An Impeachment for Tarcísio de Freitas
The governor of São Paulo, Brazil, crossed the red line and should lose his position
The Brazilian press reported uncritically and with pomp and circumstance that the governor of the State of São Paulo, Brazil, signed a declaration that defines anti-Semitism as a phenomenon equivalent to anti-Zionism. As a result, it is clear that Governor Tarcísio de Freitas intends to criminalize any type of demonstration against the genocide committed by Israeli troops in Gaza.
Tarcísio de Freitas' project to transform genocidal Zionism into a mandatory state ideology is not just worrying. In fact it is unconstitutional.
The Brazilian Constitution guarantees citizens of the country (and of São Paulo as well) broad freedom of conscience, expression and demonstration. Therefore, the governor cannot impose in the territory of São Paulo a definition of anti-Semitism that benefits Zionists and allows the criminalization of those who disagree with the systematic military violence against Palestinians in Gaza without suppressing individual rights and guarantees granted to São Paulo citizens.
Furthermore, Israeli military violence is potentially illegal and criminal. So much so that it is being discussed at the International Court of Justice and the International Criminal Court. Therefore, everyone must have the right to support or not what is being done by Israel without being monitored, coerced and attacked by the police or criminally prosecuted by the Public Prosecutor's Office based on the Zionist definition adopted by the governor.
As a result of the definition adopted by the governor, he will be able to order the police to use brute force against São Paulo citizens who gather peacefully to support the Palestinian cause. Not only that, journalists and activists who denounce Israeli genocidal brutality may be classified and treated as anti-Semites and/or terrorists by the police and the Public Prosecutor's Office.
In addition to conspiring against the individual rights and guarantees of São Paulo citizens, the governor implicitly discredited and disauthorized the application in São Paulo territory of two jurisprudential precedents from the Brazilian Supreme Court that have an erga omnes effect.
ADPF nº 130 “The normative body of the Brazilian Constitution synonymizes freedom of journalistic information and freedom of the press, rejecting any prior censorship of a right that is a sign and pledge of the most cherished dignity of the human person, as well as the most evolved state of civilization. [...] There is no freedom of the press in half or under the tongs of prior censorship, including that coming from the Judiciary, a penalty of slipping into the unconstitutional space of legal sleight of hand. If the Constitution is silent regarding the regime of the internet (worldwide computer network), there is no way to deny it the qualification of a virtual territory that freely conveys ideas and opinions, debates, news and everything else that means fullness of communication. [...] Critical thinking is an integral part of full and reliable information. The possible socially useful content of the work compensates for any excesses of style and the author's own verve. The concrete exercise of press freedom guarantees journalists the right to criticize anyone, even in a harsh or blunt tone, especially against authorities and agents of the State. Journalistic criticism, due to its inherent relationship with the public interest, is not a priori susceptible to censorship, even if legislatively or judicially initiated.” (emphasis added)
ADI nº 4451 “Democracy will not exist and free political participation will not flourish where freedom of expression is eliminated, as this constitutes an essential condition for the pluralism of ideas, which in turn is a structuring value for the healthy functioning of the democratic system. [...] Both freedom of expression and political participation in a representative Democracy are only strengthened in an environment of total visibility and the possibility of critical exposure of the most varied opinions about those in power. The fundamental right to freedom of expression is not only aimed at protecting supposedly true, admirable or conventional opinions, but also those that are dubious, exaggerated, reprehensible, satirical, humorous, as well as those not shared by the majority. It should be noted that even erroneous statements are protected by this constitutional guarantee.” (emphasis added)
Decisions of the Brazilian Supreme Court with an erga omnes effect cannot be discredited or disauthorized by a governor without violating the autonomy of the Judiciary. By adopting a limited definition of anti-Semitism that is of interest only to groups that support the genocide of Palestinians in Gaza, the governor removes any validity and effectiveness of the aforementioned jurisprudential precedents that guarantee freedom of expression for São Paulo citizens who do not agree and have no obligation to agree. with the military violence used by Israelis or with the Zionists' intentions of imposing their own opinion in a hegemonic manner with the help of the police and the Public Prosecutor's Office.
The governor of São Paulo is not above the Law, nor can he throw out of its protection the portion of the population that does not agree with the Zionist definition of anti-Semitism. Tarcísio de Freitas should not have signed a declaration with the aim of suppressing the validity and effectiveness in São Paulo of Supreme Court decisions that guarantee freedom of expression for those who disagree with the genocide of Palestinians committed in Gaza by Israeli war criminals.
As a result of what he did, the governor of São Paulo may be held liable for a criminal offense under the legislation in force in Brazil. This may be requested to the State Legislative Assembly by any citizen of São Paulo, Brazil.