|
|
|
|
Search: 
Latin American Herald Tribune
Venezuela Overview
Venezuelan Embassies & Consulates Around The World
Sites/Blogs about Venezuela
Venezuelan Newspapers
Facts about Venezuela
Venezuela Tourism
Embassies in Caracas

Colombia Overview
Colombian Embassies & Consulates Around the World
Government Links
Embassies in Bogota
Media
Sites/Blogs about Colombia
Educational Institutions

Stocks

Commodities
Crude Oil
US Gasoline Prices
Natural Gas
Gold
Silver
Copper

Euro
UK Pound
Australia Dollar
Canada Dollar
Brazil Real
Mexico Peso
India Rupee

Antigua & Barbuda
Aruba
Barbados
Cayman Islands
Cuba
Curacao
Dominica

Grenada
Haiti
Jamaica
Saint Kitts and Nevis
Saint Lucia
Saint Vincent and the Grenadines

Belize
Costa Rica
El Salvador
Honduras
Nicaragua
Panama

Bahamas
Bermuda
Mexico

Argentina
Brazil
Chile
Guyana
Paraguay
Peru
Uruguay

What's New at LAHT?
Follow Us On Facebook
Follow Us On Twitter
Most Viewed on the Web
Popular on Twitter
Receive Our Daily Headlines


  HOME | Brazil (Click here for more)

Attorney: Proof of Rousseff’s Innocence Left Out of Brazil Senate Report
The suspended president is accused of various budget irregularities, including signing decrees that altered government budgets without congressional authorization and securing loans for the federal government from state-controlled banks

BRASILIA – Suspended Brazilian President Dilma Rousseff’s defense team said on Wednesday that the rapporteur of the special Senate committee on impeachment, who has recommended that she be permanently removed from office, omitted evidence that would clearly show her innocence.

Antonio Anastasia let his emotions get the better of him and ignored a series of documents that would dispel the accusations against Rousseff, her lead attorney, Jose Eduardo Cardozo, told the Senate’s impeachment committee.

Rousseff, who was suspended from office on May 12, is accused of various budget irregularities, including signing decrees that altered government budgets without congressional authorization and securing loans for the federal government from state-controlled banks.

Anastasia presented his final report on the case on Tuesday, concluding that Rousseff was directly responsible for those crimes and that the series of irregularities amounted to an “attack on the constitution” and warranted removal from office.

But Cardozo said Anastasia had ignored a report by the federal Attorney General’s Office that concluded that, despite budget management irregularities by her administration, Rousseff had committed no criminal offense.

He said Anastasia also had only partially cited a second report prepared by Senate experts that found Rousseff had not had a direct role in the failure to repay state-controlled banks in a timely manner for funds they had advanced to her administration.

Rousseff’s opponents say those delayed repayments amounted to loans to finance federal government spending, which is illegal in Brazil.

The impeachment committee will vote Thursday on Anastasia’s report, which is expected to be approved by a clear majority.

The full Senate will then decide in a vote scheduled for Aug. 9 whether Rousseff’s case should go to trial in the upper house.

A simple majority of 41 votes is needed to accept the case, after which the Supreme Court would have to schedule the trial, which would likely begin on Aug. 29 and last five days.

A vote to permanently remove Rousseff from the presidency – possibly on Sept. 2 – would require the support of two-thirds of the Senate, or 54 upper-house lawmakers.

If that happens, her former vice president, interim President Michel Temer, would serve out her term through the end of 2018.

 

Enter your email address to subscribe to free headlines (and great cartoons so every email has a happy ending!) from the Latin American Herald Tribune:

 

Copyright Latin American Herald Tribune - 2005-2019 © All rights reserved