The rapporteur of the bill to commute sentences for those convicted of the coup attempt, also known as the dosimetry project, Federal MP Paulinho da Forsa (Solidariedade-SP) stated that the PL parliamentarians who today are making it difficult to vote on the text because they insist on trying to make a blanket amnesty have two options: “to vote and approve the current version of their report or to be left with nothing.”
Paulinho claims that he has the necessary votes to obtain approval for the Dosimetria PL in its current version if former president Jair Bolsonaro’s (PL) colleagues support it. However, part of the court still focused its efforts on directing Amnesty International’s programme, thus undermining the treatment of the text presented by the President of Solidaridad.
Senator Flavio Bolsonaro (PL-RJ) said on Monday (I) that he does not accept a text along the lines of the one proposed by Paulinho, for example.
“There is no need to measure doses, or reduce punishment, when we are talking about people who did not commit the crimes they are accused of,” he said in an interview with the Flow podcast.
The text of the dosimetry bill will not be voted on this week, and the legislative calendar is in its final weeks – and the recess begins on December 23.
Paulinho says the report will not undergo any changes and is in its final version. The focus of the document today is to unify the crimes of the coup and the violent abolition of the democratic rule of law.
As a result, Bolsonaro’s sentence in the coup plot case will be reduced from 27 years and three months in prison to less than 20 years, and time in the closed system will be reduced from 6 years and 10 months to about two to three years.
In Paulinho’s interpretation, approval of the text would lead to the immediate release of all those involved on January 8th who are still behind bars.
In recent days, attempts by Bolsonaro’s deputies to introduce amendments that would change Paulinho’s report in order to further reduce the former president’s sentence have angered centrist representatives, according to the article.
These parliamentarians interpreted the movement as a trap that could hurt them publicly if it went unnoticed, and began to assert that the text on which the vote and approval had been agreed was Paulinho’s report, which had not yet been published.
Current link: Did you like this text? Subscribers can access seven free accesses from any link per day. Just click on the blue letter F below.