For the retired minister and former president of the (Supreme Federal Trubunal), a redesign of Justice institutions should not be “a cabinet work, a product of political resentment, an episodic reaction to judicial decisions or an instrument of cyclical pressure on judges and courts”.
According to him, the discussion on the various Judiciary reform proposals that have appeared in recent weeks is “important, legitimate and necessary”, as “no republican institution is immune to public debate”.
The minister’s opinions were conveyed in a text published in , a city in the interior of São Paulo and Celso de Mello, and sent to the Sheet. The publication is edited by journalist José Reiner Fernandes, a long-time friend of the magistrate.
The former president of the Supreme Court states that approval by the Legislature of a possible reform should not only reflect the will of the majority of Congress, but also “a public process of hearing, reflection, consideration and institutional maturity”.
For him, the legitimacy of a reform depends on the degree of participation of the different sectors of society.
“The more open the discussion, the greater the degree of democratic legitimization of the political decision that results from it. The broader the participation of the directly interested sectors – not only the members of the Justice system, but above all the citizens who depend on it –, the more consistent the institutional solution to be adopted will be”, states the minister.
The impartiality of judges, says Celso, does not represent a corporate privilege, but rather the right of citizens: “judicial independence is not the personal prerogative of the magistrate; it is a public guarantee of the person under jurisdiction.”
The minister mobilizes examples of judicial reforms in European countries – such as Spain, the United Kingdom and Italy – to demonstrate that he sees institutional changes as part of the “normal repertoire of constitutional democracies”.
The STF and the Judiciary are experiencing a crisis in public opinion, worsened by the revelation of the relationship between ministers and with . The suspicions led to the case being brought before the Supreme Court.
In the midst of the STF’s image crisis and internal disputes between members of the court, that of the Judiciary.
The initiative, exposed by the minister in an article published on the ICL Notícias portal, opened a new front of conflict with the court president’s group, around an ethical and moral agenda for the judiciary.
The last substantial and coordinated changes in the Brazilian Justice system took place 22 years ago, with the approval of constitutional amendment 45/2004, which was being processed in Congress since 1992. Among the innovations, there was the creation of control bodies, such as the (National Council of Justice) and the (National Council of the Public Ministry).
Celso argues that the example of European countries reaffirms the importance of these councils against “undue interference from other Powers”. Control bodies should not be confused with “instruments of submission of the Judiciary or the Public Ministry to external interests”, he says.
“Reforming Justice is not reducing it. It is qualifying it. It is not subjecting it. It is strengthening it. It is not taking away its independence. It is making it more capable of serving, with efficiency, impartiality, transparency and moral authority, the Constitution and the laws of the Republic”, he concludes.
