By Carol Amancio
Brazilian federal deputy Bia Kicis of the Liberal Party (PL), who represents the Federal District around Brasília, sharpened her criticism of the Supreme Federal Court (STF), Brazil's highest court. In an interview with BNTV on Friday (Oct. 30), she accused the court of having "run over the TSE," the Superior Electoral Court, which oversees elections in Brazil. Summing up how she sees the country, she said: "We live under the dictatorship of the robe, my friend."
Kicis on the word "fraud"
Kicis was careful about her vocabulary. She said she does not use the word "fraud" when discussing electoral matters. She prefers to describe a process that involves electoral crime and disregard for the Constitution and the law.
In her assessment, the Supreme Court overstepped by overriding the TSE, the body that, in her view, should have the final word on the issue.
The printed-vote amendment
The congresswoman said she is the author of the constitutional amendment proposal (PEC) on printed votes, introduced in 2019. According to her, the text was approved by 33 votes to 5 in the Chamber of Deputies' Constitution and Justice Committee (CCJ).
Despite the comfortable margin in committee, the proposal did not advance. Kicis blames then-Justice Luís Roberto Barroso, who, according to her, went to the floor of the chamber to stop the amendment from moving forward.
Auditable voting machines and the right to doubt
Kicis argued for the adoption of auditable voting machines. She also criticized those who answer distrust of the electoral system with censorship.
"People distrusting the electoral system is bad for democracy," she said. In her view, institutional skepticism is part of legitimate democratic debate and should not be treated as a crime.
Why it matters
Brazil votes on electronic machines, and the role of the Judiciary in setting electoral rules, along with the transparency of the vote, remains a divisive issue in Congress and among the public. Her remarks revive that debate. The interview was released with video, and the comments are expected to draw reactions from allies and opponents in the coming days.
VDD Analysis
When a proposal passes the CCJ by 33 to 5 and goes nowhere, it is natural for part of the electorate to want to know why. Defending auditable voting machines and the right to question the system without being silenced is a legitimate debate in a democracy worthy of the name. Those who trust the process should not fear transparency, and the answer to people who ask questions should be more information, not punishment.
