STF AND CONGRESS ~ PEC 33
Renan and Alves reduce voltage level with STF Minister Gilmar Mendes after meeting at the SUPREME COURT
4/29/2013 20:48 By writing, with ACS-Brasilia
The Monday afternoon meeting between the Presidents of the Senate, Renan Calheiros, and of the Chamber of Deputies, Henrique Alves, with the Minister of the Supreme Federal Court (STF) Gilmar Mendes served to “distensionar” the relationship between the Congress and the judiciary. The evaluation was done by Renan and Alves, who treated with Gilmar project that makes the creation of new parties and the proposal for a constitutional amendment that limits the powers of the SUPREME COURT.
It Was a good conversation, we will continue talking. In the next second, we have another conversation. The Minister Gilmar was kind, defended their views, we defend our, and the conversation continues. We left there with the belief that every power has the exact size of its responsibility and its role – stated the President of the Senate, which last week complained of “invasion” of STF in powers of Congress.
Renan added that the “democratic debate” must continue in order to protect the country and the Constitution. For the Senator, Brazil is living a period of “effervescence of democracy”, which of course leads to tensions. In the next meeting, he added, will be taken to Gilmar more resource information brought by the House against the injunction of the Supreme Court which suspended the day 24 the processing of the Bill the House (PLC) 14/2013, at the request of Senator Rodrigo Rollemberg (PSB-DF).
Already approved in the House, the Bill forbids members take radio and TV time, and the Fund’s NAV in favour to new parties. The restraining order issued by Minister of the STF to serve the writ of mandamus filed by Rollemberg coincided with a vote on a request to which the PLC 14/2013 was approved by the Senate floor under urgency, without passing, so by mailing in the Committee on Constitution, justice and citizenship (CCJ), the example of what happened in the House.
The further regimental brought by law firms of the Senate the next day holds that the injunction granted by the Minister represents interference in the powers of the Legislature, because it prevented the progressing of the project within the regimental standards.
Henry Adams described the meeting as “friendly and respectful” and, like Renan, believes that the meeting served to “distensionar ‘ the climate between the two powers. The Mayor ensured that there is, on the part of Congress, any intention to shudder the relationship with the judiciary.
And promised that an examination will be made about the constitutionality of (PEC) 33/2011, the text that gives the Congress the power to review Supreme claims about the validity of laws and precedents binding. The matter was passed so quickly by the Constitution and Justice Committee of the Chamber but received harsh criticism of the Ministers of the Supreme Court. Henrique Alves said that the goal of deeper analysis of PEC is “stop that noise” between the powers.
-We will act for legislative and judicial branches have no more noises – pointed out
Tension between powers is manufactured crisis, Legislative leaders guarantee
4/26/2013 12:35 By Writing-Brasília
Chairman of the Committee on Constitution and justice (CCJ) Chamber, Mr Decius Lima (PT-SC) confirmed on Friday, which has been saying since it was installed the controversy surrounding the adoption of the admissibility of the proposed amendment to the Constitution (PEC) 33, which submits the decisions of the Supreme Court (STF) to Congress. The crisis would be made and “is storm in a teacup”. In a statement, he pondered that the admissibility does not mean agreement with the merits.
“Admissibility is not accordance with merit, it must be made clear. This misunderstanding became the rub of controversy and guides the debate more interesting side to politics. The controversy that has established itself is nothing more than a storm in a teacup. The debate between the three powers is normal. No subject is forbidden to discuss democracy and the legislature is the power of the Republic legitimately constituted for the debate and the formulation of the Brazilian legislation, “he said.
The President of the CCJ also points out that the topic was widely discussed by the Board, since December last year, and that the vote which took place on Wednesday took place according to the rules and constitutional rules.
“There was absolutely no error regarding the prerogatives of zealous Constitution and Justice Committee. There is, therefore, no possibility to have scratched a single comma of our Magna Carta. The Commission’s understanding was that the article didn’t hurt the immutable clauses of the Constitution, especially those who formulated the powers of the Brazilian Republic, “says an excerpt from the note that the Congressman, ran this morning.
