The Ethics Council of the Chamber of Deputies decided, by 11 votes in favor and 7 againstarchive the representation against deputy Eduardo Bolsonaro (PL-SP) for breach of parliamentary decorum. 
Eduardo Bolsonaro is still target of three more representations on the Ethics Councilwho are awaiting a decision from the President of the Chamber, Hugo Motta (Republicanos-PB) on the agreement, to be processed together.
The president of the council, Fabio Schiochet (União-SC), said that Motta must decide on the case by Friday (24).
Decision
The majority of deputies followed the rapporteur, Deputy Delegate Marcelo Freitas (União-MG)who argued that he saw no breach of decorum in Eduardo Bolsonaro’s actions in the United States, against Brazilian authorities.
“I may strongly disagree with the words said by Eduardo Bolsonaro, but I understand that this Ethics Council does not have the power to act as the true censor of words spoken in Brazil or abroad”, said Feitas, who alleged the formal ineptitude of the complaint.
“It is not possible to recognize, even in theory, the configuration of a breach of decorum in conduct that is limited to the exercise of freedom of expression and the expression of political opinion in the context of international debates. The act of giving an opinion, disagreeing or reporting, even in a foreign forum, does not constitute an ethical infraction, but a legitimate exercise of the representative mandate, as recognized by the most stable and mature democracies in the world”, argued the parliamentarian.
PT leader, Lindbergh Farias will present an appeal so that if it is put to a vote in the Chamber plenary – Photo: Lula Marques/Agência Brasil
PT leader, Lindbergh Farias (RJ), said he will present an appeal so that the case can be put to a vote in the House plenary. According to the rules, the signature of one tenth of the deputies is required for the appeal to be considered in plenary.
“We will immediately present an appeal to the plenary and we will collect signatures today”, said Farias after the result of the vote.
The request against Eduardo Bolsonaro was made by the PT. The party argued that the deputy’s conduct in the United States, where he has lived since February, is incompatible with the performance of parliamentary duties.
According to the representation, from foreign territory, through various channels and platforms, the deputy repeatedly launched attacks to defame institutions of the Brazilian State, with particular virulence against the Federal Supreme Court and its ministers, whom he has publicly called “dressed up militiamen” and “dictators”. Furthermore, the representation cites an interview in which Eduardo Bolsonaro declared that “without amnesty for Jair Bolsonaro, there will be no elections in 2026”.
The document also cites Eduardo Bolsonaro’s move to pressure North American authorities and political sectors in the United States with the aim of putting pressure on Brazilian authorities through international sanctions.
Deputy Chico Alencar (PSOL-RJ) presented separate vote refuting the argument that Eduardo Bolsonaro’s attitude would merely represent political criticism. For Alencar, freedom of expression cannot be invoked to hide hate speech and institutional sabotage. The vote concludes by stating that there was an abuse of parliamentary prerogatives and an offense to the dignity of the mandate and parliamentary decorum by Eduardo Bolsonaro.
“Eduardo Bolsonaro did not limit himself to political criticism: he attributed crimes and threats to STF ministers, conditioned the electoral calendar to his father’s amnesty, and worked actively and unapologetically for foreign powers to adopt sanctions against national authorities, in conduct that (…) reveals itself as institutional hostility towards the country”, said the parliamentarian.
“Eduardo Bolsonaro acts with deliberate constancy to delegitimize the electoral process, undermine confidence in democratic institutions and internationalize internal conflicts, seeking external support to attack ministers of the Federal Supreme Court and negatively influence national sovereignty”, added Chico Alencar.
