Barrier to renewal

The Chamber's plenary decision to approve in the first round Constitutional Amendment Proposal No. 457/2005 — known as the "PEC da Bengala," which increases the mandatory retirement age for ministers of the Supreme Federal Court, the Federal Court of Accounts, and other superior courts from 70 to 75 years — was questionable and hasty. This speed did not allow us to analyze and debate the issue more broadly, nor to study the impact of the increase on the period they will remain in office. Just to illustrate the force of this decision, under the current rule, five ministers would retire from the STF by 2018.

Brazilian society has been evolving at a rapid pace. This process is a result of social, economic, and cultural development. This allows millions of people to access universities, study law, and therefore reach the higher courts. And we know that this development is directly related to a modern and updated vision of the courts, so that these bodies become spokespeople for the aspirations of the population. However, the PEC da Bengala (Amendment to the Constitution regarding mandatory retirement age), a step backward, will delay the essential and necessary renewal.

In light of this, the proposal significantly hinders the necessary and effective renewal of ideas and personnel within the institutions. For example, if we appoint a young judge, how long will they remain in office? More than 30 years?! With its approval, judges will remain in office for another five years, preventing the renewal cycle that permeates Brazilian society from advancing in the Judiciary. This prolongation frustrates the temporality of the system.

Another point overlooked was the casuistic nature of the assessment of the matter, which seems to cater only to particular, concrete, and defined interests, since the constitutional amendment does not encompass thousands of public servants, but rather, little more than a hundred people in the judicial system. Why not apply the rule only to new appointments?

A more effective solution for this imbroglio This would involve replacing the current legislation with a more forceful proposal, such as Constitutional Amendment Proposal No. 342/2009, authored by then-Deputy Flávio Dino (PCdoB-MA), the current governor of Maranhão, which stipulates a term limit of 11 years for future Supreme Court justices, prohibiting reappointment.

The higher courts deal with matters of the utmost importance to the Brazilian state and society. Therefore, we cannot condone changes that impact their structure. Even less so when these changes are opportunistic, generate institutional instability, frustrate the temporary nature of tenure, or simply seek to overturn the constitutional right of the President of the Republic to appoint new judges to the higher courts. These changes directly impact Brazilian society and weaken essential bodies for maintaining the rule of law.

Carlos Zarattini is a Federal Deputy (PT-SP) and Deputy Leader of the Government in the Chamber of Deputies.