The Senate is preparing a new law on the crime of responsibility of ministers of the STF (Supreme Federal Court) and other authorities – such as the President of the Republic – to counter the decision of Gilmar Méndez that protects ministers from impeachment proceedings, by increasing the quorum for their dismissal and making the filing of applications against them the exclusive prerogative of the Prosecutor General of the Republic (PGR).
This project was introduced in 2023 by Senator Rodrigo Pacheco (PSD-MG), after drafting by a team led by the then STF Minister and now Minister of Justice and Public Security, Ricardo Lewandowski. The proposal was discussed throughout that year, but has been on hold since August 2023.
According to members of the Senate leadership, the strategy of President Davi Alcolombre (Uniao Brasil-AP) is to put this project to a vote even before the parliamentary recess. He spoke with Senator Waverton Rocha (PDT-MA), the rapporteur of the motion, so that an opinion could be presented soon.
The project was halted due to controversial points, such as setting a deadline for the Speaker of the House of Representatives to decide whether to accept the complaint in the crime of liability against the President of the Republic. Currently, he can keep the process in a drawer, without making or accepting the representation.
Furthermore, the text expands the list of authorities subject to prosecution for liability crimes, including judges, magistrates and prosecutors. Another controversial point is giving political parties, unions and the Brazilian Bar Association (OAB) the possibility to file complaints against the authorities.
Senators say the expectation is that the text will be discussed in the Constitution and Justice Committee next week. the Bound He was unable to contact Rocha. The idea is that amending the proposed constitution presented by the opposition to allow any citizen to request the dismissal of ministers will not be discussed, because the plan aims to update the 1950 law.
Other proposals that the opposition is trying to revive are for PECs to limit unilateral decisions in the STF and allow Congress to suspend court rulings. However, part of the chamber suggests that the ideal situation would be to move forward with the bill regulating this type of decisions by ministers and restricting parties’ access to the Supreme Court, which the House of Representatives approved this week.
Congress’s reaction occurred after Gilmar declared part of the impeachment law unconstitutional. He prevented ordinary citizens from asking the Senate to dismiss ministers and said that this was the exclusive responsibility of the Attorney General of the Republic.
Moreover, the quorum to approve his removal was increased. By law, the support of a simple majority of voters is required. Gilmard likened it to the impeachment of the President of the Republic, which requires a vote of two-thirds of the Senate – 54 out of 81 senators.
On Thursday, Gilmar defended his decision at an event in Brasilia. He added, “People say: But why issue a judicial order? I give them reasons. With many requests to impeach the president, and with people announcing that they will campaign to obtain a majority in the Senate to implement impeachment.”
Minister Flavio Dino supported him and said that there had never been such a large number of dismissal requests. “I hope that this ruling will serve as an incentive for the National Congress to legislate on this matter,” he said. “Just remember that the hero is just a minister: Alexandre de Moraes. So, you either take care of a serial killer or you take care of someone who is the victim of some kind of persecution and extortion.”
Members of Congress criticized the speeches. The chamber’s Labor leader, Lindbergh Farias (RJ), was one of the few in Congress to defend the resolution. For him, the dismissal of ministers “cannot be turned into an instrument of intimidation, revenge, or political coercion against the judiciary,” and there is a right-wing plan to intimidate the Supreme Court, by forming a majority in the Senate.
The majority wing of the government estimates that the debate on the dismissal of ministers takes the succession in the STF out of focus and will allow Palácio do Planalto to realign its relationship with the Senate. There are even those who defend the gesture of solidarity from Lula to Alcolombre to open the channels of communication, which were cut off after the Workers’ Party member Jorge Mesías was nominated for a vacant position on the Supreme Court, bypassing Pacheco.
The Minister of Health, Alexandre Padilha, will travel with Alcolombre to Amapa on Friday (5), to announce the federal programs. Lula’s allies claim that the conversation with the Senate president could take place as early as next week, before the recess, although the vote on the new STF minister should be delayed until 2026.
However, the Labor Party member’s criticism of the parliamentary amendments during a meeting with businessmen and members of civil society on Thursday (4) led to increased tension between the two authorities.
“I do not agree with the imposed amendments. I think that the fact that the National Congress is hijacking 50% of the Union’s budget is a serious historical mistake. But you will only put an end to this when you change the people who govern and who agree to this,” the Labor Party member stated during the sixth meeting of the Council.
The speech alarmed representatives and senators from the allied base who were in the plenary session of the House of Representatives for the congressional session. One of the MPs called the Special Secretary for Parliamentary Affairs of the SRI (Secretariat for Institutional Relations), Andrei Siciliano, and passed the phone number to the President of the Senate.
According to the parliamentarians, Alclumbre wondered in front of others “what a hijack” it would be, because he was working to approve the LDO (Law on Budget Guidelines) as the government wanted and was also working to help Correios, with a change in the financial target that would allow the executive not to have to cut expenses to compensate for the larger loss that the state-owned company is expected to record in 2026.