STF begins trial on changes to the Clean Record Law

The STF (Supreme Federal Court) begins judging this Friday (22) the actions that question changes to the Clean Record Law approved by Congress in 2025. The trial will take place in the Court's virtual plenary and is scheduled to continue until May 29.

Ministers will analyze requests to suspend sections of Complementary Law 219/2025, which modified ineligibility rules and opened a loophole so that convicted politicians can return to contest elections sooner.

Among those likely to benefit from the change are former mayor Eduardo Cunha (Republicans) and former governors Anthony Garotinho (Republicans) and José Roberto Arruda (PSD).

According to the rule approved by Congress, part of the cases of ineligibility now begin to count when convicted by a collegiate body, and no longer just after serving the sentence, which can reduce the effective time of electoral removal in some cases.

The action presented by Rede Sustentabilidade argues that the changes "disfigured" the system created by the Clean Record Law and weakened mechanisms to protect probity and administrative morality. The party calls for the immediate suspension of the effects of the rule and, on the merits, the declaration of unconstitutionality of the law.

The party also argues that there was a defect in the legislative process. According to the action, the Senate made substantial changes to the text approved by the Chamber of Deputies without returning the project for a new vote by deputies, which would violate article 65 of the Constitution.

The case is being reported by Minister Cármen Lúcia.

The PGR (Attorney General's Office) defended to the STF that most of the changes approved by Congress in the Clean Record Law are constitutional and that the Legislature has the power to change the ineligibility rules.

In an opinion sent to the Court, the Attorney General of the Republic, Paulo Gonet, rejected the thesis that there was an irregularity in the processing of the project and stated that the new law does not represent, in itself, an unconstitutional setback.

Gonet, however, defended the overturning of sections of the rule that allow the period of ineligibility to be counted at the same time as the suspension of political rights. According to the PGR, the STF has already consolidated the understanding that the two punishments are distinct and that ineligibility should only begin after the end of the suspension of political rights.

Source: CNN