The Minister of the Federal Supreme Court (STF) Flávio Dino gave the Chamber of Deputies until 8pm this Friday (27) a deadline to respond to four questions about the payment of parliamentary amendments. The deadline was given by the minister after the Chamber asked for reconsideration of Dino’s injunction that suspended the payment of R$4.2 billion in commission amendments.
In the minister’s opinion, the Chamber has not yet complied with the Court’s decisions that determined rules of transparency and traceability in the transfer of amendments. “Thus, if the Chamber of Deputies wishes to maintain or make viable the commitments of the committee amendments relating to the current year, it must respond objectively to the questions indicated above by 8 pm today (December 27, 2024), as well as attach the supporting minutes approval of the indications (or specifications) of the aforementioned amendments, if any”, decided the minister.
In the decision, Flávio Dino asked four questions that must be answered by the House:
1 – When the specifications or indications of the commission amendments (RP 8) contained in Letter no. 1.4335.458/2024? Were all 5,449 specifications or indications of the “committee amendments” contained in the letter approved by the committees? Are there specifications or indications of committee amendments that have not been approved by the committees? If they were not approved by the committees, who approved them?
2 – What appears in the table of specifications or indications of committee amendments (RP 8) as a new indication was formulated by whom? Which instance was it approved by? The leaders? The chairman of the commission? The commission?
3. Which precept of Resolution no. 001/2006, from the National Congress, is the basis for the aforementioned Official Letter No. 1.4335.458/2024? As Official Letter no. Is 1.4335.458/2024 compatible with articles 43 and 44 of the aforementioned Resolution?
4. There is another normative act that legitimizes the aforementioned Official Letter no. 1.4335.458/2024? If so, which one, in which article and when published?
Understand
In December 2022, the STF ruled that the amendments called RP8 and RP9 were unconstitutional. After the decision, the National Congress approved a resolution that changed the rules for distributing resources through rapporteur amendments to comply with the Court’s determination.
However, PSOL, the party that filed the lawsuit against the amendments, pointed out that the decision continued to be in non-compliance.
After the retirement of Minister Rosa Weber, the original rapporteur of the issue, Flávio Dino took over the management of the case.
In August of this year, Dino ordered the suspension of the amendments and decided that the transfers must follow traceability criteria. The minister also ordered the Comptroller General of the Union (CGU) to audit parliamentarians’ transfers through amendments to the secret budget.
