[ad_1]
BRASÍLIA – Government's intention
Bolsonaro
change the rules on
possession of arms
and harden the system
progression of the sentence
sentenced can not find any resistance in the Federal Supreme Court (STF). The Minister of the Court, Minister Dias Toffoli, believes that any public policy can be modified, provided that it does not conflict with the fixed clause of the Constitution, that is to say the rules that can not be changed.
For Toffoli, it is legally possible to leave the prisoner behind bars longer, as the Bolsonaro government argues. Today, for a convicted person to change the regime closed by the semi-open, for example, he must perform at least one-sixth of his sentence. Plbadto wants to increase the time needed for this transition.
Toffoli also explained that policies facilitating people's access to weapons could in theory be modified by new legislation. The Bolsonaro government plans to enact a decree on the subject. The text is being badyzed at the Civil House. Toffoli, however, felt that there could be no change in the restrictive clauses and cited as an example the death penalty, prohibited by the Constitution.
– Any public policy can be formatted, provided it does not offend the stony clause. For example: it is possible to modify the system of progression of the sentence, but the Constitution does not prevent it. By changing the arming policy of the population, the Constitution does not prevent either. To establish the death penalty: there the Constitution prevents, it is a stone clause – said the minister to the GLOBO.
As I have said on other occasions, Toffoli wants to leave the leading role to the new executive and legislative power elected by the people. Only decisions essential to guarantee democracy and freedom of expression would be in the account of the STF. Nevertheless, some problems will be inevitable, such as the reform of social security. If it is approved by the National Congress, it will certainly be questioned by the STF. Toffoli's recommendation is that a reform be negotiated to reduce the rules instead of extending them, in order to generate less legal challenge.
– All reforms were made to the Supreme Court. This is the result of a very broad constitution. The case may be for reforms that will reduce the size of the Constitution, not increase it. Because, the more it increases, the more you give room for legal actions, legal conflicts. This is one of the problems of our reforms: they generally tend to increase the number of provisions of the Constitution, he added.
Toffoli also defended the freedom of the press and said that the STF knew how to live with criticism.
– If you have a censored or censored press, or if you have a judicial system that is not independent, you will have a form of authoritarianism. And who guarantees the free press in Brazil, it is the Supreme. Even if the Supreme is often criticized by the mainstream press, or the ministers are criticized, it is unanimous here to defend the freedom of the press and a free press, "said Toffoli.
CRIMINALIZATION OF HOMOPHOBIA IN THE GUIDE
When talking about attacks suffered by the court in social networks, especially at the end of the year, when an adjustment of the compensation of judges of the order of 16 , 38% was approved, or even earlier, as a result of decisions leading to the release of the former – The Minister of the Civil House, José Dirceu, and the bus driver Rio Jacob Barata, Toffoli, has stated that the criticisms of the Court concerned the democratic game. But he warns against the fact that they can not slip into criminal practices:
– This is the cowardice of anonymity of social networks. There are lies, false news. We must get used to it: in a democratic society, criticism is also part of it. The person has the perfect right not to love such or such person. It's part of democracy. What he can not have, it is a violent and disrespectful act, from the point of view of slander.
The president of the Supreme Court also said he understood who is dissatisfied with court decisions, but should not go as far as asking for the closure of a court because of disagreement with the ruling.
– You have to say that judges do not get up in the morning and say, "I'm going to judge it here." Someone will ask the magistracy. So close the judiciary, it is close access to the exercise of citizenship, it is close democracy. This government, which was not authoritarian in Brazil, has never supported, at any time in history.
Although the trial court sentence is scheduled for April, the TSP should have reduced its criminal role this year. With the transfer of the Lava-Jet cases to the lower court, because of the change in the special court rule, the court tends to deal more with constitutional issues.
For the first half of 2019, judgments are important to society, such as the obligation for the public power to provide high-cost drugs to those who do not have financial conditions and the process of criminalization of homophobia. In addition to dealing directly with the rights of the people, the causes have in common the fact that the National Congress has not legislated on the subjects, lack of political consensus.
[ad_2]
Source link
