LOBBY IN THE COURTS

The lobby in Brazil is not legal activity, but synonymous with "simple pressure, influence peddling or corruption"; is the pejorative meaning that the press gives to the term. 

The performance is directed primarily to the Executive, Legislative and Judicial powers, because the decisions of these bodies influencing an entire social group, motivating the political movement.

Legalization lobby is needed because, while activity remains unregulated, abuses continue to be perpetrated, something similar to the numbers game. The Bill no. 203, introduced by Senator Marco Maciel, in 1983, remains shelved in the House of Representatives since 1990. Ago amendment that allows the actions of lobbyists only at the level of the houses of Congress, not allowing the action in the business, even though studies show that 85 % of projects in progress in the legislative houses originate from the government; also prohibits interference in the judiciary of lobbyists.

Since the promulgation of the Constitution in 1988, 12 projects were presented in the House of Representatives, but the lobby is still without some regulation. Projects, almost all, were archived.

The omission of the legislature provides conditions for rampant and pernicious proliferation lobby together decision makers, influencing beliefs about illegal rewards, corruption, undue advantage, money, etc. 

The press has rendered outstanding service to the dignity and citizenship, denounces when numerous cases of abuse lobby, outlaws and through corruption, carried out mainly in recent years in the country.

In the United States, the action of lobbyists is regulated, since the year 1946. The word means "waiting room ", where people were in expectation of the arrival of the authority to negotiate and talk.

The lobby in the Legislature involves the monitoring of projects running in the house, followed by technical studies and proposals for improvement of the measure.

Lobbyists come even in commissions for obtaining good laws. Clear that the lobby can influence the authors of this or that project the impact and the impact that social issue in the segment to which it is intended. The field of action of lobbyists in the legislature, is vast, because it passes by the committees, the seminars, which often settle for discussion and improvement projects, and arrives at the plenary parliamentary houses.

In the business lobbyists also move because there originates most of the laws of the country; influence in this area, come by considering the issue for submission to Parliament until the moment of final decision, or sanction or veto the proposal discussed and approved in the Legislature.

The judiciary does not mean there is not room for activities of lobbyists, but there is no doubt his perilous drive.

Numerous demands have taken different paths the true meaning of justice mission. The tarnish the judiciary begins by Cortes upper and falls into the hands of the judges.

One of the most publicized examples had starring Roberto Bertholdo, lawyer, surnamed by the magazine Isto É, "the organizer of sentences." Beltholdo was tipped to take ministry in the Lula government, but ended up in jail as a result of criminal action initiated by the Public Prosecutor of Curitiba; the process involves ministers and former ministers of the STJ. Among other crimes, was found buying judicial decision to lock the criminal action for achieving political candidacy.

Operation "Diamante", Federal Police, culminated with the expulsion Minister Vicente Leal, in April 2003, the Supreme Court, on suspicion of selling judgments for drug traffickers. In 2004, the Court requested retirement.

Another example of the lobby STJ relates to so-called "premium credit IPI". The superior court, in previous trials, admitted maintenance of Decree- Law n . 491 1969 set up to compensate exporters of manufactured products, by internally taxes paid; abruptly changed the understanding, on the grounds of " reasons of state " and denied that the exporters had already granted. The lobby government to the STJ prevailed to the detriment of taxpayers.

Operation Anaconda, undertaken by the Federal Police, along with the prosecutor, discomfited extortion scheme and sale of sentences; one of those involved, the judge Joao Carlos da Rocha Matos acquitting guilty, finds himself trapped since the year 2003. This case, major pharmaceutical corrupted ( lobby ) magistrates to prevent the marketing of generic drugs.

In Curitiba, newspapers reported that one judge, and interfere with the encouragement of his protected, came to put together a sentence to the judge to sign, admitting no recovery of Service Tax of law firms in the city.

The Judge Nicolau dos Santos Neto was promoted to Regional Labour Court through political patronage. By decree, the former constitutional permission, was appointed by General Emilio Medici president for the post of Public Prosecutor of Labor, in 1970; later, in 1981, was chosen as a magistrate and then the fifth constitutional reached the TRT. Away went the judiciary and arrested for corruption.

There are those who understand that the partnership concluded between the Souza Cruz and the judiciary in 2004, has been lobbying the company to obtain favor in a ADIN, in which it sought an injunction to remove restrictions on cigarette advertising.

The press reports that a minister in Parliament, accused, a former president of the Supreme Court to act as a lobbyist in defense of a client, Paraná, in case of expropriation. The case involved the release of an amount of U.S. $ 100 million. 

The lobby of the government with the Supreme Court, when it examines the constitutionality of taxing retirees and retirees caused irreparable damage; judges, prosecutors, attorneys and lawyers, through their associations, expressed the illegality of the contribution and concern with the "interference" of the executive in the judiciary, but to no avail. 

The Binding Precedent has its advantages, but without doubt will led greater force to lobby the government with the superior courts. Is that the ministers of the Supreme Court, responsible for binding precedents, are appointed by the President and the key criterion is political.

Are we heading towards kleptocracy?

Salvador, junho/2014.

Antonio Pessoa Cardoso.

                 OAB 3.378