author
