Searchlight takes risks to the STF and exposes obstacles to control – 07/22/2023 – Power

The spotlight on ministers of the STF (Supreme Federal Court) due to episodes outside the case records led to wear and tear on the Judiciary in recent days and exposed obstacles in the control and supervision of the magistrates who are part of the highest court in the country.

In a span of just four days, between July 12th and 15th, Luís Roberto Barroso, Alexandre de Moraes and Gilmar Mendes entered the spotlight and sparked the resumption of discussions about the politicization of the court, igniting attacks against it and questions about its impartiality.

Establishing means to deal with the public performance of STF ministers is still a challenge, according to experts interviewed by the Sheet.

The top of the Judiciary hierarchy does not have a control body similar to the function exercised by the CNJ (National Council of Justice) in relation to the judiciary in general.

Thus, paths that involve establishing rules or sanctions, for example, would depend on the court’s own control over its members.

In addition, there are those who point to the need for greater detailing of the rules of impediment and suspicion as a way of constraining the performance of ministers in the public arena.

The Federal Senate has competence to evaluate impeachment requests from STF ministers, but the punishment is seen by specialists as a drastic measure that would not apply to the questioned conducts.

After members of the Supreme Court were the main target of attacks throughout the government of Jair Bolsonaro (PL), including speeches and actions that culminated in the January 8 attacks, recent episodes ended up giving ammunition to critics of members of the court.

Minister Barroso was the target of criticism after a speech at a UNE (National Union of Students) event on the 12th in which he stated that “we defeated Bolsonarism”. The speech was condemned by the president of the Senate, Rodrigo Pacheco (PSD-MG), and resulted in an impeachment request led by Bolsonaro allies.

Gilmar Mendes mocked the impeached federal deputy Deltan Dallagnol (Podemos-PR), stating that the former attorney could “found a church”. The statement took place on Saturday (15) at an online event by Prerogativas, a group of lawyers who are critical of Lava Jato and who supported Lula’s candidacy for the Planalto.

Moraes, in turn, was the target of hostilities on the 14th at Rome airport. Despite being a victim, the developments had negative repercussions after the revelation that the organizers of the event in which he had participated in Italy included a business group condemned in Federal Court to pay BRL 55 million in collective moral damages for disclosing an alleged “early treatment” against Covid-19.

In addition, the PF investigation, which investigates an aggression against his son, raised questions about its proportionality after including a search and seizure at the suspects’ home.

The Lula government (PT) announced this Friday (21) a project to punish crimes against democracy, providing for up to 40 years in prison for those who attempt against the lives of the presidents of the Powers and members of the Supreme Court, with the aim of altering the democratic constitutional order.

Rubens Glezer, professor at FGV Direito SP and coordinator of the research group Supremo em Pauta, considers that a change in the way STF ministers communicate is important and argues that the court itself takes the initiative, institutionalizing the decision.

“Today there is a paradigm in which each minister decides how he wants to communicate”, he says, which includes presence on social networks, attendance at events and interviews in the package.

For Glezer, it would be important for ministers to establish some form of self-restraint, under the understanding that, if they themselves do not limit their powers and freedoms, other political actors will do so —which, in his view, tends to lead to exaggerated results.

In this sense, the very presentation of impeachment requests against ministers, as well as eventual legislative reforms altering the powers of the court, would be tools available to external forces for retaliation.

On the other hand, the debate about the existence of a controlling body that could punish ministers would fall into practically insoluble questions, such as who would control this other body, given that the STF is the highest body of the Judiciary.

When judging the constitutionality of the creation of the CNJ, which has the power to issue resolutions and sanction judges, the Supreme Court decided that it was not under the authority of the body.

In the last elections, for example, different magistrates were targeted by the council for posts on social networks. The Constitution forbids judges to “dedicate themselves to party-political activity”.

Juliana Cesario Alvim, professor of law at UFMG and Central European University, considers that the establishment of norms that regulate the public performance of ministers, such as a code of conduct, would be an important step, both in terms of declarations, but especially for sponsored events.

The professor understands that the court itself can lead this process, collectively thinking about a solution, and emphasizes the importance of the measure in the context of attacks.

“This context makes this debate even more urgent, in order to protect the institution itself”, she says, stressing that it is important to differentiate attacks from criticisms of decisions, such as those made by academia and the press.

UFSCar (Federal University of São Carlos) professor Fabiana Luci de Oliveira also considers that it is necessary to deal with what she sees as an excessive expression of opinion by ministers in relation to cases and issues that will possibly be judged by the court itself. She has, however, caveats to the creation of more rules.

“It’s hard for us to want ministers to be completely absent from the public debate”, she says.

For Fabiana, who researches the Supreme Court and is leader of the Center for Studies in Law, Justice and Society, a possible path would be to make the causes of suspicion more explicit and detailed.

Similarly, André Rosilho, a lawyer and professor of administrative law at FGV, is skeptical about creating more rules. “It seems to me that it is a more cultural problem, which would have to be solved in another way.”

He also understands that more objective rules than the current ones on cases that would generate suspicion and impeachment of magistrates could be more effective.

“If the norm is more precise, he ends up being more embarrassed in, occurring that situation, to declare himself impeded”, he says.

---

Recent cases in which ministers were in the spotlight

Luis Roberto Barroso

What: Speech seen as party-political by the opposition
When: July 12th
Where: Congress of the UNE (Congress of the National Union of Students), in Brasilia
Context: The minister said the phrase “we defeated Bolsonarism” in a public event. The speech was a reaction to screams and boos from the students, who protested against Barroso’s presence.
Phrase: “We defeated censorship, we defeated torture, we defeated Bolsonarism to allow democracy and the free manifestation of all people”
Reaction: Parliamentarians led by allies of Jair Bolsonaro (PL) filed an impeachment request against the minister in the Senate on Wednesday (19)

Gilmar Mendes

What: Minister mocked the impeached federal deputy Deltan Dallagnol (Podemos-PR)
When: July 15th
Where: online event by Prerogativas, a group of lawyers who are critical of Lava Jato and who supported Lula’s candidacy for the Planalto Palace
Context: Gilmar said that Deltan could already “open a church”, citing the financial support that the former deputy claims to have received from supporters after the impeachment
Phrase: “These days I saw Dallagnol saying that when he left the Chamber and was on the plane, Pix started to rain. It’s the new contact with spirituality, that of money. Surely he can found a church”
Reaction: Deltan accused the minister of religious intolerance

Alexandre de Moraes

What: Magistrate and family members are the target of hostility at Rome airport. Despite being a victim, the developments had negative repercussions after the revelation about the organizers of the event in which he had participated in Italy
When: July 14th
Where: Rome International Airport, Italy
Context: The minister reported cursing against him and family members and an aggression against his son. The accused family denies the offenses and says there was a misunderstanding without political motivation. As for the event in which he participated, among the organizers were a business group condemned by the Federal Court to pay BRL 55 million in collective moral damages for disclosing an alleged “early treatment” against Covid-19
Phrase: The minister would have been called a “bandit”, “communist” and “bought”, according to the investigation
Reaction: The opening of an investigation by the PF and the search and seizure operation at the suspected family’s home were the target of criticism from specialists