Lira defends reviewing the list of those who can question the constitutionality of laws in the STF

The president of the Chamber of Deputies, Arthur Lira (PP-AL), defended this Tuesday (19) that it is necessary to review the list of those who can propose direct actions of unconstitutionality (ADI) in the Federal Supreme Court (STF). Lira stated that it is necessary to “raise the bar a little” for people who can challenge laws approved by Congress.

“The ideological dispute interferes with the autonomy of the Legislative Branch in drafting the law,” said Lira during an event promoted by the group Esfera Brasil. “Congress is nothing more than Brazilian representation, with a widely discussed subject. It is not a party with a single parliamentarian that will demand an ADI”, she highlighted.

At the beginning of January this year, Lira defended Congress’s competence to legislate on any subject. He stated, in an interview with TV Camerathat this “does not allow other Powers to deliberate on the issue”, even if Parliament “decides not to legislate”. Since last year, deputies and senators have questioned what they consider to be alleged interference by the Court in issues such as the time frame for the demarcation of indigenous lands and the eventual decriminalization of drugs.

STF Minister Gilmar Mendes also participated in the event and highlighted that in some countries the prerogative to question the constitutionality of a law approved by Parliament is more restricted, reported the Chamber Agency. The Dean of the Court pointed out that the large number of ADIs means that the Supreme Court is accused of judicializing politics.

“In the past, only the Attorney General of the Republic could take direct action and, at that time, he did not do so. When the Constitution of 88 came, we expanded and went to the extreme”, said the minister. “The judicialization of politics comes from these provocations. The problem is that, when an ADI is filed, you cannot give up, and the question is resolved. And there is still the debate about monocratic decisions”, he highlighted.

The ADI is a provocation to the Supreme Court to analyze the possible unconstitutionality of a law, federal or state normative act. It can be filed by the President of the Republic, the presidents of the Senate, Chamber or Legislative Assemblies, the Brazilian Bar Association (OAB), the Attorney General of the Republic, political parties and national trade union entities.