CNJ has a majority against limiting judges at events – 09/22/2023 – Power

On the eve of the end of Minister Rosa Weber’s administration, the CNJ (National Council of Justice) formed a majority on Tuesday (19) —8 votes to 5— to reject the creation of a resolution that intended to give more transparency to the activity of judges and allow greater control over the participation of judges in events sponsored by private entities.

In a previous session, the rapporteur, Luiz Philippe Vieira de Mello, had presented a draft resolution to the plenary. The national inspector of justice, Luis Felipe Salomão, requested a review. The trial was resumed, and he presented the vote, opening the divergence. He was accompanied by seven other counselors. The only thing missing is Rosa, president of the body, whose vote is insufficient to reverse the result.

The proposed resolution targeted by the trial establishes, among other obligations, that judges must maintain a public agenda, made available online by the courts, and annually report asset variations that exceed 40% of the remuneration in the previous year.

In 2016, on the recommendation of then-president Ricardo Lewandowski, the CNJ made confidential the fees paid to magistrates for lectures at the invitation of state administrations, associations and private companies.

At the end of the last session, the topic ended up overshadowed by the discussion on the policy of alternating gender when filling vacancies for the second instance of the Judiciary, after the tributes to Rosa for her work in the STF (Supreme Federal Court) and the CNJ.

The minister does not attend seminars sponsored by private groups. Salomão is president of the Editorial Board of the magazine “Justiça & Cidadania”, which organizes events for judges in resorts and luxury hotels in the country and abroad.

Salomão disagreed with the rapporteur, Vieira de Mello, as he understood that there are already enough regulations to exercise this control. “We cannot create grounds for impediment and suspicion, other than those that exist in law,” he said.

Vieira de Mello maintained that “the regulations are not sufficient to guarantee the credibility of the Judiciary”. He cited reports dealing with these events.

“The moment I participate in an activity that is financed by a private company, I am having the opportunity to be close to the party, [oportunidade] that the other party will not have”, said the rapporteur.

According to him, informing the courts “who pays for the tickets, accommodation in luxury hotels and many other things”, is a protection to avoid doubts about the magistrate’s procedures.

Salomão said that the Judiciary was considered a “black box”. According to him, “today, judges have opened up to participating in academic events, which is also an item to be considered in terms of transparency.”

“Our participation in events concerns exclusively institutional and scientific matters.”

“I think that terms such as ‘conflicts of interest’ should be removed from the resolution,” said the magistrate. “If the magistrate does not receive remuneration for participating in the event, there is no need to talk about an incentive to make decisions aimed at benefiting anyone.”

Vieira de Mello stated that “the concept of conflict of interest was extracted from the Bangalore Principles [elaborados por grupo ligado à ONU e que trata da conduta dos magistrados]”. He said that, in many countries, people were losing trust in the Judiciary.

The rapporteur welcomed suggestions from magistrates’ associations, but recalled that the Constitution prohibits judges from receiving aid or contributions from individuals, public or private entities. The only exception to the remuneration of judges, in addition to judicial activity, is the position of professor.

According to him, this is not the case with internet courses, some with the participation of the magistrate’s relatives, “a way of bringing in income”.

“What is academic?” he asked. “As a counselor, this situation caused me great anguish.” The rapporteur said that he was director of a national judicial school, and “that these schools have their own funds to sponsor the best teachers”.

Salomão voted to reject the draft resolution, leaving open the possibility that the CNJ Operational Efficiency, Infrastructure and People Management Commission will formulate a new proposal.

Salomão was accompanied by advisors Mauro Martins, Richard Pae Kim, Márcio Freitas, João Paulo Schoucair, Marcos Vinicius Jardim, Marcello Terto and Luiz Fernando Bandeira de Mello Filho.

Vieira de Mello was accompanied by counselors Salise Sanchotene, Jane Granzoto, Giovanni Olsson and Mário Goulart Maia.

Mauro Martins said he was afraid of “bureaucratization”. He thinks that there is no generalization of the problem of events. Bandeira de Mello stated that the resolution “advances in creating suspicion and impediments”.

“I don’t think financing an event generates suspicion,” he said.

Giovanni Olsson confirmed the need to advertise the gains and advantages of events promoted by private entities. “We are not dealing with procedural issues, but ethics. The point here is not control, but transparency,” he said.

Márcio Freitas said he viewed the resolution with “strangeness”. For him, receiving gifts “is an almost abstract topic”, and receiving invitations to events is something distant for a judge in the first instance.

After announcing the result of the vote, Rosa suspended the trial. “The trial will continue with my vote, or with the vote of the [próximo] president. The topic is very relevant.”