O STF (Supreme Federal Court) formed a majority to admit that cases of slush fund can generate liability as an electoral crime and as an act of administrative improbity, in different instances. The understanding was presented in the vote of the rapporteur, Alexandre de Moraes, and already has the support of eight ministers of the Court.
Ministers Cármen Lúcia, Cristiano Zanin, André Mendonça, Dias Toffoli, Edson Fachin, Luiz Fux, Flávio Dino and Gilmar Mendes accompanied the rapporteur. All that remains is the vote of Minister Nunes Marques to conclude the trial, which ends in the virtual plenary this Friday (6), at 11:59 pm.
O box two occurs when amounts received or spent on a campaign are not declared to the Electoral Court and can constitute an electoral crime, according to article 350 of the Electoral Code.
In the vote, Moraes states that the electoral and administrative spheres are autonomous. According to the minister, while Electoral Law seeks to ensure the fairness and legitimacy of elections, the Administrative Improbity Law protects administrative morality and public property.
As a result, the same fact can generate different legal consequences in different instances. Moraes also stated that actions of improbity are civil in nature and must be processed in the common courts, even if the conduct investigated also constitutes an electoral crime.
“Double liability for slush fund electoral crime (art. 350 of the Electoral Code) and act of administrative improbity (Law 8,429/1992) is possible, as the independence of instances requires differentiated sanctioning treatments between illicit acts in general (civil, criminal and political-administrative) and acts of administrative improbity”, explained Moraes.
The case is analyzed within the scope of Theme 1260 of general repercussion, which will establish a thesis with binding effect for similar processes across the country.
