Lula appointing Zanin to the STF overrides principles and affects the court, say experts – 03/11/2023 – Politics

The possible nomination of Cristiano Zanin, lawyer and friend of President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva (PT), to the STF (Federal Supreme Court) may violate the principle of impersonality and compromise the legitimacy of the court before society, evaluate representatives of the legal world heard by Sheet.

Zanin acted in the processes in which Lula was accused in the context of Operation Lava Jato, including the one that resulted in the PT’s arrest for 580 days in Curitiba. The actions were later annulled by the STF.

Recently, Lula referred to the lawyer as his friend and stated that no one would be surprised if he referred him to the court.

“Today, if I nominated Zanin, everyone would understand that he deserved to be nominated. Technically he has grown in an extraordinary way, he is my friend, he is my companion, as others are my companions, but I never nominated him because of that”, he said in an interview with journalist Reinaldo Azevedo at BandNews.

The statement contradicted the PT’s own speeches throughout the 2022 election campaign. In an interview with the Jornal Nacional bench, in the first round, Lula said: “I don’t want a friend in any institution.”

A similar statement was made in the Folha/UOL/Band/TV Cultura debate, in the second round.

“It is not prudent, it is not democratic for a President of the Republic to want to have Supreme Court justices as friends. I think that the Supreme Court has to be chosen for competence, for curriculum, and not for friendship”, he said.

The next seat on the STF will open with the retirement of Minister Ricardo Lewandowski, who will turn 75 in May this year.

Zanin’s proximity to the president is mentioned as a concern among specialists interviewed by the Sheet.

“I believe that it is not impossible for there to be exemption when we have ideology and a very great tendency towards personal alignment involved. It distorts the precept of the judiciary of impersonality, which is a constitutional principle”, says Luciana Berardi, member of the constitutional law commission of the OAB- SP and professor at Escola Paulista de Direito.

Rubens Glezer, professor at FGV Direito São Paulo and coordinator of the research group Supremo em Pauta, says that Lula’s speech about Zanin is problematic and ambiguous.

“The president treats a public institution as a gift. Another interpretation is: ‘I’m going to put it there because it’s someone I’m absolutely aligned with and that’s what makes him worthy of the position.’ This is very similar to Bolsonaro, who wanted someone terribly. evangelical, who thought like him.”

Another concern expressed by teachers is in relation to the image of the court, at a time when the Judiciary is the target of mistrust and after attacks by the Bolsonarist right.

“The court is extremely relevant and has to convey the image that it is the guarantor of the Constitution, no matter who appoints it and where the decisions go”, says political scientist Maria Tereza Sadek, senior professor at USP. “The presidential democratic regime involves the idea of ​​an independent judiciary that acts in accordance with the law.”

Professor at the Faculty of Law of the University of Pernambuco, Flávia Santiago Lima says that the Supreme Court’s power to overturn laws approved by Congress makes the issue even more delicate.

“The court needs to be impersonal and neutral, because that’s what legitimizes it and eventually even invalidates the popular will.”

Oscar Vilhena, professor at FGV Direito SP and columnist for Sheetreinforces that the Supreme Court plays a crucial role in the defense of democracy, but brings up the issue of diversity.

“It would be essential to increase the number of women and black people in the court. Lula should use his prerogative to increase the representation of Brazilian society in the court”, he says.

In recent days, legal entities, ministers in the Lula government and STF minister Edson Fachin have publicly manifested themselves in favor of appointing a black magistrate to the court.

The appointment of a minister with close ties to the President of the Republic is nothing new, but, if confirmed, Zanin’s would be the only case in the current composition in which this link is strictly personal.

The other cases are those of André Mendonça, former attorney general of the Union in the Jair Bolsonaro administration (PL); Alexandre de Moraes, former Minister of Justice under Michel Temer (MDB); Dias Toffoli, also former Lula’s AGU; and Gilmar Mendes, who held the same post in the FHC government.

President of the AMB (Association of Magistrates of Brazil) at the time of Gilmar Mendes’ nomination, Cláudio Baldino Maciel assesses that the current situation differs from that of the nominee by FHC.

He remembers that the biggest annoyance in the class with Gilmar was the use of confrontational expressions, such as “judicial asylum”.

In relation to Zanin, the issue of impersonality also weighs heavily in his view.

“He was President Lula’s lawyer at a very dramatic moment, one wonders if there isn’t a very close personal relationship,” he says, adding that the Senate should be more rigorous in its analysis of nominees.

The Constitution establishes few criteria for someone to occupy the court: being over 35 years old, unblemished reputation and notorious legal knowledge. There is no legal definition of what questions must be considered to know if such requirements have been met.

In order to carry out the rite, the nomination must then pass through the Senate’s scrutiny, with hearings and votes in the CCJ (Constitution and Justice Commission) and plenary, where approval occurs by an absolute majority, at least 41 votes of the 81 senators, which has always happened.

There is no certainty about what Zanin’s role would be in the processes in which Lula or the government are a party.

The codes of Civil Procedure and Criminal Procedure establish that the judge is suspected (that is, he should not participate in the trial) when he is an “intimate friend” or enemy of one of the parties. Other criteria are having received gifts or having advised one of the parties.

For Berardi, there would be an ethical conflict in the nomination of Zanin, like what happened with the nomination of Toffoli and Mendonça.

“More and more the constitutional requirements are being left aside and the nominations are being guided essentially in political terms, like a caress. This can also be seen in the nominations of 12 wives for the TCUs (Courts of Accounts of the Union) of the states.”

For Glezer (FGV), the constitutional rules are minimalist.

“What is most impressive is that with each nomination there is not an essential debate: what are the qualities we want from the candidates? What kind of career do they need, what kind of profile and trajectory?”, he says.

Sadek (USP) states that, among the aspects that need to be better debated, is the length of stay in the court, since there are ministers appointed when they are still young for the position and who can remain for decades in the Supreme Court.

Sought by the report, Zanin declined to comment. In private conversations, the lawyer has said that he does not go to Lula’s house nor the PT to his, that he is a defender of the Justice system and that what created distrust in relation to the Judiciary was Lava Jato.

UPCOMING RETIREMENTS AT THE SUPREME

GOVERNMENT 2023-2026
Ricardo Lewandowski (May.23)
Rosa Weber (Oct.23)

GOVERNMENT 2027-2030
Luiz Fux (Apr.28)
Carmen Lúcia (Apr.29)
Gilmar Mendes (Dec.30)

GOVERNMENT 2031-2034
Edson Fachin (Feb.33)
Luís Roberto Barroso (mar.33)

GOVERNMENT 2039-2042
Dias Toffoli (Nov.42)

GOVERNMENT 2043-2046
Alexandre de Moraes (Dec.43)

GOVERNMENT 2047-2050
Kassio Nunes Marques (May 47)
André Mendonça (Dec.47)