The House of Representatives, which restricts the possibility of arrest and opening criminal actions against deputies and senators. The text received 353 votes in favor and 134 against the first round, and 344 to 133 in the second.
With, the bill now follows for Senate analysis. Understand below what the proposal says, as it affects deputies, senators and party presidents, and what should be the role of the Supreme Federal Court (STF).
Prior approval for criminal proceedings
Continues after advertising
The PEC states that deputies and senators will only be able to respond to criminal actions if the House or Senate is authorized. The Federal Supreme Court (STF) will need to send the complaint to the respective Legislative House, which will have up to 90 days to deliberate. Without this authorization, the process will not be able to advance.
Arrest only in the act of unenforceable crime
The proposal states that parliamentarians cannot be arrested, saved in the act of crimes considered unenforceable, such as murder, rape, racism, terrorism and drug trafficking. Even in these cases, the arrest will only be valid if it is endorsed by the congressman’s House plenary within 24 hours. If the endorsement is denied, the arrest is automatically suspended during the term.
Continues after advertising
Suspension of Process Prescription
If the House or Senate rejects the continuation of a criminal action or the maintenance of a prison, the PEC provides that the period of prescription of the crime will be suspended as long as the parliamentary mandate lasts. In practice, the process does not prescribe, but cannot continue until the end of the term.
Expanded privileged forum
Continues after advertising
The text expands the list of authorities entitled to direct judgment in the Supreme Court. In addition to the President and Vice President of the Republic, Ministers of State and Congressmen, the National Presidents of Parties with representation in Congress also have a privileged forum. This change reaches leaders of acronyms such as PL, PSD and União Brasil.
LIMIT TO CAUTIONARY MEASURES
The proposal centralizes in the Supreme Court the competence to impose precautionary measures against parliamentarians, such as blockade of goods, removal of the mandate or restrictions of movement. Lower instances may not adopt this type of decision during the exercise of the position.
Continues after advertising
Why did the House vote the shield?
The vote occurred amid pressure from former President Jair Bolsonaro’s allies for amnesty measures to the January 8 depredation of the coup attempt, including Bolsonaro. According to analysts, he also told the dissatisfaction of parliamentarians with investigations on amendments. For the mayor, Hugo Motta (Republicans-PB), the proposal represents “commitment to the autonomy of parliamentary mandates”.
If it is also approved in the Senate, may benefit a series of parliamentarians who are currently investigated in the STFlike the, which targets an inquiry that investigates its influence to Donald Trump’s tariff on Brazil.
Analysts at LCA Consultoria observed that the Armage PEC is the first of the projects selected by Motta to unlock the agenda in the House. This Wednesday (17), he should bring the plenary the vote on the urgency of the amnesty project. Only later does the income tax exemption project for those who earn up to $ 5,000, which is expensive to the Lula government, should be appreciated.
Continues after advertising
TREED SECRET vote – and resumed
Initially, it was expected that the text had at least one setback, after the exclusion of the provision that voting on criminal proceedings authorization against parliamentarians would be secret. The highlight was approved by 174 votes, after the confidentiality favorable block does not reach the 308 necessary to maintain the rule. However, – now he predicts secret vote to endorse criminal proceedings against parliamentarians.
Support and Resistance
PEC had significant support from the centrão, including parties such as PL, União Brasil, PP, PSD and MDB. The PL voted fully in favor. However, there were internal divisions on acronyms such as the PSD and even the PT, whose guidance was contrary, but 12 deputies voted in favor. Already parties like PSOL, Novo and Rede have fully rejected the proposal.
Rapporteur Claudio Cajado (PP-BA) argued that the approved model “safeguard institutional guarantees” and strengthens the independence of the legislature. Already critical, as the institute does not accept corruption, classified approval as “attempt to legislate in their own case” and pointed to the principle of separation of powers.
For lawyer Arcênio Rodrigues da Silva, the approval of the PEC of the armor “marks one of the darkest moments of Brazilian political life since the promulgation of the 1988 Constitution”, as it “tears” articles of the Constitution “in an act of legislative cynicism, in which parliamentarians, elected to oversee the executive and protect the public good, use the constituent power derived to shield themselves”.
