Describing the Brazilian Federal Supreme Court and Judiciary, Part One
- Note: Olavo is going to continue posting on some of the more technical topics regarding Brazilian law and investment. This post is first of two describing the Brazilian judiciary, how it functions, and some of the changes we will likely see in the future. It is interesting to note the role of foreign investors encouraging change.
There is no legal conference around the country where Justices (Ministros) from both the Supremo Tribunal Federal (“STF”) andthe Superior Tribunal de Justiça (“STJ”), the highest courts in the country for constitutional and non-constitutional matters, respectively, don’t complain about the amount of cases receive. In response, the courts and legislature are pursuing several measures to change this picture. But to understand where the burden comes from and how it can be resolved, it is helpful to first look at the judiciary in general and how cases arrive at the highest courts.
Brazil has state and federal courts (the so called ordinary branch – justiça ordinária) in addition to electoral, labor, and military courts (the so called special branch – justiça especial or justiça especializada).
Ordinary Branch
- The highest court for non-constitutional matters (above state and federal courts of appeal) is the STJ. In most cases, the STJ is the highest court that will make a decision. The STJ was created by the 1988 Federal Constitution to help to lower the number of cases that reach the STF.
- A case reaches the highest court in different ways. For a claim to reach the STF, the party has to show the case deals with a direct violation to the Federal Constitution. Most civil procedure matters, for instance a domestic arbitration dispute, will only reach the STJ, because even though they may deal with a violation to the Constitution (i.g. due process), such violation is indirect.
- Another requirement for a case to reach the STF is the so called prequestionamento (all topics have to be stated in the decision made by the lower court), exhaustion of all other types of appeals (exaurimento de recursos), and that the party, as mentioned, demonstrates a direct violation to the constitution.
As a matter of practice, a party always has to appeal to both higher courts (STF and STJ) if it wants to have its claim heard.
Special Branch
- All courts in the special branch have higher courts. Their decisions (and STJ decisions) tend to be final, unless overturned by theSTF due to constitutional issues.
Exceptions: Original and Extraordinary Jurisdiction
Original jurisdiction means the case starts in the appellate court and not in the lower courts. Superior (STJ), Extraordinary and Appellate Courts (Courts of Appeal, Regional Federal Courts) can have original jurisdiction over some matters. In this sense, a crime (either a felony or a political crime) committed by a member of the National Congress is judged by the STF, not any lower court. A crime committed by the governor or by members of the State National Assemblies is judged by the State Courts of Appeal (Tribunais de Justiça or “TJs”).
The STF and STJ may also have appellate jurisdiction, instead of extraordinary and special jurisdiction, respectively. In this sense, a first degree final ruling in a political crime starts in the lower court but is then appealed directly to the STF, instead to a federal court of appeals – known in Brazil as a Regional Federal Court, Tribunal Regional Federal – TRF, since it has jurisdiction over a certain region of the country, not only over one particular state (what is known in the US as circuit).
In the same fashion, a final decision that deals with a foreign state or a foreign entity versus Brazilian municipalities or residents is appealed directly to the STJ.
Concluding Remarks
Despite the very large court system in Brazil, historically, the number of appeals that reach the STF in its capacity as a court of appeals was extremely high (more than five thousand a year as recently as five years ago). The vast number of procedural measures, the large size of the Brazilian Federal Constitution (which has 250 articles and several amendments), and the many articles within that document allowing for cases to start directly at that court – i.e. the STF has original jurisdiction to rule on any type of crimes (political or felonies) committed by members of the National Congress, by the President, the Vice-President, State Ministers and the Attorney General (article 102, b),– has created lots of cases for the STF. In addition to ordinary appeals, the cases arising from original jurisdiction overflow to the 11 Supreme Court Justices who could be occupied with different matters.
In recent years, different measures have tried to change this situation, as we shall see in a future post. Most were motived by criticism from foreign investors regarding the slowness of the Judiciary Branch and were consolidated in the Constitutional Amendment 45 of 2004 (Emenda Constitucional – EC – 45/2004). This amendment plus additional reforms have greatly changed the Brazilian court system, and these changes will be the focus of our next post on this subject.