The powerful, unbalanced Justice system

The Judiciary is the only branch of government not elected by popular vote and, strictly speaking, is not accountable to the sovereignty of the people, as there is no external control. 

From the architecture of the plenary halls to the black robes (togas), everything exudes autocracy, exhibitionism, and mold.

Composed of ministers, judges, and justices, whose entry into the judiciary is through competitive examination, except for exceptions such as the constitutional quota for the Brazilian Bar Association (OAB) and for the Supreme Federal Court, whose nominations for justices are made by the president of the country, approved by the Senate, and do not need to be from other judicial branches.

According to the Constitution, the requirements are: citizens over thirty-five and under sixty-five years of age, of notable legal knowledge and unblemished reputation.

For the other Superior Courts, the choice is also made by the president, but from among those in the legal field. 

There will be replacements in all courts, from the TSE to the STJ. Lula must know how to choose better than in previous times, where he and Dilma chose 33 (unless my memory serves me wrong) and did so poorly. 

This is a very powerful body, lacking legitimacy and popular control, to handle appointments lightly, rashly, and without proper human resources.

The vast majority of the population cannot compete with the children of the elite, who can dedicate themselves exclusively to preparing for civil service exams. The competitive examination process for state careers, with high starting salaries, will always reflect social inequality. In not-too-distant times, the fairness of these exams was not transparent; with the advent of information technology and whistleblowing, the process has improved.  

It is a powerful state system that has largely always represented the interests of the country's dominant oligarchies.

Lula's nominations for Supreme Court justices should be based on the following criteria: 1. proven technical competence and legal expertise; 2. a past record demonstrating a commitment to democracy, human rights, and republican ethics (not to be confused with the "goody-two-shoes" republicanism); 3. integrity of character (no skeletons in the closet) and personal courage. 

Someone who loves the country and its hardworking people, and above all, is committed to fulfilling the constitutional mandates, particularly the sole paragraph of Article 1 and Article 3 of the Constitution.

Therefore, the choice should not be based on connections (who makes the nomination), nor on gender, ethnicity, or race as the primary and sole criterion, as was the case with many of the wrong choices among Lula and Dilma's 13 nominations to the Supreme Court, and even less so on those who "take the blame" and then score own goals.

Being young doesn't guarantee anything either; we have the regrettable example of Dias Toffoli. This is especially true because the lifetime tenure of ministers until age 75 needs to be reformed; permanent individual power is not compatible with the dynamics of democracy.

However, whether or not reform is on the horizon, Zanin's name fulfills the above requirements. Not because of what the GLOBO representative, Merval Pereira, said, as a final victory for Zanin over Moro. After all, that is to reduce the nomination to this past legal battle, to belittle the nomination, to diminish the responsibility of a Supreme Court Justice. 

Folha, in saying that the choice of this brilliant lawyer violates the principle of impartiality, heard the rooster crow but doesn't know where, and remained on the surface of the principles of Public Administration, because the purpose of this supposed appointment is not to favor personal gain, but rather the public interest.

It is a fundamental duty of all branches of government at the federal, state, and municipal levels to adhere to the principles of legality, impartiality, morality, transparency, and efficiency. 

I remember the media pressure against Brizola, who couldn't run for president because he was Jango's brother-in-law. To counter an electoral rule, in effect at the time, that prevented relatives of the president from running for his succession, the campaign was created. Brother-in-law is not a relative, Brizola for President!

Zanin is committed to the Constitution, has an unblemished record, proven legal expertise, and a transparent curriculum.

The pro-coup media, by campaigning against it, consolidated the choice! 

Dias Toffoli was a lawyer for the PT (Workers' Party), and the result is there for all to see: a betrayal of the principles and requirements that led to his selection.

Both of Bolsonaro's nominees were terribly subservient to his designs, and retired minister Marco Aurélio Mello was a cousin of former president Fernando Collor de Melo. The Folha newspaper erases this memory and remains silent; it's outrageous.

The media shouldn't interfere, just as the President doesn't comment on the choices of journalists in that media outlet. 