Also in press release published at the beginning of the night, the Brazilian Magistrates ‘ associations (AMB), Federal judges of Brazil (Ajufe) and of the Magistrates of the Labor Court (Anamatra) said the PEC 33 represents a stimulus to impunity.
“The associations and professional associations of judges nationwide, considering the approval of PEC 33/2011, come out to express concern about the proposed forwarding that have the aim to weaken the judiciary, resulting ultimately in impunity and denial of Justice”, says passage of the note.
In the document, stress that the proposal, to make the decisions of the judiciary to a judgment of the legislature, eminently political in nature, “means an institutional backlash extremely dangerous, which is not good for Brazil.”
President of the Chamber, Mr Henrique Eduardo Alves (PMDB-RN) also said that you don’t want to install the Special Commission to review the merits of the SGP while not be clear if the proposal hurt the constitutional principle of the separation of powers. It is up to the speaker of the House the installation of special commissions to review the merits of PECs. Approved by the CCJ, the PEC 33 conditions binding effect of approved by the Supreme Court precedents to the endorsement of the legislature and shall submit to the National Congress the decision on the unconstitutionality of laws.
For the Minister Marco Aurélio Mello, the decision to review the proposal with more caution was wise.
-Your posture confirms my words yesterday, the absolute confidence in the Chamber of Deputies and the Senate of the Republic as two major collegiate-he said, while leaving the Supreme Court, last night.
For the Minister Gilmar Mendes, however, the situation is not so. He returned to criticise the proposed amendment to the Constitution that binds the court decisions to the National Congress. In conversation with journalists, on Friday, the Minister highlighted the fact that the text be adopted in the Committee on Constitution and justice of the Chamber without a more detailed analysis and said it is “better to close the Supreme Court” If the proposal is approved by the Legislature.
-There is no doubt, (the proposal) is unconstitutional from beginning to end, of God the last constituent Assembly who signed the Constitution. It is clear that this is it. They (the legislature) tore the Constitution. If this amendment were to be approved, it is better to close the Supreme Court, “said Mendes.
Already the Minister Ricardo Lewandowski downplayed the semblance of crisis between the legislative and judicial branches.
-The powers are working. Each of which takes the attitude that means within its sphere of competence and so does democracy. When the powers act within its sphere of competence, in my view, there is nothing to talk about in retaliation. And much less crisis. On the contrary, the powers are active, and there is no crisis-guaranteed.
By Mr Nazareno Fonteles (EN-PI), the proposal provides that the Supreme Court can only propose binding overviews “after repeated decisions on constitutional matters”, resulting from the decision of four-fifths of the Ministers. According to the proposal, the precedents, however, will only have binding effect after approval by the National Congress. The PEC establishes that only by vote of four-fifths of the Ministers or members of the special body can the courts declare the unconstitutionality of law or normative act of the public authorities.
Another point of friction between the legislature and the Judicário won, this morning, a new episode. Filed on the eve by the Senate, landed on Friday, in the Supreme Court, which aims to free the processing of the Bill the House (PLC) 14/2013. The regimental further maintains that the injunction granted by the Minister Gilmar Mendes represents interference in the powers of the Legislature.
-The role of the legislature is to ensure by their skills. Just as we never influence Judicial decisions, we do not accept that the judiciary has influence in legislative decisions, we consider this an invasion-said the President of the Senate, Renan Calheiros, the journalists, shortly after meeting with the President of the Chamber of Deputies, Henrique Eduardo Alves.
The decision by Gilmar Mendes suspended the progressing of the project, which restricts the access of new parties to the Partisan Background and TV time. According to the Minister, there was “extreme speed” in the examination of the matter, apparent casuistry in people at the expense of minorities and political contradictions between the project and constitutional standards. The decision was triggered by a court injunction filed by Senator Rodrigo Rollemberg (PSB-DF).
The regimental tort is a legal resource that calls for review of a decision monocrática (a single judge) by the full composition of the Court. Rainey added that the occasion will be an opportunity for the Supreme Court to make a “review” about the decision. The Senate President also denied that there is a crisis between legislative and judicial branches, but said it was inconceivable to external influence on the progress of the legislative process.
