Since the end of last year, it has gained momentum for ministers of the (Supreme Federal Court). The idea is supported by , current president of the court, who .
Such an initiative, however, If this first internal obstacle is overcome, another challenge will be to make any new rules effective.
In general terms, the idea would be to provide more detailed guidelines to avoid or raise questions about conflicts of interest on the part of those responsible for judging cases at the highest level in the country.
Understand what is being discussed:
What is the motivation for approving a code of conduct for the STF?
Given the protagonism that the Supreme Court and its members began to occupy in the national political arena, the initiative as a measure that could help protect the court’s credibility.
In recent years, public speeches by ministers on topics that are being judged by the court have been recurring. Added to this is the frequent participation of members of the Supreme Court in seminars and forums both in Brazil and abroad, alongside politicians, businesspeople and other actors with an interest in actions being processed in court.
Who has defended the initiative?
The topic gained momentum in the public sphere at the end of last year. In addition to the support of the President of the Supreme Court himself for the measure, it was published last October and signed by important names in Brazilian law.
by businesspeople, economists and sectors of civil society was released in December and called for the adoption of a code.
Pressure on the issue grew from controversies involving Banco Master. Minister Dias Toffoli traveled to Peru to watch the Libertadores final in November accompanied by a lawyer in the case on a businessman’s jet. Furthermore, the newspaper O Globo showed that the law firm headed by Alexandre de Moraes’ wife, Viviane Barci, had a contract worth R$3.6 million per month to defend the bank’s interests.
What would be the rules of a STF code of conduct?
This would depend on the consensus among the court ministers when voting on the issue. Experts consulted by Sheetas well as the FHC Foundation study, advocate the establishment of more detailed parameters on different topics.
These include public demonstrations by ministers, participation in events attended by parties interested in court proceedings, receiving gifts and transparency about amounts received in activities outside the court, such as conferences and lectures. It also highlights the need to prohibit former ministers from working before the court, after leaving office, for a longer period.
Approved codes of conduct have been cited as references.
What would guarantee that the STF code of conduct would be effective?
This point has not been central to the debate. There is no clarity as to whether there would be any body responsible for monitoring compliance with any new rules or, even, whether any type of sanction would be applied. The (National Council of Justice), which supervises magistrates throughout Brazil, does not have the authority to analyze cases involving STF ministers.
Professors of constitutional and public law consulted by the Sheet evaluate that one possibility would be the creation of an ethics commission in the Supreme Court, which could receive and evaluate complaints, in addition to responding to preventive consultations. This path, however, is not a consensus. The majority argues that such an organization should not have a punitive nature. The new list of rules would function as an extra tool for public collection and embarrassment.
Aren’t Supreme Court ministers already subject to rules of conduct?
Today there are already rules to which ministers are subject, such as the Statute of the Judiciary, which prohibits, for example, the expression of an opinion on proceedings pending trial.
The Constitution prohibits the exercise of other positions by magistrates, with the exception of teaching, and even if they are dedicated to political-partisan activities. Nor can they receive “aid or contributions” from individuals, public or private entities – except in exceptions provided for by law. It also provides that, before three years, judges cannot advocate before the court from which they left.
What are other forms of control over STF ministers?
Ministers can be targeted by the Federal Government and, in the case of conduct that could constitute criminal offences, it is up to the PGR (Attorney General’s Office) to file a complaint.
Could a code of conduct for the STF be discussed in the Legislature?
While the Supreme Court does not move forward with the issue, a project on the topic was presented in December in Congress by federal deputy Chico Alencar (PSOL-RJ). He states that the idea of the proposal is not confrontation, but the protection and strengthening of the court. There are professors of constitutional law who consider, however, that this proposal could only be presented to the Legislature in a proposal initiated by the STF
In a scenario in which the discussion within the Supreme Court advances, there are those who argue that the Supreme Court, before approving the new rules, should open a public consultation process to gather suggestions, based on an initial draft.