The inexperience and naiveté of the past should no longer thrive in Supreme Court nominations. The price was too high: the "mensalão" scandal, the 2016 coup, Lava Jato, Lula's imprisonment, the rise of the far left, genocides, social and economic regression, and fractures in the democratic rule of law. The reality would be completely different if the choices had been correct.

We are not a government of single thought, we are not a government of single philosophy, we are not a government of identical people. We are a government of different people. And what is important is that we, thinking differently, must make an effort so that, in building our process of rebuilding this country, we think alike, we build alike. said Lula.

To think alike is to think in accordance with the Constitution; to build alike is to rebuild democracy within the rule of law. Therefore, it should no longer accept the tutelage of the US, the market (empowered by the Central Bank), or the Armed Forces. 

Bolsonarism is not dead; it continues to plan to promote institutional instability. 

The appropriate conceptual instrument is that of Transitional Justice. And, for this purpose, the Supreme Federal Court (STF) and the Attorney General's Office (PGR) are of paramount importance for the implementation of Transitional Justice. 

The Public Defender's Office, which is still not very present in this fight, needs to become more active and fulfill its indispensable functions, avoiding following the wrong path of the Public Prosecutor's Office. 

Lula, once again demonstrating his willingness to learn from his mistakes, has already signaled that he will not hesitate to choose the Attorney General from a shortlist of three candidates.

It is a constitutional prerogative of the President of the Republic to nominate [the candidate], and the method of selection is up to him. 

While it once conceived of the Public Prosecutor's Office as a corporation with unionist inspiration, it has matured with experience and now adopts the lucid stance of strengthening the democratic state, free from the vestiges of corporatism. 

The Attorney General of the Republic is responsible for Attorney General's Office; is appointed by President among career members over thirty-five years of age, and their name must be approved by an absolute majority of SenateWith the prerogative of functional independence in the exercise of their duties, not being subordinate to... Executive power, and has a two-year term, renewable. Among his duties are the leadership of Union Public Ministry quality electoral attorney general and president of National Council of the Public MinistryHis removal from office by the President of the Republic depends on authorization from the Senate. (Summary of Article 127 of the Federal Constitution).

The three-person or six-person list is a method, not a constitutional requirement. Similarly, the selection among career members does not explicitly state whether it is limited to active personnel or broader, including retirees as well. 

The president's responsibility is to choose well and transparently; the method and the responsibility rest exclusively with him. 

It is worth noting that the Public Prosecutor's Office is a branch of government without legitimacy from popular suffrage and without external control. 

During the dictatorship, it was the accusing arm. With the 88 Constitution, theoretically it should represent society, be our voice, but recent experience has already seen it become the file-keeper, the archivist, subordinates, implicitly or explicitly, to the Executive branch. 

The president does not follow any list for choosing Supreme Court justices, so there is no reason to follow one in the case of the Attorney General's Office. 

The champions of state control by secular elites seek to strip the President of the Republic of his constitutional power whenever the person elected by the people does not please them; such are the cases of the bizarre "independence" of the Central Bank, the list of candidates for the Public Prosecutor's Office, and the choices of ministers and military commanders.

The three-person list, besides fostering corporatism, is a straitjacket for the country's leader, convenient for the siege of the ideological and coup-plotting right wing in Brazil.

Lula was elected by the majority of Brazilians and the Constitution is the guardian of his duties. 

Brazil will sooner or later need a constitutional reform of the State, and the path to that will be through a Constituent Assembly; however, the timing is not right. Nevertheless, we don't need to wait for that moment to raise necessary issues for society to debate.

First, the reconstruction of the democratic rule of law is necessary, with the implementation of transitional justice.

The failure of the Labor Court in Brazil allowed and even encouraged the rise of Bolsonaroism.

Lobbying for the appointment of ministers to the Supreme Court runs rampant in the media and in the corridors of power; however, it is normal that pressures and crude, biased criteria of the moment are not the dominant factors.

Those with more suitable profiles generally do not engage in lobbying, as is the case with the retired Deputy Attorney General of the Public Prosecutor's Office, former Minister of Justice in the Dilma government, jurist and lawyer, Eugênio Aragão, an admirable soldier of democracy, who can be summoned by the rule of law when necessary.

However, mistakes like those of the past will be unforgivable in the eyes of history!