Chamber declares the loss of mandate of Deltan Dallagnol

Brasilia DF) – The Chamber of Deputies declared this Tuesday (6) the loss of mandate of Deputy Deltan Dallagnol, decided by the Superior Electoral Court. The impeachment originated in a lawsuit filed by the National Mobilization Party (PMN) and the Brazil of Hope Federation (PT-PCdoB and PV).

The lawsuit argues that Dallagnol asked for his resignation from the position of public prosecutor while investigations were pending to investigate complaints about his conduct in Operation Lava Jato. These investigations could lead to one or more disciplinary administrative proceedings (PADs), which would render him ineligible if he were convicted.

The appointment of the substitute who will occupy Dallagnol’s vacancy still depends on a court decision, as there is a dispute between Itamar Paim (PL) and Luiz Carlos Hauly (Podemos).

In an official note, the Chamber of Deputies explains the chances of loss of mandate and clarifies its role in each one. See the note in full:

“The Federal Constitution provides, in its art. 55, two rites for cases of loss of parliamentary mandate.

In the first rite, applicable to cases of breach of decorum, final criminal conviction and violations of constitutional prohibitions (art. 55, items I, II and VI), it is incumbent upon the Chamber of Deputies to assess the merits and decide, by majority of the Plenary, on the loss of the mandate of the Deputy or of the Deputy (art. 55, § 2º).

In the event of decree of loss of mandate by the Electoral Justice (art. 55, item V), there is no decision on the merits or judgment by the Plenary of the House. The competence of the Chamber of Deputies, exercised by the Board of Directors under the terms of § 3 of art. 55 of the Federal Constitution, is to declare the loss of mandate. This is the case of Deputy Deltan Dallagnol.

In these hypotheses, the Chamber of Deputies follows the Board Act No. 37, of 2009, which specifies the rite that guarantees to know the decree of the Electoral Justice, evaluate the existence and enforceability of a judicial decision, hear the House magistrate and instruct the Board Director to declare the loss in constitutional terms.

Fundamentals

The hypotheses of loss of parliamentary mandate are provided for in article 55 of the Federal Constitution. In the same article, two distinct rites are defined for that loss to occur.

In the case of parliamentarians who commit the offenses listed in items I, II and VI (infringement of the prohibitions established in art. 54, breach of parliamentary decorum or criminal conviction that has become final), the loss of mandate will be decided by the Plenary of the Chamber of Deputies , by absolute majority, pursuant to § 2 of art. 55.

It is a political decision, in which the Plenary, in a sovereign manner, decides whether or not to lose the mandate, according to its analysis of the merits of the matter.

In the other hypotheses of loss of mandate, listed in items III to V of the same article (including, therefore, the case of loss of mandate decreed by the Electoral Justice – item V), it is incumbent upon the Board of the Chamber of Deputies, under the terms of § 3 of art. 55, just declare such loss, after only formal analysis of the decision of the Electoral Justice.

In this case, there is no need to speak of a decision by the Chamber of Deputies, but only a declaration of loss of mandate by the Bureau.

Within the scope of the Chamber of Deputies, the procedures to be observed in cases of loss of mandate provided for in items IV and V of the Federal Constitution are disciplined in the Act of the Board n. 37/2009.

According to art. 5 of the aforementioned Act of the Board, the analysis, within the scope of the Chamber of Deputies, will be restricted to the formal aspects of the judicial decision.

In this sense, it is reiterated that it is not up to the Chamber, or any of its bodies, to discuss the merits of the decision of the Electoral Court. Thus, it is not a case of the Chamber revoking a parliamentary mandate, but exclusively declaring the loss of mandate, as already decided by the Electoral Justice.

Following the procedures set forth in Board Act 37/2009, the communication from the Electoral Justice is sent to the House Internal Affairs (art. 1), which will send a copy to the deputy to which it refers and will set a deadline for its manifestation (art. 3). .

Once the defense is presented, the inspector prepares an opinion, which is forwarded to the Board of Directors to declare the loss of mandate.”

*With information from the Câmara de Notícias Agency

Read more:

Message from the Municipal Executive is delivered to the CMM to benefit permit holders

STF rejects another complaint it had accepted against Lira

President of the PL says that Moro and Dallagnol “will pay dearly”