:strip_icc()/s04.video.glbimg.com/x720/9074343.jpg)
[ad_1]
Four ministers of the Supreme Federal Court (STF) voted in favor of the possibility that the mayors of the Chamber, Rodrigo Maia (DEM-RJ), and Davi Alcolumbre (DEM-AP), stand for re-election to the command of the houses.
The sentence takes place in the virtual plenary session of the STF, a system in which the ministers present the votes remotely.
The STF analyzes a PTB share, which seeks to avoid re-election (see details below). Elections are expected to be held in early February.
The ministers, Gilmar Mendes (speaker), Dias Toffoli, Ricardo Lewandowski and Alexandre de Moraes, voted in favor of the possibility of re-election of Maia and Alcolumbre.
Minister Nunes Marques understood that reelection is only possible once, regardless of whether it is the same legislature or when changing from one legislature to another. In practice, the minister’s vote would prevent Maia’s re-election (already re-elected in 2019), but would authorize Alcolumbre’s.
STF starts trial on re-election of mayors and Senate
The PTB action was presented by the party to the Supreme Court in August. Chaired by former deputy Roberto Jefferson, an ally of President Jair Bolsonaro, the caption wants to avoid re-election to the commands of the Federal Senate and the Chamber of Deputies.
According to the acronym, the Constitution prohibits re-election to any position on the board of directors, responsible for commanding the two legislative chambers.
For the PTB, this prohibition should apply both to the same legislature and to different legislatures: Presidents serve for two-year terms.
Despite involving internal rules of the two Chambers and the Constitution, the discussion may impact specific cases: the succession of Rodrigo Maia (DEM-RJ) and Davi Alcolumbre (DEM-AP), presidents of the House and Senate, respectively.
New elections for the posts of president are scheduled for February next year. Maia, who has led the House since July 2016, says he is not a candidate for reelection. Alcolumbre seeks to obtain a favorable decision from the Supreme Court.
Throughout the process, both the Attorney General’s Office and the Attorney General’s Office, in the opinion of the Court, defended the autonomy of Congress to address the issue, that is, they understood that it is up to the Legislative Branch to resolve the dispute internally. .
“It is not up to the Judiciary, although through abstract control of the rules, to substitute the Legislative to define what the real meaning of the regulatory provision is. Such conduct represents an unequivocal affront to the principle of functional division of Power,” said the fiscal. General Augusto Aras.
