The Expulsion of Eduardo Cunha: the Game of Brazilian Politics Continues

The Brazilian Legislature moved to vote on the expulsion of Eduardo Cunha, a former Speaker of the Chamber of Deputies, on September 12. The Legislature evicted Cunha from office by a vote of 450 to 10. From this point forward, the former Speaker can no longer participate in political office for eight years.

Cunha possessed a large degree of prominence on the stage of Brazilian politics. Along with Michel Temer of the Brazilian Democratic Movement Party (PMDB), who succeeded Dilma Rousseff as president after her impeachment, Cunha spearheaded the initiative to indict Rousseff herself and became widely regarded as a key figure in the anti-Rousseff movement.

Despite Cunha’s role in the impeachment of Rousseff, he himself stands under scrutiny for bribery and embezzlement charges. After his impeachment, Cunha no longer possesses any legal immunity and could be incarcerated if convicted of corruption. Ironically, Michel Temer propelled the vote to impeach his former ally and PMDB colleague despite their partnership to oust Rousseff.

Cunha’s impeachment comprises just one event in a long string of legal and political incidents revolving around corruption in Brazil. Amidst revelations that several Brazilian politicians had been complicit in embezzlement and bribery, public outcry has increased in recent months, leading to the dismissal or indictment of several public officials, including Rousseff. Her  party, the Brazilian Workers’ Party (PT), argues that the PMDB is merely exploiting corruption inquiries and the country’s poor economic conditions to obtain power for itself.

Aside from the power shifts occurring within the fabric of Brazilian politics, Cunha’s eviction highlights other underlying trends within the government.

According to The Economist, Cunha possibly knows of undisclosed corruption crimes committed by other officials, and could act as a whistleblower to expose these politicians. Although some Brazilians speculate he may try to exploit this knowledge to buffer the harshness of the penalties likely to be imposed upon him, Cunha himself vehemently disagrees with this strategy.

To some it may seem as if Cunha’s removal may have been a means of securing “loose ends.” Others believe that by associating Cunha with the country’s largest corruption scandal, Temer seeks to use him as a scapegoat to channel the Brazilian people’s dissatisfaction with the political system.

Temer’s actions reflect a shift in the means by which Brazil plans on suppressing corruption. Whereas in the Rousseff administration individual judges, watchdog elements, and those outside of the domain of the main government led the effort to dispense justice, it is now Temer’s presidency that is taking ownership of the effort in dismantling corruption. This move demonstrates that the government seeks to improve its tarnished standing amongst the Brazilian people by proving it can become an institution that can regain the trust of the constituency.

Despite the intents of the Temer administration, Cunha believes that he is the victim of power politics in the government, stating that “this was all a political game. In fact, there is an agenda… with the objective of impeaching me.” Cunha’s opponents, however, believe that Cunha’s removal is just one small step in the government’s effort to foster reconciliation with the Brazilian people. Jean Wyllys, an anti-Cunha legislator, went so far as to say, as reported by the New York Times, “It’s not me who says that Cunha is a criminal. It’s the prosecutor general of the republic in his indictment. And I agree with it.”