Sub-attorneys launch manifest against PEC that destroys Public Ministry

Sub-attorneys launch manifest against PEC that destroys Public Ministry

Photo: Disclosure/National Council of the Public Ministry

a group of 31 Deputy Attorneys General of the Republic signed a manifest defending rejection of PEC 5/2021, the so-called ‘Gilmar’s PEC’, that changes the composition of the National Council of the Public Ministry (CNMP).

The assistant attorneys claim that the approval will destroy the Public Ministry model and will reduce to CNMP to one gloomy instrument of oppression and intimidation of its members”.

They say the project does not add benefit some to the rule of law and citizenship – rather, in reverse – , to reveal its real purpose and to foreshadow its destiny towards rejection.

Last Thursday, after a series of publishing the antagonist, the deputy Marcelo Ramos accepted the suggestion of the own author of the proposal, the PT Paulo Teixeira, and other leaders and postponed the PEC vote.

Read the full sub-attorneys’ manifesto:

“The Deputy Attorneys General and the Deputy Attorneys General of the Republic below, attentive to the unique processing, in the National Congress, of the PEC 05/2021, which proposes significant changes in the composition of the National Council of the Public Ministry;

and committed to the legal order, the democratic regime and unavailable social and individual interests, which have their defender in the Public Ministry, by express claim of the Constitution (art.127 – caput),

They consider that the PEC 05, if approved, will cause

– the destruction of the Public Ministry model as enshrined in the 1988 Constitution, notably with the weakening of functional independence, which allows its members not to be subject to pressure, political interests and other injunctions;

– the end of parity in the composition and attributions of the National Council of the Public Ministry and the National Council of Justice – external control bodies of their respective magistrates –, burying the constitutional symmetry of the regime between the Judiciary and the Public Ministry;

– the disfigurement of the National Council of the Public Prosecution Service as an exempt external control body, mischaracterizing its authentic constitutional purpose and reducing it to a dismal instrument of oppression and intimidation of the members of the Public Prosecution Service;

– intervention in the core activity of the Public Ministry, attributing to the CNMP the power to review any and all functional acts of the members of the Brazilian Public Ministry, through opaque parameters, when it should be confined, according to the Constitution, to disciplinary and financial control;

– the elimination of the healthy democratic practice of the Public Ministry, by allowing each attorney general to choose 2/3 of the body’s Superior Council, stifling all judicious debate and causing a biased hegemony in the review of acts and in the punishment of the members of each Public Ministry , with the aggravation of giving an altered CNMP the possibility of reviewing the acts of each Council, striking institutional autonomy;

– the interference of politics, by allowing the national magistrate of the Public Prosecutor’s Office – who will also be the vice president of the CNMP – to be appointed by Congress, and for the CNMP to review or cancel acts of the Public Prosecution Service that “interfere” with public order , political order, internal organization and independence of institutions and constitutional bodies – concepts whose inexact boundaries would authorize any kind of reprimand; and

– the criminalization of members of the Public Prosecutor’s Office, since, once an investigation or disciplinary proceeding is instituted against a member of the Public Prosecutor’s Office, the statute of limitations will be interrupted until the final decision – a more implacable criterion than the one in force for those prosecuted in criminal proceedings.

They note, moreover, that PEC 05 bears the suggestive attribute of not adding any benefit to the Rule of Law and citizenship – rather, the reverse -, to revealing its real purpose and foreshadowing its destiny towards rejection.”

More news