Bolsonaro complies with court order and apologizes to a woman lawmaker because of offensive remarks

Friday, June 14th 2019 - 08:30 UTC

Full article 15 comments

Following on a court order, Brazilian president Jair Bolsonaro issued a retraction note to opposition Congresswoman Maria do Rosário (PT-RS) because of his statements about rape. During a discussion in 2003, when Bolsonaro was still congressman, he said that Mary of the Rosary “did not deserve to be raped” because she was “too ugly”.

“Due to court order, I publicly apologize for my past speeches addressed to Congresswoman Maria do Rosario Nunes”. Bolsonaro added his original statement had been in response to repeated “unjustified offenses” from the Workers Party, PT, which responds to ex president Lula da Silva..

“On the spur of the moment, in an ideological clash between parliamentarians, specifically with regard to human rights policy, I recall the fact in 2013, on what, after being unjustly offended, the congressman in question, insulted me, calling me a rapist, I replied stating that she did not deserve to be raped”, wrote Bolsonaro.

Bolsonaro also underlined his commitment to the protection of women, which he considers a priority and mentioned he was who drafted Bill 5.398, imposing chemical castration for sex offenders.

“This, therefore, defending the victims of these abhorrent practices of rape and other sexual crimes, has always been a standing struggle in my years as member of Congress“ reads the statement.

Jair Bolsonaro closes the retraction letter recalling that his wife Michelle, was the first to speak, even before the incoming president was inaugurated, which only comes to emphasize the significance and importance of women for his administration and his record as lawmaker.

”I reiterate Brazilian women are a priority of my government which has always been and will continue to be clearly demonstrated through concrete actions

Categories: Politics, Brazil.

Tags: Brazil, Brazil congress, brazil president, congressman, Jair Bolsonaro.

Top Comments

Disclaimer & comment rules

:o))
REF: “Due to a court order, I publicly apologize for my past speeches”:
http://www.chargeonline.com.br/php/charges/AUTO_vasqs.jpg
Jun 16th, 2019 - 10:06 am 0
Jack Bauer
A piece of irrelevant evidence....yeah, totally irrelevant, as to why Bolsonaro said she was too ugly to be raped, is the fact that Maria do Rosário, a few days earlier, while Bolsonaro was giving a speech in Congress, and was expressing his opinion on the infamous one-sided “Truth Commission” (created by Dilma), Maria do Rosario had called Bolsonaro a rapist....of course, that was ok, and in hindsight, he should've agreed and kept silent.
Jun 18th, 2019 - 09:35 pm 0
DemonTree
How odd, that he didn't ask her for an apology...

RE “Polls: Fernández-Fernández”
I read that Brazil had had two coups, three if you count chucking out the monarchy and becoming a republic. At least it's less than Argentina.

“no one I knew was concerned”

You knew me. Also Terry, but he doesn't count. Anyway, why would you be concerned? You'd rather the military take over than see Lula elected again, right?

I don't know if the STF was influenced by VB's comments, and I also don't know if the army would have taken action if the decision had gone the other way, but I definitely think the military exceeded their role.

I read the article you linked to about Haddad. He seemed to be evasive about it, but when pressed said he wouldn't pardon him. Perhaps he was trying to appeal to Lula's hard core supporters, without putting off the people who believe the law should be respected? Didn't work, anyway.

”8 STF judges were appointed by Lula (3) / Dilma (5).“

That would've been enough to free him if all voted in favour. IIRC, Lula's voted to leave him free, Dilma's to jail him. The judges appointed by earlier presidents also voted in Lula's favour.

”FHC's 2nd term was well seen as Brazil was improving.”

Yeah, until the recession, anyway. But then you agree it is possible to amend Brazil's constitution if Congress cooperates?

As for the spending cap, irrespective of its merits as a policy, I don't think such things belong in the constitution, and I don't think governments should be attempting to tie their successors' hands in this way. It strays a long way from the intended purpose of a constitution.
Jun 18th, 2019 - 10:01 pm 0

Read all comments

Commenting for this story is now closed.
If you have a Facebook account, become a fan and comment on our Facebook Page!