The leader of , (RS), and the minority leader, Caroline de Toni (-SC), presented appeals, each with 52 signatures, to take the vote on the constitutionality and constitutionality actions in the (Federal Supreme Court) to the Chamber plenary.
In addition to Novo and part of the PL, the project also faces resistance on the left, especially the PSOL.
On the 30th, on a conclusive basis, that is, it would be sent directly to the Senate for a vote if there was no resource to also require analysis by the plenary, as occurred.
Proposed by deputy Marcos Pereira (Republicanos-SP), the project is reported by deputy Alex Manente (Cidadania-SP), who says he will work to get the measure to the plenary as quickly as possible.
The reading is that the proposal, by restricting the Supreme Court’s actions, serves as a message to the court and demarcates the Chamber’s position of dissatisfaction. Part of the deputies disagrees with this confrontation, while the opposite part argues that the project is not sufficient to qualify the STF.
The project, among other measures, establishes that only parties or federations that have complied with the barrier clause will be able to file constitutionality control actions, which harms the Novo party, which did not reach this goal. Today, any party with an elected representative in the Chamber or Senate can do so.
For the Novo bench, the project, instead of limiting the powers of ministers, expands the role of the STF by maintaining the existence of monocratic preliminary decisions and by changing rules for proposing Direct Constitutionality Actions and Claims of Non-compliance with Fundamental Precepts.
Van Hattem states in a note that the project “does not solve the problems we have today with the hypertrophy of the STF”.
“On the contrary, it reinforces judicial activism and creates new ways for the court to continue interfering in matters that are the responsibility of the Legislative and Executive. The result is more legal uncertainty and more concentration of power in a single Branch of the Republic. Our appeal seeks to correct this distortion and ensure that Parliament does not give up its prerogatives”, he adds.
When contacted by the report, deputy Caroline de Toni did not respond.
Manente states that, contrary to the understanding of the Novo bench, the project limits and regulates monocratic decisions, shortening the temporal validity of these decisions.
“This project is, in fact, an adaptation of rites and procedures, which today the Federal Supreme Court does on its own, and which we are doing through legislation, to guarantee balance and separation of Powers”, said the rapporteur.
The project provides that STF ministers will have to, when making monocratic decisions, justify their need and submit the decision for analysis by the plenary automatically in the following session — or it will become null and void.
In addition to the requirement for parties and federations, class entities also now have more rules for filing constitutionality control actions, such as having a causal link with the issue and that their highest deliberative body has approved the activation of the STF.
According to a rapporteur, the reduction of entities and parties that could sue the Supreme Court is progress.
Much of the Chamber’s dissatisfaction with the STF is due to more than , which led to reactions from deputies, such as . Actions filed with the Supreme Court by PSOL and Abraji (Brazilian Association of Investigative Journalism) led to an analysis of the transparency of the amendments by the Supreme Court.