To Henry Adams, the provocation to the SUPREME COURT was misguided. He reinforced the speech of Renan, to say that does not accept the intrusion of other power in Congress. Alves said that Congress does not interfere in the form of vote of the Ministers of the Supreme Court and also cannot accept any interference in the form of constitutional and procedural Legislative decision.
-We hope that the Supreme can review this position, doing justice to the constitutional role of Congress, “said the Mayor.
Mayor ‘ strange ‘ the Supreme Court injunction that suspended the plenary vote
4/25/2013 13:37 By Writing-Brasília
The President of the Chamber, Mr Henrique Eduardo Alves (PMDB-RN), considered “strange” the injunction of the Minister Gilmar Mendes, of the Supreme Court (STF), which suspended last night, the processing of the Bill that aims to make the creation of new parties. Approved by the Board, the proposal is under consideration in the Senate.
-Very Strangely because it was a sovereign decision of this House, so democratic, transparent. Met all the rules and precepts, therefore, we find it strange and do not agree with it. Let’s see how we can check with the Supreme so that the merits (the injunction) will be taken quickly (to the plenary of the Court) so that there is a correct decision in relation to the powers and the decisions of this House – argued Henrique Alves.
On Tuesday, the Board concluded the vote on the Bill that ends up with the possibility of members to migrate to another party in the same parliamentary term and take with them part of the background and partisan political advertising on radio and television, referring to the electoral performance.
In practice, the project makes the creation of parties, such as the Sustainability Network, the former Minister Marina Silva. Opponents of the proposal argue that the article serves to prevent the candidacy of Marina to the presidency next year.
In your page, in a social network, Marina celebrated the edition of the injunction:
“Defeat of casuistry in people. Won democracy: fell in the Senate and the SUPREME COURT granted an emergency injunction at the request of the PSB. Senator Pedro Simon (PMDB-RS) was the eloquent and forceful voice of those who rose up against the casuistry in people, and were in favour of democracy. The Senators Jorge Viana (PT-AC) and Eduardo Suplicy (PT-SP) remained faithful to democratic principles. Senator Petecão (PSD-AC) did not use double standards, “he said.
-Is a respect for the principle of legality and impersonality, by which the Supreme has a duty to ensure. Obviously there were constitutional principles being injured, because it was a project commissioned with two weights and two measures. The Supreme Court made the right decision to avoid this casuistry in people. It is very good for the democracy, for those who think they can make custom laws-Marina, said the journalists.
The author of the security mandate received by the Supreme, the leader of PSB in the Senate, Rodrigo Rollemberg (DF) also celebrated the decision susta the progressing of the project.
-The Supreme Court held that there was a risk that undue speed for a quick and deep change in the electoral and political process that there could be a serious attack on the Constitution – said.
Message to Plateau
For Senator Eunício Oliveira (EC), leader of the PMDB-who led next to the project’s defense against the new parties, there is now another decision that is not expected to vote on the merits of the project by the Supreme. But he added that it will not appeal against the injunction.
-Decision of the Supreme is the Supreme decision. Now is wait. So as we are waiting for the decision of the royalties and the people of the Northeast passing thirst and hunger. I am of those who believe that it has to be harmony between the powers, with each one in your square-said.
Author of the urgent request down in tumultuous session, the leader of the Pack and Union strength, Gim Argelo (DF) said that on Thursday is day to stop and rethink new strategies. On the overthrow of urgent request, stated:
-No one is innocent here. Had 76 senators in the House. Do you think someone left this fall by chance? It was a message to the plateau, “said Gim, minimizing the defeat in the House.
The Governor of Ceara Cid Gomes (PSB), who accompanied the vote in plenary, without saying whether for or against the subject.
-I am a member of the Executive Board of the PSB and my party never met to discuss this. I never stopped to think on this issue. But I see a festival of inconsistency and opportunism. Guess who defended it to the PSD should continue advocating. And who was against the PSD, should continue to be. But what one sees, is the opposite. There is inconsistency for all hand-finished.