The article I’ve linked lists are least five reasons his actions are illegal, with the respective citations explaining why they are illegal. Just because you chose to ignore that, doesn’t make it unsubstantiated.
> He has an injunction that allows him to "censure" people and media
At least you admit Brazil is under a censorship regime. Dictatorships are always backed by the law.
By the way, any injunction that contradicts the constitution is by definition illegal.
The article I’ve linked lists are least five reasons his actions are illegal, with the respective citations explaining why they are illegal. Just because you chose to ignore that, doesn’t make it unsubstantiated.
> He has an injunction that allows him to "censure" people and media
At least you admit Brazil is under a censorship regime. Dictatorships are always backed by the law.
By the way, any injunction that contradicts the constitution is by definition illegal.