Congress evaluates Zanin with a series of attacks on the STF – 06/20/2023 – Politics

The National Congress has already had at least 69 PECs (proposed amendments to the Constitution) to try to change the rules for appointment to the STF (Federal Supreme Court). For specialists, most of the proposals show political disputes without concern for the court.

The report identified 40 PECs in the Chamber of Deputies since 1995 and another 29 in the Senate, since 1998, to change Article 101 of the Charter. It is in this device that the age requirements –minimum of 35 and maximum of 70–, notorious legal knowledge and unblemished reputation are set out.

It is up to the President of the Republic to choose the name and indicate it, and the Senate to decide on its approval.

This Wednesday (21), the House will hold a sabbatical at the Constitution and Justice Commission and then vote on President Lula’s (PT) nominee to fill Ricardo Lewandowski’s vacancy. The expectation is that lawyer Cristiano Zanin will be approved easily – after going through the CCJ, an absolute majority of votes from senators (41 out of 81) in plenary is enough for the nomination to be ratified.

Regarding the PECs analyzed in Congress to change the rules for appointment to the STF, 6 are still pending, all in the initial phase.

Among the Chamber’s proposals with this content, mapped from research initiated in Master in Data Journalism at Insper, there are four that are still in progress, in which others of similar content were attached. The texts seek to share the presidential prerogative by choosing with Congress and other bodies, in addition to establishing that ministers must come from specific careers, such as the judiciary.

The two themes are the most recurrent among all the proposals already presented, many of which try to change more than one rule. The attempt to change responsibility for nomination is mentioned in 39 PECs, while rules on profiling appear in another 38.

In the Senate, two proposals from 2019 are still being processed, the first year of the Jair Bolsonaro (PL) government, which was marked by attacks on members of the STF. One tries to create an eight-year term for the court and the other seeks to divide the prerogative of choice between the president, Senate and House.

Among the authors of the texts are politicians from different ideological spectrums, such as the former deputy and president of the PL, Valdemar Costa Neto, the former deputy and minister of Justice in the Lula government, Flávio Dino, and the former senator and former president Fernando Collor.

Dino’s text was presented in 2009, during Lula’s second government, and suggests an 11-year term with a three-year quarantine after leaving the court. He also proposed dividing the Powers by appointment and adopting the triple list model. The PEC authored by today’s minister was attached to another one of similar content.

Only one proposal to amend Article 101 has been approved to date. PEC 32/2021, by then federal deputy Cacá Leão, was enacted in 2022, raising the maximum age for nomination from 65 to 70 years.

“It is important to observe the timing of these proposals and public discussions on the subject. It is worth remembering that this PEC was approved in the crisis by the nomination of Mendonça. Bolsonaro negotiated with the base to expand the possibilities in the case of [André] Mendonça being barred”, says professor of political science at UFMG (Federal University of Minas Gerais) Marjorie Marona.

At the time, the Sheet showed that the articulation for the approval of the text was headed by the mayor, Arthur Lira (PP-AL), to favor quoted names, such as the former presidents of the STJ (Superior Court of Justice), Otávio Noronha and Humberto Martins.

The frequency of presentation of proposals intensifies from Lula’s second term onwards, which UFSCar (Federal University of São Carlos) professor Fabiana Luci de Oliveira attributes to the relevance that the Supreme Court acquires from the monthly allowance scandal, revealed in 2005 and judged from 2012 by the court.

The peak occurs in the government of Dilma Rousseff (PT), when 31 texts are presented, the majority trying to establish the use of lists for the choice. There are also proposals to set deadlines for steps to replace a minister.

Four of Dilma’s five choices were made in more than 90 days. The most time-consuming was that of Edson Fachin, announced in April 2015 to replace Joaquim Barbosa, who retired in July 2014.

In the 257 days that the STF remained short, six proposals were filed in the Senate. Among the perpetrators are deputies Cássio Cunha Lima and Marta Suplicy, who suggest establishing a crime of responsibility if the proposed deadlines are not followed.

In the same interval, then-deputy Eduardo Cunha, who in early 2015 would become president of the Chamber and later a central figure in the impeachment of Dilma, presented a PEC to increase the number of ministers to 15, share the power of appointment, limit the maximum age admission to 55 years and establish eight-year terms for the court.

Professor of political science at USP, Rogério Arantes recalls that it was in 2015 that Congress approved an amendment to another article of the Constitution raising the compulsory retirement age of STF ministers to 75 years, which would limit the choices to be made by Dilma.

Known as the PEC da cane, the proposal was once again debated in the Chamber in the Bolsonaro government. Articulated by Lira, deputies sought to annul the change and return to the original retirement rule at age 70, in an attempt to increase the number of nominations to be made by the then president.

Arantes claims that the STF was wrong in not acting to prevent the approval of the text, giving Congress a bad signal that it is possible to change rules that affect the court, which he assesses as worrying.

For political scientist Luciano Da Ros, professor at UFSC (Federal University of Santa Catarina), politicization will always be an element of choices for bodies that play a political role, as is the case of the Supreme Court.

He considers that raising the minimum age for nomination and trying to avoid choices that are extremely close to the president at the time, in the case of Cristiano Zanin, would be welcome changes to preserve the court’s image.

Professor at FGV Direito SP and coordinator of the research group Supremo em Pauta, Rubens Glezer says that the attempt to take away the power of appointment of the president is a mistake. As weaknesses of the current model, he points out the lack of deadlines and the participation of civil society.

Glezer also believes that limiting the nomination to a career would be misguided.

“Being a minister of the STF is not like being a minister of the STJ or a judge of first or second instance. What exists are competences that are important for this function and the debate about the professional trajectory that the person has to have is obscured”, he says .

Professor Marjorie Marona (UFMG) states that the Brazilian model is similar to that of other Latin American countries and does not see the need to change it, adding that “reforms carried out in times of crisis do not give good results”.

For Fabiana Luci (UFSCar), establishing clearer rules for suspecting ministers would already be a way to contribute to the Supreme Court without changing the constitutional text.