Impasse at the STF: Dino's decision on the PF is the one that stands

The reappointment of delegate Andrei Rodrigues to the command of the Federal Police opened a discussion about the powers of the ministers of the Supremo Tribunal Federal (STF) and the scope of individual decisions. In less than 24 hours, two ministers of the Court issued opposing decisions on the same case, generating a legal and institutional impasse. The main doubt revolved around why the decision of Minister Flávio Dino came into effect on the previous determination of removal pronounced by Minister André Mendonça.

The Supreme Court’s regiment does not provide that a minister can overturn a colleague’s decision. As the two ministers have the same hierarchy within the STF, the most recent decision is the one that ends up being executed — counteracting the effects of the previous order until the plenary of the Pacific Court halts it. This dynamic, although it causes strangeness, is what has guided the practical action in the case.

Decision conflict in less than 24 hours

The decision conflict on STF unfolded in an interval of less than 24 hours. First, Minister André Mendonça ordered the removal of Andrei Rodrigues from the position of Director General of PF. Then Minister Flávio Dino, rapporteur of a related case, granted an injunction to bring him back to his post.

As both ministers are members of the STF with the same jurisdictional authority, one individual decision does not formally revoke the other under the hierarchical criterion. However, in the practice of public administration, the last order issued is the one that is executed. This is why Dino’s decision, as the most recent, prevails at the moment.

Why does Dino's injunction prevail?

According to the federal judge Paulo César Rodrigues, post-doctoral from the University of Coimbra, the momentary prevalence of Dino’s injunction stems strictly from the temporal sequence. There is, therefore, no hierarchical superiority among ministers, but rather a question of a practical order: the last word given is that which guides the administration until the collegiate body manifests itself.

In an interview with GloboNews Radar, the jurist Gustavo Sampaio explained that, under the regimental aspect, the minister Flávio Dino had competence to analyze the request of Andrei Rodrigues because it was already linked (prevent) to the subject. Andrei’s defense brought the Supreme Court in the context of the process in which Dino had authorized the sharing of evidence collected by the Civil Police of São Paulo in the counting on amendments intended for the film Dark Horse. As the rapporteur of the matter was Dino, the request followed the formal rules of the court.

Experts point to previous misconceptions

Gustavo Sampaio also noted that, in 2020, the STF accepted the request of the PDT to suspend the appointment of Alexandre Ramagem in the PF and that, in 2026, Mendonça attended the New Party. For the expert, in both episodes there was a misunderstanding, since the prerogative of naming and exonerating the head of the PF falls privately to the Executive Power.

This view reinforces the thesis that monocratic decisions about the command of the PF can invade the competence of the Executive, but it does not solve the current impasse. The controversy remains until the plenary of the STF pronounces itself definitively.

Plenary is the only way out of the impasse

Both the magistrate Paulo César Rodrigues and the jurist Gustavo Sampaio emphasize that the only way out to pacify the duality of decisions is the deliberation of the plenary of the STF. Sampaio emphasized that monocratic decisions taken in an urgent character need to be submitted immediately to the collegiate body.

The need for the final word of the collegiate is expressly contained in the decision of the Minister himself, Flávio Dino, who concluded the order by recording that his injunction "submits exclusively to the authority of the plenary of Supremo Tribunal Federal". Appraisal by all the ministers is also collected in appeal from the Advocacia General da União (AGU), on which the president of the Court, Edson Fachin, opened a 72-hour period for André Mendonça to demonstrate.

Instruments to suspend ministerial decision

In the Supreme Court, the instrument for suspending the decision of the minister of the Court is the so-called Suspension of Injunction, which is the competence of the Presidency of the Supreme Court. It was the type of resource used by the AGU to request the overthrow of Andrei’s removal and awaits Fachin’s analysis.

The Supreme Court understands that it is not up to a minister, by individual decision, to invalidate a decision made by another colleague in cases such as habeas corpus, used to challenge arrests or restrictions on freedom, and the security warrant, used to question acts of authorities when there is an allegation of violation of a right. This understanding reinforces the need for the plenary to resolve the conflict.

While the plenary does not speak, the decision of Flávio Dino continues to apply, and Andrei Rodrigues remains in charge of the Federal Police. The outcome of the case may define the limits of individual action of the ministers of STF on sensitive issues such as public safety. Keep up with updates on the Boca no Trombone.

Read Also

Mendonça sends ex-prosecutor of the INSS arrested since 2025

Deltan-favourable decision holds indefinite dispute for Senate, for Gleidson Carlos

Manifestos urge STF to join

Font

g1.globo.com