After agreement with the Senate, Minister Gilmar Mendes, of the Supreme Federal Tribunal (STF), decided to partially suspend the injunction issued last week which limited impeachment requests against the Tribunal’s ministers. This Wednesday’s decision suspends the exclusive attribution to the Attorney General’s Office (PGR) to file charges of accountability crimes against members of the Supreme Court, but maintains the majority of 2/3 of the votes in the plenary session of the Senate for the establishment and approval of the impeachment.
- SP Town Hall: Enel stopped “a large number of vehicles” during the storm
- “Kill a lion”: Man Who Strangled Trans Woman Arrested; he was free after leaving his body at the police station
The magistrate’s injunction was to be judged on Friday, but the actions were removed from the agenda on Wednesday by Gilmar himself, shortly before the new decision. Currently, any citizen can file a request for impeachment and approval depends only on a simple majority.
The decision of the Minister of the STF, according to the Court’s interlocutors interviewed by GLOBO, came after successive contacts between the dean of the Court and members of the Senate, including the President of the Chamber himself, Davi Alcolumbre (União-AP), and his predecessor Rodrigo Pacheco (PSD-MG). According to columnist Malu Gaspar, Minister Alexandre de Moraes, record holder for impeachment requests, also participated in the meetings. Last week’s injunction that suspended sections of the impeachment bill opened a new front in the crisis between the powers.
In the new decision, Gilmar considered the advancement of discussions in the Senate for the approval of updated legislation to regulate the process of dismissal of authorities — the current law dates back to 1950. A draft is currently being considered in the House and was included on the agenda of the Constitution and Justice Commission (CCJ) on Wednesday, but ended up postponing the reading of the opinion.
According to the dean, the new text takes up elements of the injunction and highlights an effort of cooperation between institutions, guided by prudence, dialogue and respect for constitutional norms.
“Such legislative improvement is not limited to formally complying with the decisions of the Federal Supreme Court, but constitutes an act of great public spirit, aimed at preserving the integrity of the judiciary and protecting harmony between the powers,” he said.
In suspending the decision, Gilmar responded to a request made earlier Wednesday by the Senate Attorney’s Office, which asked that processing of the action be halted until Congress finishes voting on the proposed new rule, authored by Rodrigo Pacheco.
According to the Senate Prosecutor’s Office, maintaining the precautionary decision while the project is debated could generate “normative dissonance” and hinder the technical development of the new legal diploma. The body says there is no immediate risk because there are no impeachment proceedings underway against Supreme Court ministers.
“The aim of the request made is not to attenuate the authority of this Supreme Court, but to harmonize the exercise of constitutional jurisdiction with the democratic legitimacy inherent in the legislative process, by guaranteeing, simultaneously, respect for the institutional prerogatives of Parliament and the preservation of legal certainty during the normative development phase,” states the Senate Prosecutor’s Office in the petition.
In Wednesday’s decision, Gilmar commends the handling of the demands for dismissal of STF ministers made by Alcolumbre and Pacheco. For the judge, both “demonstrated an adequate perception of the traumatic potential, from an institutional point of view, which results from the opening of impeachment proceedings against ministers of the Federal Court”.
At the same time, the rapporteur of the proposal debated in the Senate, Weverton Rocha (PDT-MA), defended the removal of the reading of the opinion from the CCJ agenda so that the project could be debated in plenary session, which would be held after the holidays. It is therefore only later, in 2026, that there will be a formal analysis of the text.
Under the bill currently under consideration in the Senate, ordinary citizens lose the ability to individually submit impeachment requests and deadlines are now set for the presidents of the House and Senate to express their views on the allegations. According to the proposal, complaints will be limited to political parties represented in Parliament, the Brazilian Bar Association (OAB), professional associations and labor organizations at the national or state level. Citizens will only be able to activate the mechanism through a popular initiative meeting formal requirements and a minimum number of signatures.
In last week’s ruling, Gilmar suspended sections of the Impeachment Act of 1950. It had exclusively assigned the PGR the prerogative to bring impeachment requests against STF ministers. On Wednesday, he withdrew, once again opening the possibility for other actors to do so. The minister, however, maintained the need for a minimum quorum for the initiation and approval of impeachment. The face-to-face debate in Court on the Dean’s decision will still be scheduled by STF President Edson Fachin.
In justifying his injunction last week, partially responding to the demands of the Solidariedade party and the Association of Brazilian Magistrates (AMB), Gilmar considered impeachment, among other points, as a “constitutional tool of an extraordinary nature, the use of which requires a solid basis and strict compliance with regular legal procedure, an adversarial and broad defense.” Therefore, it could not be used as a “mechanism to unduly suppress the independence of other powers.”
About The Author
