The attorney general is not the Public Prosecutor's Office, and is not greater than the institution

Brazil is living through an institutional crisis of exceptional gravity, the article argues, as allegations, suspected abuses of power and accusations of improper conduct spread across the Republic's institutions.

The public is left stunned by the steady flow of accusations, while the system of checks and balances has failed to calm tensions or resolve the situation. Sweeping the matter under the rug, the article says, cannot be the answer.

At the center of the argument is a basic principle of a democratic state governed by law: no one stands above the law, and everyone must face the same duties and legal standards. When authorities have a legal obligation to act, the bodies responsible for defending legality must do so. Failure to act when they could and should may amount to a functional violation or even a crime.

That raises a central question: how should the Public Prosecutor's Office respond when a possible abuse of power comes from the state itself, or when one of its members may have committed a disciplinary offense or crime? The article points to Article 127 of Brazil's Constitution, which defines the institution as permanent and essential to the state's judicial function, with responsibility for defending the legal order, the democratic system and protected social and individual interests.

Defending democracy, it says, means defending the people who transfer power to the state through elections. The state holds that power in trust and must use it for society's benefit, not for the benefit of those who temporarily occupy positions of authority. The attorney general, therefore, is not identical with the institution and cannot place himself above it.

“

The Public Prosecutor's Office is a permanent institution, essential to the state's judicial function, responsible for defending the legal order, the democratic system and protected social and individual interests.