Entities go to the STF against amnesty for parties – 07/22/2023 – Panel

Educafro, together with Rede and Fenaq (National Federation of Quilombola Associations) filed on Thursday (20) an unconstitutionality action in the STF (Federal Supreme Court) against the amendment that granted amnesty to parties for irregularities in electoral accounts, enacted last year.

The interpellation, which asks for the annulment of the pardon text for non-compliance with financial quotas for black people and women in the 2020 election, could jeopardize discussions of the new Amnesty PEC, approved at the CCJ (Commission on Constitution and Justice) of the Chamber of Deputies in May.

The lawsuit argues that the amnesty contravenes the 1988 constitutional text and the Inter-American Convention against Racism, signed by Brazil in 2013 and ratified (turned into law) in 2021. It also claims that the amendment perpetuates disrespect for TSE (Superior Electoral Court) rules.

According to Frei David, coordinator of Educafro, the request was considered the most efficient in facing the action of the parties to make financial quotas for blacks and women something inefficient in the Brazilian legal system.

He stated that the unconstitutionality of the previous acts is a way out to prevent new measures against the advances obtained for the claims. In addition, he highlighted the effect of constraint on the acronyms, and recalled that the Amnesty PEC is being supported by Lula’s PT to Jair Bolsonaro’s PL.

“We have no doubts that the STF is very well prepared to judge and repair these injustices, which were systematically being practiced by colonels from the right, left and center, from the Chamber and the Senate”, declared Friar David.

Despite the attempt to create a precedent to prevent the approval of the Amnesty PEC, the proposed unconstitutionality action may generate legal uncertainty, according to the visiting professor of public law at the University of Manchester, in England, Rafael Valim.

Valim stated that there are a number of theories in law arguing that, if a norm is declared unconstitutional, a second rule edited with the same principles would also be considered incompatible with the 1988 Magna Carta —this would be the case of the PEC currently under discussion—, including for seeking to circumvent the Supreme Court’s decision.

The professor emphasizes, however, the possibility of the action causing uncertainty because, according to him, it addresses an intertemporal right, that is, there is a conflict between the annulment of the amnesty and its consequences for the parties, which have already used forgiveness for their own benefit.

“As you remove this norm from the system in theory, its concrete effects are removed, but at the same time, there are consolidated situations, concrete situations that are difficult to resolve, unless the supreme itself modulates the effects of a possible decision for unconstitutionality”, said Valim.

Regarding amnesty in general, he said he saw the filing of the action as a way of reaffirming quotas for black people and women within electoral jurisprudence. “It is a way of honoring the authority of the TSE norms”, added the professor.

The Amnesty PEC was signed by 184 deputies, including government leaders José Guimarães (PT-CE) and opposition leaders Carlos Jordy (PL-RJ).

The text prohibits any punishment for electoral illegalities committed until the enactment of the proposal, including disrespect for the minimum transfer of funds to women and blacks in elections, in addition to allowing the return of corporate financing to settle debts prior to 2015.

In the mini-electoral reforms approved by the National Congress in the year before each election, it has been common to loosen rules and supervision, which includes pardoning those who break the law — but so far nothing has been approved with the magnitude that the current amnesty proposal foresees.

After approval by the CCJ, the Chamber postponed to the beginning of August the installation of the special commission that will analyze the proposal, initially for the last 12th, but it ended up not happening due to the holding, at the same time, of a session of Congress to analyze presidential vetoes.

PRESENT LINK: Did you like this text? Subscriber can release five free hits of any link per day. Just click the blue F below.