The president of the (Supreme Federal Court), minister, stated this Tuesday (31) that judges also make mistakes and need to answer for this, bearing the consequences of their actions and omissions.
In a conversation with journalists about the first six months of his administration, about the , Fachin once again defended the code of ethics for ministers and said he hoped the vote would take place by the end of the year.
When answering the question of Sheet Regarding the image and confidence crisis currently experienced by the court, Fachin said that criticism, even the most acidic, is part of democracy, but that the STF has fulfilled its function of protecting the Constitution.
“Parliamentarians make mistakes and must answer for their mistakes. Public managers make mistakes and must answer for their mistakes. Judges also make mistakes, and we need to answer for our mistakes, respond to criticism and the consequences of our actions and omissions.”
“In my view, when the taxpayer looks at the Justice system, he will say: ‘here is a problem, but the engine room of this system works in a healthy way'”, he continued.
According to Fachin, the code of conduct serves to create “embarrassment”. “Whoever acts in disagreement with an ethical rule needs to feel constrained to rethink their behavior, self-criticize and return to the appropriate path.”
The minister said that the rapporteur of the code of conduct, minister, is working on the draft that will be taken to the plenary for consideration in due course. He acknowledged that there is internal resistance to the project, but minimized the impact of criticism.
“The discussion process is as important as its conclusion. Strictly speaking, we have already begun to highlight questions that the facts generate about certain types of events here or there,” he said.
According to the minister, critics are divided into two groups in the STF — there are those who consider the guidelines to be appropriate, but not at this time, and there are those who are against specific points of the initiative, such as the publicity of the lectures held.
“For example, should the lectures be informed? Yes. But, beforehand, could it generate any security problems? Let’s discuss, let’s see how Minister Cármen’s draft will come about.”
