Video transcript
Pela Ordem / Explicação Pessoal
32 statements · 1 politicians · September 24, 2025
Statements by Rodrigo Pacheco. 32 transcribed statements, with topic and stance on the ones the analysis classified. Topics: Judiciary, Parliamentarian Accountability, Mandates and Public Office, Criminal Procedure.
Speakers
Click any statement beside the video to jump straight to the moment it was said.
Transcript
32 statementsFull transcript of the video. Statements the analysis classified carry topic and stance.
President Davi Alcolumbre, I greet Your Excellency; I greet my fellow Parliamentarians, Senators.
I just want to record this, because it is important to do so, as a former President of this House for four years, to give here a testimony, a recognition, a record of how important Your Excellency, President Davi Alcolumbre, has been for the institutional and political stability of this country.
Your Excellency's positions, Your Excellency's courage...
In very turbulent moments of a polarization that insists on prevailing in our country, Your Excellency has called for responsibility and asserted positions that one expects of a President of the Federal Senate.
- Neutral
About: remove a Minister of the STF
When the removal of a Minister of the STF (Supreme Federal Tribunal) is invoked, which is not new, Your Excellency has had the courage to say that this is a prerogative of the Presidency of the Senate and that quantities and signatures do not matter, because this is a prerogative that Your Excellency cannot fail to exercise and to possess, since Your Excellency is invested by all of us in the Presidency of the Senate.
- Against
About: remove a Minister of the STF
It is a decision of Your Excellency that must be respected, especially in light of the practical reality that today, as yesterday, there is not the slightest political viability for the removal of a Minister of the STF.
About: limit monocratic decisions by the STF (Supreme Federal Tribunal)
Your Excellency had that same courage, when I was sitting in that chair, to support me at that time, and other colleagues, so that we could vote here on a proposed amendment to the Constitution that limits the single-judge rulings of the Supreme Federal Tribunal.
- Neutral
About: limit monocratic decisions by the STF (Supreme Federal Tribunal)
We voted, we approved by a narrow majority, and, upon reaching the Chamber of Deputies, those who promoted it as the solution to limiting the powers of the Supreme Court fell silent, ceased to address this issue in the National Congress and insisted on an absolutely unviable thesis of impeachment of a Minister of the STF, following a very selective criterion of what generates adherence on social media, what generates applause on social media, failing to support the proposed constitutional amendment on single-judge rulings, which was voted on by me with the support of fifty-some Senators of the Republic.
Your Excellency had the courage at that moment to say that it was important and that it would matter little if it displeased the Judiciary.
- Against
About: remove a Minister of the STF
And Your Excellency has that same courage when, from the height of your chair and your authority, you assert that the removal of a Minister of the STF, while there is no just cause, demonstrated fact, typicity, adequacy to the Law on Crimes of Responsibility and political viability, by a majority that is not 41 but 54 votes in this House...
Your Excellency demonstrates great civic courage in taking on this confrontation, because this does indeed generate for Your Excellency enormous wear and tear — as it also generated for me enormous wear — from a personal, electoral and political point of view.
About: limit parliamentary prerogatives that shield mandates from investigations
This is civic and institutional courage that Your Excellency has, the same you have now, to set things straight regarding this shielding of Parliamentary mandates.
About: limit parliamentary prerogatives that shield mandates from investigations
Your Excellency positions yourself, giving due processing, and, together with Senator Otto Alencar, establishes what is the spirit of the Senate — so much so that it was voted unanimously in the CCJ — rejecting the idea of an excess of parliamentary prerogatives in the scope of police investigations.
About: prohibit exercise of a parliamentary mandate from abroad
It is the same courage you have to do what is obvious, to say that it is inadmissible for a Parliamentarian to be outside the country conspiring against his own country.
About: prohibit exercise of a parliamentary mandate from abroad
Your Excellency had the courage to say this in the Presidency of the Federal Senate, because you are also President of the National Congress, thus emphasizing what is glaringly obvious, of absolute clarity: that it is absolutely impossible to exercise a Parliamentary mandate — even though we have this remote and semi-presential modality in some situations — outside our country.
