Secrecy of STF votes goes against the Constitution – 09/05/2023 – Power
[ad_1]
Making confidential the votes of the ministers of the STF (Supreme Federal Court), as defended by President Lula this Tuesday (5), does not follow the precepts of the Constitution.
The president defended during the live transmission that the votes are not disclosed. According to him, the dissatisfaction of the population with votes can generate insecurity for magistrates.
“For us not to create animosity, I think it was necessary to start thinking about whether this is not the way for us to change what is happening in Brazil. on the street, hanging out with his family, you know, because there’s a guy who didn’t like his decision”, he said.
“Society does not have to know how a Supreme Court justice votes. I don’t think the guy needs to know, the majority voted, no one needs to know. Because then everyone who loses gets angry, everyone who wins is happy,” he said. Squid.
According to Raphael Neves, a professor of constitutional law at Unifesp (Federal University of São Paulo), the STF’s internal regulations provide for public voting grounds. “There would have to be an amendment to the Court’s internal rules,” he says.
Publicity is also supported by laws that regulate actions by the Supreme Court and by the Constitution itself, says Neves. “There is a constitutional requirement to publicize these decisions.”
Ana Beatriz Presgrave, specialist in constitutional law and professor at UFRN (Federal University of Rio Grande do Norte), points out that secret voting is not possible under the current STF model.
According to her, although it is possible to discuss whether the model of deliberation should be public in Brazil, the model of individual voting of the ministers does not allow the secrecy of the votes.
Juliana Cesario, a professor at the Faculty of Law at UFMG (Federal University of Minas Gerais), states that Article 93 of the Federal Constitution points to the impossibility of secret ballots.
According to the article, Judiciary Power judgments must be public and with reasoned decisions, under penalty of nullity.
“It is crucial that society has access to the motivations for decisions. That is what gives legitimacy to the decisions of the Judiciary”, he says. “The justifications for decisions need to be known so that society can understand the basis on which a decision was taken.”
All judgments by the bodies of the Judiciary Power will be public, and all decisions will be substantiated, under penalty of nullity, and the law may limit the presence, in certain acts, to the parties themselves and their lawyers, or only to them, in cases where the preservation of the right to privacy of those interested in secrecy does not harm the public interest in information
For Vera Karam de Chueiri, professor of constitutional law at UFPR (Federal University of Paraná), Lula was unhappy with his statement.
“When President Lula says that votes should be confidential, he suggests a way that is not compatible with what our Constitution prescribes. The current constitutional and infra-constitutional format that regulates the decision of the STF does not allow the vote to be confidential”.
Lula made the statement in a context of criticism of the positioning of Cristiano Zanin, appointed by him to the STF in the first half of this year.
Zanin has received criticism from left-wing representatives due to conservative positions. Some of these votes were against the decriminalization of drug possession for personal use and against the classification of homotransphobia as a crime of racial injury.
[ad_2]
Source link
