The statements given to the press this Tuesday (31) by the president of the (Supreme Federal Court) — who spoke about code of conduct and — irritated a wing of the court, which complains of public embarrassment and undue exposure of the court’s internal dilemmas.
At least five ministers have reacted frequently and in a coordinated manner to Fachin’s agenda as president and his public statements. They say that the Supreme Court has become a “drifting ship” and believe that the president of the court is demoralized, disuniting the court instead of defending collegiality — all this amid a crisis of credibility arising from the investigations into the .
According to reports made confidentially by three of these magistrates, Fachin wants to leave a legacy in defense of the ethical agenda, but at the cost of wearing down his colleagues in the public square, which gives ammunition to opponents of the Supreme Court both within and in society in general.
Surprised by the statements, the group claims that Fachin could have adopted a harm reduction strategy, warning his colleagues in advance that he would talk to journalists specialized in covering the Supreme Court and that uncomfortable questions could inevitably arise.
The ministers say that Fachin acts in good faith, but that the effects of his speeches end up burying the unity that the STF needs to face an intense election year, in which attacks on the court tend to intensify. Therefore, they are also against closing the fake news investigation at this time.
While Fachin understands that the mere debate about the code of ethics is already relevant, the other wing of the court understands that fueling this discussion is bad and does not impact the real problems of the Judiciary, such as news of non-compliance with the .
When presenting to journalists an overview of the six months of his administration, this Tuesday, the president of the STF stated that “judges also make mistakes and need to answer for mistakes”. He also said that “anyone who acts in violation of an ethical rule needs to feel constrained to rethink their behavior.”
Those around Fachin claim that the statement did not specifically concern the Master’s repercussions or the behavior of STF ministers, but was inserted in the context of the code of conduct and the purpose of punishing magistrates, issues that were raised by reporters.
One of the first points addressed by the president of the court at the event was the “valuation of the collegiate”, in which he cites “decisions that reinforce legal certainty and the strength of the plenary as a unified voice of the Constitution”, such as the judgment on penduricalhos and on Brazil.
Fachin also stated that, from September to now, all members of the STF were covered by processes from their respective rapporteurs included on the plenary agenda. “There was a relatively equal distribution among all ministers,” he said.
According to him, this will continue to be a criterion on the judgment agenda from now on.
Regarding the criticism, Fachin has told assistants that he does not feel isolated and that he maintains dialogues and periodic meetings with all colleagues to map the court’s challenges and come up with joint solutions, as occurred in the case of the penduricalhos. He also states that defending the moral integrity of the court and the impartiality of the ministers is a non-negotiable flag of his management.
