André Franco Montoro Filho: Double impunity
Author: ANDRÉ FRANCO MONTORO FILHO
Source: Folha de S. Paulo, 19/05/2009
CRIMES, misdemeanors and transgressions are common in all countries. What distinguishes the more developed countries from the others is that, there, these crimes are punished quickly and, often, by the transgressors themselves, who, marked by shame and social repulsion, self-punish themselves, resigning their positions and sometimes even committing suicide.
I do not want these extreme acts in Brazil. But the impunity that prevails in our country has already passed acceptable limits. And that is dramatic for building a prosperous, just and civilized nation.
The feeling that is being created in Brazil is that the easiest way to win in life is to be "smart", trickster and dishonest. Do not comply with rules or laws, written or moral. What matters is to take advantage in all situations, even if it involves illegal acts.
If these acts are discovered, it seems that there is a belief that in the end there will be a “way”. A specialized lawyer, some “kindness” for law enforcement officers, time passes, the punishment is postponed and the crime ends up being forgotten. After all, everyone does. The offender returns to social life as if nothing had happened. He thus benefits from double impunity: the legal one, due to the slowness of the proceedings, and the social one, due to the tolerance of the population.
We need to change and end this double impunity in our country.
Proposals for greater agility and speed in judicial processes have received the attention of many authorities in the Judiciary, the Legislature and many experts.
Despite being of the utmost importance for correcting the course of Brazilian society, I do not intend to elaborate on this theme in this article.
My objective is to comment on social impunity, especially electoral impunity.
The vote is the weapon that the population has to punish bad politicians. However, congressmen who are known to have committed unlawful acts, including evidence, confessions and resignations, are re-elected - and even with a good vote. This means that the population has not punished, by voting, those behaviors that shock public opinion.
The recent scandal with the passages of federal parliamentarians is another to add to a long list that indicates the capture of Congress by two external interest groups. Executive interests and interests of economic groups.
The first refers to the almost total subordination of the Legislative Branch to the wishes of the Executive Branch, turning the constitutional mandate of independence and harmony of the Branches into a dead letter. Through negotiations, almost always physiological, the Executive has achieved a large parliamentary majority for the approval of its initiatives.
The second capture is due to the interests of economic groups. Not necessarily from large groups - as these, in addition to internal and external corporate governance rules, are easily identified and monitored -, but especially from regional groups located in the “bases” of congressmen who have obtained funds for local projects and tax advantages.
All power emanates from the people, who exercise it through elected representatives, says the sole paragraph of the first article of our Constitution. The theory of representative democracy is based on the hypothesis that the representative must correspond to the wishes of his voters, otherwise, he would not receive the votes, and the population would elect another representative.
As, despite these scandals, these congressmen have been elected and reelected, there are two alternatives.
Either the population is satisfied with their representatives, or there is something wrong with the process of choosing representatives. I lean towards the second alternative.
The reality shows and research confirms that the relationship between the voter and the politician is very tenuous. The Brazilian does not see the congressman as his representative. Most don't even know who they voted for.
In addition to historical and sociological reasons, the fact is that the electoral process is not developing the notion of representation that is essential for the functioning of a representative democracy. Without this notion, voters will not feel responsible for judging and punishing their representatives.
This demonstrates the need to change the voting process and choose a system that promotes the identification of the congressman as the representative of the voter, a representative who, if not pleased, can be replaced and punished by the vote. The most widely adopted system in the world is that of the district vote. But there are others. The fact is that it is essential to change.
ANDRÉ FRANCO MONTORO FILHO, 65, PhD in economics from Yale University (USA), is a full professor at FEA-USP and president of the Brazilian Institute of Ethics in Competition - ETCO. He was secretary of Economy and Planning of the State of São Paulo (Mário Covas government) and president of BNDES (1985 to 1988).
Articles published with a subscription do not reflect the opinion of the newspaper. Its publication follows the purpose of stimulating the debate on Brazilian and world problems and to reflect the various trends of contemporary thought.