Impeachment of STF ministers: what each side says in the crisis inaugurated by the Gilmar Mendes decision

Gilmar Mendes sits in the STF with a thoughtful look — Image caption,

- author, Mariana Alvim and Marina Rossi
- scroll, From BBC News Brazil in Sao Paulo
1 hour ago

This body is led by the Attorney General of the Federation, Jorge Messias – chosen by President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva (PT) for his new appointment to the STF, which needs to be approved by the Senate.

The AGU statement, signed by Mesías, was presented at a sensitive moment for his candidacy and for the relationship between Planalto and the Senate.

The selection of Messias “strained the political climate”, according to the STF minister in an exclusive interview with BBC News Brazil on the day of Lula’s selection.

Alcombre criticized Mendes’ decision during the opening of the Senate session on Wednesday. According to him, the changes attempt to “usurp the powers of the legislative authority.”

Mendes defended the validity of the precautionary measure he took.

Moreover, some parts of the legislation may affect the independence of the judiciary.

“Thus, I believe that the granted precautionary measure, in addition to finding sincere support in the Federal Constitution, proves indispensable to put an end to a situation that clearly contravenes the constitutional text. Therefore, there are no reasons to change the terms of the previously issued decision, nor to suspend its effects,” the Minister said this Thursday, when rejecting the African Union’s request.

The two measures being discussed at the STF were introduced by the Solidariedade party and the Brazilian Judges Association, which seek to increase judges’ protections against impeachment requests.

Under current law, any citizen can request the removal of a Socialist Workers Party minister.

The African Union argued that it was legitimate for any citizen to do so.

Image caption, Amid tensions over his candidacy for STF membership, Jorge Mesías asked Gilmar Mendes to reconsider the precautionary measure

For Méndez, a two-thirds Senate quorum would be more appropriate – and constitutional – According to the minister, this would protect the constitutional guarantees of the judiciary and the independence of the judiciary.

The Dean of STF has asked AGU to comment on this issue. However, he criticized on Thursday that the response had only come now.

“Almost (two) months after the specified deadline, the union’s general prosecutor expressed his opinion on the case,” Mendez wrote.

The minister told Globo TV on Thursday that his decision was not aimed at protecting Supreme Court ministers like himself. Mendes confirmed that the law currently in effect dates back to 1950.

“It is about implementing the Constitution, that’s what we are doing. Taking into account that the law, in a way, has already expired. It dates back to 1950, and it was prepared to regulate accountability in the process of the 1946 Constitution. It has already passed through several constitutions, and now its discussion is facing the 1988 Constitution,” the minister said.

“This exacerbates the need to review the regulatory framework. I hope that this ruling will serve as an incentive for the National Congress to legislate on this topic.”