New Gilmar charging decision seen as ‘welcome’ by AGU members | Policy

On December 3, Gilmar tightened the rules for impeachment of Supreme Court ministers. At the time, the STF Minister had defined that only the Attorney General of the Republic could request the dismissal of members of the Court and that the opening of the procedure would require the participation of two thirds of the senators, instead of a simple majority, as previously planned. This Wednesday (10), Gilmar went back and suspended part of its own injunction, but only with regard to the exclusive jurisdiction of the Attorney General’s Office (PGR). The minister maintained the need to obtain two-thirds of the votes for the process to advance in the Senate.

Last week, the AGU had already asked Gilmar to reconsider the decision to overturn the exclusive jurisdiction of the PGR to seek impeachment. Current legislation allows any citizen to file a complaint against magistrates. The institution, however, decided in favor of a higher quorum to open the dismissal procedure.

“(This Wednesday’s decision) is entirely consistent with what the AGU asked for. It ended up recognizing that the AGU was right,” said a member of the institution’s management. Other lawyers heard in reserve by the Value assessed Gilmar’s decision the same way.

The formulation of the request that led to Gilmar’s withdrawal included the participation of Senate leaders. The movement was led by the President of the House, Davi Alcolumbre (União-AP), and his predecessor, Rodrigo Pacheco (PSD-MG). The parliamentarians reportedly told the STF ministers that, if Gilmar’s decision was upheld, the Chamber would move forward with projects contrary to the Court, such as the PEC Marco Temporal, approved on Tuesday (9).

Messias was nominated by President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva (PT) for the post of Minister of the Supreme Court. Approval depends on the Senate, where there is resistance to his name. This is because Alcolumbre wanted Pacheco to be the candidate.

Pacheco was also Gilmar’s favorite for the Supreme Court nomination. The senator authored the bill that updates the impeachment statute. One of the arguments put forward by the Minister of the Supreme Court to justify this withdrawal was that the proposal was beginning to advance in Congress.

“The decision that granted the precautionary measure, based on the protection of the constitutional guarantees of the Ministers of the Supreme Federal Court, had an immediate impact on the processing of PL 1.388/2023, which began to be processed with priority and speed. This transmission highlights the attention and sensitivity of Parliament to the guidelines issued by this Supreme Court, reflecting a commitment to institutional stability and the correct interpretation of the legal system,” said Gilmar in an extract from this Wednesday’s decision.