The minister of the (Federal Supreme Court) stated this Thursday (30) that the decision to reject him for a vacancy on the court must be respected, but made a public statement in support of the president’s nominee ().
In a publication on
“He is one of the greatest jurists in the recent history of Brazil, whose career, marked by dignity, rectitude and dedication to public service, speaks for itself”, wrote the STF minister.
Gilmar also stated that he “always” defended and maintained his opposition that Messias “meets the credentials required for the judiciary”.
Initially, the minister was in favor of the appointment of the former president of the Senate (-MG), also supported by the current president of the House, (União-AP). After Lula’s announcement, Gilmar began to defend Messias in private conversations with senators and publicly.
“The Federal Senate exercised, with its own sovereignty, its constitutional prerogative to examine and deliberate on names nominated to the STF — a century-old mission that must be guided by the public interest and the requirements of the position”, added the dean in the publication.
as to Sheetthe campaign by Supreme Court ministers with senators to try to approve Jorge Messias’s nomination included André Mendonça’s “superpower” of influence, a change in Gilmar’s position and a meeting mediated by Cristiano Zanin.
The articulation of this wing of the court, however, was not enough. On Wednesday night (29), the Senate, in a movement articulated by Alcolumbre, rejected his nomination to the Supreme Court.
In a secret vote, 42 senators spoke against approval, while 34 of the 41 required were in favor.
The decision is the result of a struggle between Congress and the Palácio do Planalto, added to a long process of erosion of the Judiciary leadership and a strengthening of the right in the scenario leading up to this year’s.
According to SheetSTF ministers assessed the rejection of Messias’ name as signaling both an error by Lula in articulating the chosen name and the Senate’s dissatisfaction with the court.
In the context of the strained relations between the Powers, the behind-the-scenes assessment is that the senators’ discontent with the Supreme Court has grown in recent days, after the episode between Gilmar and the rapporteur of the CPI (Parliamentary Inquiry Commission) on Organized Crime, senate (MDB-SE).
With this result, the Senate would have shown the spirit of corps to take part in the institutional dispute.
LINK PRESENT: Did you like this text? Subscribers can access seven free accesses from any link per day. Just click the blue F below.
