Regarding the PL opposition reported by the São Paulo lawmaker, financial market participants warned Chamber of Commerce President Hugo Motta (Republican, PB) and Guilherme Delite (PP, SP).
In recent days, market heavyweights have sought out Mr. Motta and Mr. Delight to warn them about opposition proposals to include in the text the classification of criminal groups as terrorist organizations.
4 images
Close the modal.
1 out of 4
Guilherme Delight, Secretary of Public Security of the Government of São Paulo
Fabio Vieira/Metropole 2/4
Chamber of Commerce President Hugo Motta (R-PB) removed the publication following criticism.
Credit: Rafael Vieira/DP3/4
Minister of Justice and Public Security Ricardo Lewandowski
BrenoEsaki/Metropole @BrenoEsakiFoto4 / 4
Minister Gleij Hoffmann
Vinicius Schmidt/Metropole @vinicius.foto
Market watchers believe parity could cause funds and companies to withdraw investments from the country, potentially driving foreign capital into Brazil.
The president of the Chamber of Commerce and Industry and the rapporteur of PL Antifaction were warned that the law contains provisions that prohibit large funds and multinational companies from investing in countries that host terrorists.
The market’s warnings also reached members of the government’s economic team who oppose equality. The business community is concerned that the flight of foreign capital will have a negative impact on Brazil’s credit rating.
What is your opinion of Delight?
After the warning, Mr. Delight submitted an opinion that would not classify the sect as a terrorist organization in the strictest sense, but would equate the penalties for crimes committed by the sect with those for acts of terrorism.
However, the rapporteur has proposed changes to anti-terrorism laws to provide for equalization of this punishment, which has caused mistrust among government officials and financial markets.
Overall, Delight’s opinion classifies members of criminal organizations, paramilitary organizations, and private militias as terrorists, “regardless of reason or motive.”
“The first thing to note is that it is not a question of classifying criminal organizations, paramilitary organizations or private militias as ‘terrorist organizations’ in the strictest sense, but rather recognizing that certain acts carried out by these organizations produce social and political consequences comparable to acts of terrorism, and therefore justify equal criminal treatment in terms of severity and legal consequences,” Delight explains in the report.
About The Author
