Ives Gandra says that the questionnaire found by the PF with Mauro Cid is from 2017 and does not ‘inspire’ a coup

Jurista argues that the responses have a “strictly constitutional nature” and that their interpretations have been “distorted”; The opinion was saved by federal criminal experts on the cell phone of Bolsonaro’s former assistant

33 years ago, the jurist Ives Gandra da Silva Martins trains generals at Army Command and General Staff School. He is Professor Emeritus of Constitutional Law at the institute. His theses have been adopted by the Bolsonarist militancy and by former president Jair Bolsonaro himself in an attempt to provide a theoretical framework for manifestly unconstitutional proposals.

The writings of the jurist on the article 142 of the Constitution, which regulates the activities of the Armed Forces, fell in favor of the Bolsonarists. The device has come to be seen by supporters of the former president as the great legal violation to justify military intervention against the judiciary.

It is no news that Gandra has reported “distortions” in his interpretations. His name has again been associated with anti-democratic agendas after federal police uncovered a coup plot involving Lieutenant Colonel Mauro Cid, a former aide to Bolsonaro, and other officials.

The PF found, on Mauro Cid’s mobile phone, a questionnaire to which Ives Granda replied in 2017 on the ‘guarantee of constitutional powers’. The answers were sent at the request of Major Fabiano da Silva Carvalho, who presented himself as a second-year student of the army command and staff course.

In addition to the questionnaire, there was a document that set out to summarize Mauro Cid’s ideas. “Faced with situations of encroachment by one Power on the attributions of another, the Federal Constitution allows the Armed Forces to act punctually to restore constitutional harmony”, says what is seen as the ‘synthesis’ of the jurist’s argument. Soon after, a “script suggestion” arrived, in three stages, for the Armed Forces to act as a “Moderating Power”.

The report StadiumGranda informed that the answers were given six years ago, are “strictly constitutional in nature” and do not “inspire, influence or exploit the implementation of a coup”.

“My interpretation of 142 has always been extremely skewed. It’s a device not for breaking up, but for ensuring democratic order,” he says. “If others have misinterpreted what I have said and written, what can I do?”

Read the full interview:

STATUS: Mr. Did you answer scam questionnaires?

Ives Gandra: Do you answer a questionnaire on the coup? Never. Basically what I can say is this: I take responsibility for what I wrote. Certainly there is nothing written by me and certainly not talked about. How did my name appear there? Did someone else get that information? My lessons were before the election.

ESTADÃO: Was there a distortion by Mr. on article 142?

Ives Gandra: When I saw this storm, I said: first, it’s not my interpretation. My interpretation of 142 has always been extremely skewed. It is a device not to disrupt, but to guarantee democratic order. Suddenly, Article 142 passed as if it were a deconstitution of power, a coup d’état. If others have misinterpreted what I have said and written, what can I do? When these demonstrations took place, they believed that the elections had been rigged. There was no evidence of fraud. The same soldiers accompanied the elections at the request of the Superior Electoral Tribunal.

ESTADÃO: Was there room for a coup after the defeat of Bolsonaro?

Ives Gandra: Having an absolutely insane text of a state of siege, the one that has been published, could only be valid if Congress supported it by an absolute majority. There wouldn’t be the slightest chance.

STATE: Mr emphasizes that he sees no risk of the military endorsing an institutional breakdown, but dialogues retrieved from the PF show a coup plot involving officers. Is it a minority current?

Ives Gandra: The course at the Army Command and General Staff School was created in 1989 and I started teaching in 1990. I know their mentality. When people gathered in front of the barracks, I said: this is silly. There is not the slightest risk of a scam. They (military) they will not take any measures against it, but they will not take any measures to disrupt the institutions, because they are slaves of the Constitution. Zero risk, multiplied by zero, divided by zero. I have no doubt that there may be one or the other citizen. But my lessons are about constitutional law. Those colonels, who are going to be generals, have this perfect vision. They created a course for the Armed Forces to exclusively represent what’s in the Constitution: absolute respect for what’s in the Constitution. It is the mentality that prevails throughout the Generalate.

ESTADÃO: And why not inertia in the face of the coup demonstrations organized after the second round in front of the barracks?

Ives Gandra: What there was was a respect from the Armed Forces towards the popular demonstration, since it was only an oral demonstration, it wasn’t a demonstration with a weapon. The military always understood that they would respect the election results.

Source: Terra

Rose

Rose James is a Gossipify movie and series reviewer known for her in-depth analysis and unique perspective on the latest releases. With a background in film studies, she provides engaging and informative reviews, and keeps readers up to date with industry trends and emerging talents.