The CNJ (National Council of Justice) decided to fully maintain the triple list for promotion by the criterion of merit of the Judge of the Federal Regional Court of the 5th Region, based in Recife.
The choice was questioned by.
The rapporteur counselor, Rodrigo Badaró, dismissed the requests of judges Roberto Wanderley Nogueira and Cristina Maria Costa Garcez to declare the nullity of the process by alleged favoring the most voted candidate, Judge Isabelle Marne Cavalcanti de Oliveira Lima. She is the daughter of the dean of TRF-5, Paulo Roberto de Oliveira Lima.
Prevented, the dean did not participate in the vote.
“The alleged irregularities pointed out in the votes in favor of the federal judges who joined the triple list cannot be admitted as arising from manifest and deliberate intention to manipulate the result of the vote to the detriment of any of the competitors or to sponsor the promotion of a particular magistrate,” said the rapporteur.
Badaró based his decision on the absence of legal basis for the revocation of a CNJ resolution (106/2010). He considered the consolidated jurisprudence of the Federal Supreme Court and the Council.
The administrative control procedure was instituted by the National Corregedor of Justice, Minister Mauro Campbell, from a letter sent by Nogueira, communicating the suspicions raised at the Court.
Consulted by the rapporteur, Campbell stated that the matter escapes the competence of the national correctional agency. He understands that the controversy is based on rules consolidated by the Federal Supreme Court and the CNJ.
“Everyone already knew that the two best voted candidates were elected in advance,” Nogueira told the statement to the national corregedor.
Isabelle Marne Cavalcanti de Oliveira Lima, from Alagoas, were elected; Gisele Chaves Sampaio Alcântara, from Ceará, and Amanda Torres de Lucena Diniz Araújo, from Pernambuco.
Two days before the outcome proclamation, Nogueira registered his prognosis, which was confirmed.
Nogueira compared the decision of the TRF-5 with the procedures adopted by the TRF-4 and TRF-2, which require the triple list to be composed of first-fifth magistrates from the seniority list.
He argued that the triple list did not reflect the purpose of gender affirmative action. It claimed that the need for declaration of the grounds of the conviction of the voters was not observed.
Rodrigo Badaró understands that the measurement of merit does not exclude the autonomy of the court to establish internal rules, adapting it to local peculiarities.
He considers that the TRF-5 offered the voters the necessary information for the formation of their conviction.
“The author of the office (Nogueira) did not discourage himself from the task of pointing out, in a specific way, which evaluative criteria were disregarded at the time of voting or if there was any kind of foundation addiction in the winning sacred vote for the composition of the triple list.”
Also according to the rapporteur, “if it is true that the objective investigation of the merit of competitors is privileged, to give greater transparency to the choice, the load of subjectivity inherent to evaluation cannot be completely eliminated.”
For him, the PCA is not appropriate to discuss alteration in the rule of merit promotions.
The president of TRF-5, considers it “pure lightness” to speak of marked letters. He says the triple list was decided “after a fierce dispute, in which one of the candidates was only chosen in second scrutiny.”
Judge Isabelle Oliveira Lima attributes the initiative of Nogueira to “hurt against the court, gathered for decades”.
“There is a personal dissatisfaction for not being promoted earlier, by merit criterion, but only more recently by seniority criterion.”
Gift Link: Did you like this text? Subscriber can release seven free hits from any link per day. Just click on F Blue below.
