Senators charge Zanin about proximity to Lula and judicial activism

The senators of the Constitution and Justice Commission (CCJ) of the Senate took advantage of the lawyer Cristiano Zanin’s sabbath, appointed to the Federal Supreme Court (STF), to firm up positions and demand commitments from him. Most explored the issue of impartiality and the strained relations of the STF with other powers, especially with the Legislature.

Asked by Senator Alessandro Vieira (PSDB-SE) whether he would guarantee exemption in relation to President Lula, who contradicted interviews given as a candidate when he nominated a friend for the Supreme Court, Zanin responded succinctly. “All the processes in which I acted as a lawyer, I will not be able to judge in the Supreme Court. This is clear and I will have to follow the impediment”, he said.

Regarding future cases that eventually involve the president, he declared that he will value impartiality and defend the credibility of the Court. “The position of minister of the STF must act impartially in trials, as he will be on the side of the law. Unlike the lawyer, who has the mission of defending his client, the magistrate has to listen to both sides with equidistance and act with balance”, he said. And as for the pressure of public opinion, he said it is the role of the judge to be guided only by the records, which may even go against expectations.

Questioned about the advances of the Judiciary regarding the competences of the other powers of the Republic, Zanin reaffirmed his guaranteeist profile, which would be supported by the Brazilian Constitution, considered a model of guaranteeism.

“The harmonic relationship between the powers depends on the observance of the constitutional limits of the performance of each one”, he said. Regarding controversial monocratic decisions, he stated that the collegiate nature of the STF ends up imposing itself at the end of each case.

On the question of whether there are limits between interpretation and judicial activism, he tried to say that it is necessary to better define what activism is. In any case, he came out in defense of the role of legislator of the National Congress, criticizing the situations in which the STF went too far and filled legal gaps, usurping the attribution of the Chamber and the Senate.