Brazil's cry for hope turns to dust as scandal surrounds ex-chief of staff

Antonio Palocci, the former chief of staff to the Brazilian president Dilma Rousseff, might be the latest example of how corruption beat hope.

Antonio Palocci, the former chief of staff to the Brazilian president Dilma Rousseff. AFP

Brazil's Workers Party took power in 2003 trumpeting the triumphant slogan Hope Beats Fear.

Eight years on, the once leftist party has transformed this continent-sized nation into an economic powerhouse and one that is reducing inequality at an unprecedented rate. But as it gets dragged into yet another tawdry scandal of its own making, a more appropriate slogan today might be Corruption Beat Hope.

The latest scandal surrounds Antonio Palocci, the former chief of staff to the president Dilma Rousseff and former confidante to her predecessor Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva, who stepped down last week.

A Brazilian newspaper revealed this month that Mr Palocci's personal wealth increased almost 20 times during the four years he served as a top ranking federal deputy in the party.

He made the money heading his own consultancy firm and the largest part of the windfall came in the two months between Ms Rousseff winning the election and taking power. Mr Palocci headed the transition team during that period.

Either his brain "is an extraordinary sponge, capable of absorbing vast quantities of knowledge at unprecedented speeds … or this is influence trafficking", wrote Clovis Rossi, a columnist for Folha de S.Paulo, the Sao Paulo newspaper that broke the news.

A talented former finance minister, Mr Palocci is no stranger to scandal.

One of Lula da Silva's most trusted colleagues - the former president once compared Mr Palocci to the country's most famous footballer, calling him "the Pele of ministers" - he was forced from office in 2006 after he was found guilty of lying to Congress about a government scheme to pay legislators for votes. The powerful minister tried to frame the humble janitor whose testimony exposed his contradictions but to no avail.

Mr Palocci spent some time in the political wilderness before being elected as a federal deputy for Sao Paulo state and it was at the end of that four-year term that he discovered his calling as a consultant.

After earning about 160,000 reals (Dh372,690) in 2006, the year it was set up, his firm made 20 million reals last year. Half of that came in the two months between Ms Rousseff being elected and her taking office. And yet this being Brazil, where politicians are almost expected to enrich themselves, Mr Palocci broke no rules.

He reported the earnings to the appropriate committees and did nothing to contravene house statutes. In fact, several other cabinet members are believed to front similar consultancy firms.

It could well be that the others got away with their double dealings because they are not as high-profile as Mr Palocci or they do not have as tarnished a reputation and are therefore less open to attacks.

But it could also be they were simply less barefaced about their operations. One reason this scandal made the front pages is not just that Mr Palocci made money from his privileged position, it is the huge amount he made and the speed in which he made it.

Looking at the bigger picture, even more shocking - and yet sadly predictable - is the cynicism with which the Workers' Party and its allies have sought to downplay the situation. Only one party member with a national reputation had the courage to criticise Mr Palocci's new-found wealth, the rest affirming he had done no wrong and had no case to answer.

That would be bad enough coming from any other Brazilian political party, most of which have no ideology other than to get elected and then rake in the profits. But the Workers Party, when it was formed in 1980, was a genuinely serious collection of intellectual, trade unionists and church leaders who put social justice at the core of their manifesto. This scandal is further confirmation it has become one more party of grubby opportunists.

That is particularly true of Mr Lula da Silva, a man who throughout his political life proudly maintained that he was not a career politician and that if he was elected president he would do things differently.

He promised a more ethical approach and given the way he had dragged himself out of poverty, fought heroically to end the country's military dictatorship and then stoically stood in opposition for many years, there was good reason to believe him.

But when push came to shove Mr Lula da Silva turned a blind eye to malfeasance inside his own inner circle and he reappeared last week touting the same line, advising Ms Rousseff to defend Mr Palocci and take whatever measures necessary to avoid the scandal spreading.

In the end, it might not be enough. One report suggests the federal government gave money to a "foundation" run by Mr Palocci's sister-in-law and police say they will investigate whether his consultancy earnings constitute "illicit enrichment".

One thing, however, is clear. The hope of 2003 has long gone. Corruption remains. The fear is that those elected to eradicate it also have their hands in the till.