:strip_icc()/s03.video.glbimg.com/x720/9074266.jpg)
[ad_1]
Minister Gilmar Mendes, of the Federal Supreme Court (STF), voted in favor of a legal thesis that, in practice, enables the re-election of the current mayors, Rodrigo Maia (DEM-RJ), and the Senate, Davi Alcolumbre (DEM -AP).
Rapporteur of an action by the PTB that seeks to avoid re-election, Mendes understood – in a trial in the virtual plenary session of the Supreme Court, which began at 12:00 hours on Friday (4) – that the Constitution allows a re-election for the commanders of the House and the Senate.
According to the vote of the minister, this understanding should guide the election for the tables of the two Houses of Congress from 2023.
For next year, when there will be elections to elect the presidents of the Legislature in the 2021-2022 biennium, Mendes considered reelection or reelection to the same position of the current mayors and senators possible.
The virtual plenary trial is a format by which ministers present their votes over the Internet, without the need for a face-to-face session or by videoconference. If there are no pending requests that interrupt the virtual plenary, the analysis ends on the 11th.
I don’t vote, Gilmar Mendes He said the Supreme Court will not decide the outcome of the House and Senate elections. According to the minister, “it is the parliamentary majority that defines who“ speaks for the Chamber ”.
“It is clarified, therefore, that the STF is not deciding the result of the next elections to the Presidencies of the Legislative Chambers, a matter that obviously falls under the most absolute deliberative sovereignty of the actors in Congress,” he wrote.
Mendes affirmed that the Supreme Court is deciding only on the constitutionality of the provisions of the regiment that deal with the composition of the Board of the Chambers of the National Congress.
The minister said that Congress should have autonomy to analyze its internal affairs.
“Parliament must enjoy a space for organizational conformation in accordance with the challenges posed by the complexity of the political dynamics. In fact, certain situations and de facto situations may not only be considered desirable, but also demand that re-election be prohibited for it. position that the Bureau may be the object of exception: provided that the House of the National Congress is necessary for the purposes of preserving its constitutional autonomy. ”
The rapporteur affirmed that there is no margin for the interference of the Judicial Power in the autonomy of the Legislative.
“At the same time, considering that the prohibition of re-election does not constitute a structural constitutional precept, it is not for the Judiciary to interfere in the scope of the aforementioned norm.”
The minister stressed that “the concern that can be raised against the perpetuation of political agents in central positions of power is indefinitely republican” and voted in favor of establishing the limit of a single re-election or re-election.
The minister Toffoli days He also voted this Friday, accompanying the speaker.
The minister Nunes marques He understood that reelection is only possible once, regardless of whether it is the same legislature or when passing 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.
“If the President of the Republic can be reelected only once – a corollary of the democratic and republican principle – due to symmetry and the duty of integrity, that same limit must apply to the Presidents of the Chamber of Deputies and the Federal Senate,” he said.
That is why I admit the interpretive innovation adopted by the Rapporteur, as part of a chain novel, according to which a subsequent election to the same position on the Board of Directors is possible, regardless of whether it is in the same legislature or in another. possibility of re-election for those who are already in a position to be re-elected consecutively, under penalty of breaking the coherence that gives integrity to the Law and of being accepted, in fact, unlimited re-election, which has no parallel in the Federal Constitution, “he added .
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 reelection 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.
The full STF will decide if the re-election of mayors and senate is allowed
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 the responsibility of the Judiciary, although through the 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.
“AGU is absolutely respectful of the autonomy of each Chamber,” Aras wrote.
Senate lawyers, also in a demonstration to the STF, defended the possibility of re-election.
They asked the Court to recognize the possibility of requesting, for the succession in the presidencies of the Chamber and Senate, the rule of re-election to positions of the Executive Power.
In the opinion of the lawyers, the executive functions exercised in different powers should be equated.
In the case of the Executive, this task corresponds to governors, mayors and the president, who have the constitutional provision to be re-elected. In the Legislative, a similar function is exercised by the presidents of the House and Senate.