And this is not any kind of opinion about the figure of the Parliamentarian, the person of the Parliamentarian, nor about what he is doing there.
- Neutral
About: prohibit exercise of a parliamentary mandate from abroad
It is the obvious fact that one cannot exercise a Parliamentary mandate outside our country, because our Rules of Procedure and our Constitution do not permit that.
So, Your Excellency has had the courage to adopt positions that Brazil needs.
Not long ago I was speaking with some politicians and party Leaders, saying how much Your Excellency, in a moment of such conflagration, has been important in establishing — I repeat — this institutional political stability.
That makes me very proud, because I know the weight of that chair, I know the responsibilities imposed on that chair, I know the pressures we suffer when we sit in that chair, and Your Excellency has honored, every minute, every moment, the trust I placed in Your Excellency when I voted for you on February 1 to replace me.
And, along with that courage, with these correct political positions that Your Excellency has — and will have the recognition of the Legislative, of the other Branches, of the institutions and of society of this country — along with that, obviously come the criticisms, the conspiracies, the insinuations, the prejudgments, even violating constitutional principles of presumption of innocence, of full defense, of adversarial proceedings, with absolutely empty criticisms, due to speculations that arise at any moment and that have, evidently, as their target, a President of the Senate.
Therefore, President Davi, receive from me this recognition of how important Your Excellency has been for this country in this moment of conflagration and for the good relationship you have established with President Hugo Motta, with the Deputies, with us Senators, with President Lula and his Ministers, with the Ministers of the STF, with the Attorney General of the Republic, with the press, and with society in general.
And this is what we need at this moment: someone with the maturity to establish what the true priorities of our country are, which are not this polarized environment and this selfish logic of always wanting to defend your side to the detriment of the other side.
And, when we speak of sides, I recall Senator Randolfe Rodrigues saying that, indeed, there are not two sides when one discusses democracy and the preservation of the Rule of Law: either one is a democrat or one is not a democrat, and Your Excellency has shown great maturity in the conduct of the Presidency of the Senate.
About: guarantee proportionality of penalties and due process in political crimes
I also cite the intention Your Excellency had when you assumed the Presidency of the Senate, and that Deputy Hugo Motta had when he assumed the Presidency of the Chamber of Deputies, to establish a bill that could modify the law that changed the democratic rule of law, the Penal Code, to include crimes against the rule of law, to allow for a specific criminal typification for those people of January 8 — a criminal typification that would carry more reasonable penalties for those January 8 individuals who did not lead, who did not organize, who did not finance and who were under the influence of a crowd, amid turmoil, committing those acts, and cannot be equated with those who, seated in their important chairs, planned a coup in this country.
About: guarantee proportionality of penalties and due process in political crimes
Your Excellency had every good intention — and even discussed it with me — so that we would have a bill that could balance that law which is now being applied as a result of that recent event.
- Neutral
About: guarantee proportionality of penalties and due process in political crimes
Your Excellency had every good intention of resolving that issue, but there was resistance from those who were not necessarily concerned with the January 8 detainees, who were concerned with other aspects and other people, and they failed to consider that bill at that time.
About: apply retroactivity of the more favorable criminal law to allow regime progression for the January 8 prisoners
It has been six months without it having been considered and people are serving sentences when, in fact, they could possibly already have progressed in regime due to an adjustment, by virtue of the retroactivity of a more lenient criminal law that could apply to them.
- Neutral
About: guarantee proportionality of penalties and due process in political crimes
Your Excellency led this, and I am a witness, because you asked me to carry out a technical analysis regarding that bill.
Unfortunately, there were resistances, even from those we would not have imagined could resist.
Therefore, Senator David Alcolumbre, receive this record as an expression of unrestricted support for Your Excellency and for your Presidency.
I know that the majority of this House shares this support that must always be given to Your Excellency as recognition for the work you have performed.
AI classification from the transcript of a public video. See the Methodology