POLITICS-BRAZIL: Senate Probe Steals Soap Opera Audience

By Mario Osava Reprint | | Print |

Mario Osava

RIO DE JANEIRO, May 4 2001 (IPS) - The crisis shaking the Brazilian Congress, where three senators are facing impeachment and a possible eight-year ban from politics, has won the ratings war over the past few weeks, even enticing diehard viewers away from their soap operas.

Key politicians subjected to lengthy interrogations, a senator breaking down in tears in front of Congress, accusations launched by government officials, dramatic and even comical speeches have brought newfound fame to the Senate TV channel that broadcasts the complete sessions of the upper house, which have never been so entertaining.

The increase in the station’s ratings has led some private TV and cable networks to air parts of the real life soap opera themselves.

The scene of an unprecedented performance that stretched out seven hours late Thursday and early Friday was the packed room of the Senate Council on Ethics, where two powerful senators, Antonio Carlos Magalhaes and Jose Roberto Arruda, faced off with the former head of the Senate’s computer system, Regina Peres Borges.

Millions of Brazilians remained glued to the box for hours, while huge crowds gathered in plazas where giant TV screens were set up. The climate was something like the excitement surrounding the World Soccer Cup.

The most attentive viewers were those in the northeastern state of Bahia, where Magalhaes, three times governor, is the undisputed political boss.

Brazilians’ interest, and even glee, in following media coverage of the downfall of corrupt politicians was fuelled by the 1992 parliamentary investigation that led to the collapse of then- president Fernando Collor on corruption charges.

At stake is not only the career of two influential politicians, but also the credibility of the Brazilian Congress and the stability of the coalition that backs the government of Fernando Henrique Cardoso.

The crisis, which has bogged down parliament since last year, involves a number of allegations of corruption against the current president of the Senate, Jader Barbalho, who is also the head of the Party of the Brazilian Democratic Movement, one of the three main forces in the ruling coalition.

Two other leaders of the coalition – Magalhaes, the head of the right-wing Liberal Front Party, and Arruda, who was forced by 79 fellow party members to leave the Social Democracy Party – have been accused of tampering with the secret voting system in the Senate.

The incident occurred on Jun 28, when the Senate impeached one of its members, Luiz Estevao Oliveira, for misappropriating public funds.

Thursday’s session, in which Magalhaes and Arruda testified jointly with Peres Borges, was unprecedented in the Senate’s 177- year history. The confrontation was set up due to a number of discrepancies that emerged in previous testimony from the two lawmakers and the former director of the Senate’s computer system.

Peres Borges admitted that she headed the illegal operation that violated the Senate’s secrecy norms to find out how each of the 81 senators voted that day in June, when a majority decided to expel Estevao and banish him from political life for eight years.

But the official said she was ordered to tamper with the voting system by Arruda, the then-leader of the ruling coalition in the Senate, “in the name” of Magalhaes, president of the Senate and Congress at that time. The senators were provided with one single list of the votes.

The public learned about the incident in February due to Magalhaes’ indiscretion in a private conversation with three prosecutors, in which he said he knew how each senator voted in the Jun 28 session.

One of the prosecutors taped the conversation and sent it to the weekly publication Isto E, whose article unleashed the scandal that led to the investigation by the Senate Council on Ethics.

An examination of the computers by University of Campinas experts verified that the system had been violated. However, they were unable to salvage the programme used to that end.

The Council on Ethics probe drew increasing attention, and Peres Borges’ testimony at an Apr 19 public hearing revealed the details of the vote-tampering, and seriously compromised the two senators.

Arruda, who the day before had vehemently denied taking part in the incident, surprised his fellow lawmakers and public opinion five days later when he confessed in a speech in which he cried and apologised to his children, among others, for having lied.

However, he did not admit to ordering Peres Borges to violate the secret vote, but said he had simply “consulted” her regarding the security of the system against possible fraud that could alter the votes issued by senators through buttons installed in their seats.

Peres Borges must have misunderstood the question, Arruda argued.

But an overwhelming majority in the Senate and, according to opinion polls, the public believe Arruda and Magalhaes are guilty.

Peres Borges’ insistence that Arruda ordered her to get the list of votes for him was the first of several discrepancies between her testimony and the declarations of Magalhaes and Arruda, which meant it was left up to the Council of Ethics to decide who was lying.

Magalhaes denied telling Arruda to consult Peres Borges “about anything” to do with the electronic voting system, as Arruda claimed.

However, he failed to convincingly explain why he merely accepted the list of votes without taking any measures, as Senate president, against Arruda or the former head of the computer system.

Magalhaes said he kept silent in order to avoid a scandal that could lead to an annulment of the vote that expelled a senator involved in corruption.

But that explanation did not clarify why Peres Borges remained in her post, nor the fact that no precautions were taken to prevent future violations of the secret vote.

The 16 members of the Council on Ethics now have to decide whether or not to hold impeachment proceedings against Magalhaes and Arruda on the basis of a report that is to be ready within 10 days.

If a majority of the members of the Council on Ethics votes for impeachment, the matter will go to a plenary session of the Senate.

An eight-year ban from politics is the heaviest sanction the two senators would face, followed by indefinite suspension, a warning, or an official reprimand.

The polls indicate that the public wants the two senators to lose their seats and to be banished from political life due to the apparent violation of the parliamentary code of ethics and secrecy norms.

But banning a political leader of the stature of Magalhaes would amount to “a political earthquake,” warned Globo TV analyst Franklin Martins.