Eduardo Bolsonaro has 5 days to explain faults in a process that could revoke his mandate
The president of the Chamber of Deputies, Hugo Motta (Republicanos-PB), formalized this Wednesday (10) the notification that opens the administrative process against deputy Eduardo Bolsonaro (PL-SP) for excessive absences. The document, published in the Official Gazette of the Union, determines that the parliamentarian must present a defense within five working days.
Eduardo Bolsonaro has been in the United States since March and has exceeded the absence limit established by the Internal Regulations. Under the rule, parliamentarians who miss more than a third of sessions without justification may lose their mandate.
CCJ overturns pro-Zambelli opinion and revocation process accelerates in the Chamber
New rapporteur will have to present text for loss of mandate after STF imposes ten-year sentence
The notification signed by Motta on Tuesday (9) cites Board Act No. 37, of 2009, and article 240 of the Internal Regulations to establish the defense deadline. If the deputy does not respond by the end of next week, the process will go to the Board of Directors for deliberation.
The procedure takes place in parallel with the analysis of the absences accumulated by the deputy, whose situation was classified by the President of the House as “sufficient” to justify the loss of his mandate.
Trend is towards revocation
Hugo Motta had already anticipated that the Board of Directors must be guided by official information from the General Secretariat of the Board on registered absences. According to him, the data points to an unfavorable scenario for Eduardo Bolsonaro.
“The tendency is for the Board to present the result for the revocation of its mandate”, said the president of the Chamber, in a statement.
Eduardo Bolsonaro has been the target of impeachment requests since he left the country and began to act politically from the United States, including on foreign policy issues and international sanctions. The situation worsened at the end of November, when he formally exceeded the allowed absence limit.
With the process now underway, the decision on the future of the deputy’s mandate will depend on the analysis of the defense and the political judgment of the Board of Directors.
