Brazilian Supreme Court has violated the Constitution,” says congresswoman

Congresswoman Coronel Fernanda (PL-MT), elected last year for the first mandate, presented a draft resolution to protect the Legislative from interference by the Judiciary.

To justify the proposal, she severely criticized the Supreme Court (STF).

“The Court, which should be the guardian of the Constitution, has violated it, invading the internal affairs of another Branch,” she said in the justification of PRC 22/2023, which aims to create an article in the Internal Rules of the House making the Plenary the last instance of appeal.

The intention is to bar appeals to the Judiciary “by virtue of the fact that this is an ‘interna corporis’ matter and of the independence of the Legislative Branch”.

“The Judiciary can only rule on administrative acts; in the field of legality, it cannot rule on the legislative matter of competence of the Legislative Branch, under penalty of crime of abuse of authority under Law No. 13,869, 2019, and absolute nullity of its decision,” says the project.

The project provides that “the request of a political party with representation in the National Congress, through a Resolution Project, by decision of an absolute majority of its members, will sustain the judicial act that violates its competence or independence.”

In the justification, she states that “Brazil is living a State of exception, by a coup d’état without weapons, practiced by the Federal Supreme Court, which placed itself in the condition of Supreme Power of the country, and also as the Moderator Power, violating the Democratic State of Law and the independence of the Legislative Power”.

According to her, this happened when the STF changes the Constitution “by judicial decision, including reducing or suppressing fundamental clauses, illegitimately establishing an original and derived constituent power”.

The congresswoman says that the Supreme Court has been “writing a new Constitution and a new Penal Code, by changing the principle of legal reserve and defining criminal types by analogy. A recent example was the STF’s decision that created the “crime” of homophobia by analogy with the crime of racism.

She also claims that the STF has interfered in the independence of the Legislature, “arresting parliamentarians for a crime of opinion, creating the figure of an instantaneous crime of permanent flagrante.

“It is urgent that the Chamber of Representatives, the authentic representative of the Brazilian people, exercise its constitutional powers to end any and all authoritarianism coming from the Judiciary,” she says.

With information from Revista Oeste