Author: Felipe Recondo

Source: The State of S. Paulo - São Paulo / SP - 30/09/2010

Felipe Recondo / BRASÍLIA - The State of São Paulo

 

INTERVIEW

Eliana Calmon, national justice broker

The new national justice broker, Minister Eliana Calmon, is a victim of the slowness of the Brazilian judiciary. Four years ago, after her father's death, she expected the court to complete the inventory. But, as she herself defines, this was yet another case that fell into the “webs of the Judiciary”. Therefore, he says that he prefers to solve his problems without the intervention of Justice. "I am a magistrate who fears needing justice," he says.

 

Eliana is responsible for correcting any deviations from the magistrates and working precisely so that problems such as delays are solved. She replaces Minister Gilson Dipp and will serve for two years. Among the examples of slowness in the Judiciary, the minister cites the judgment of the Clean Record Law by the Supreme Federal Court (STF), which ended in a tie last week. "Even this project, which is rather a reaction to the slowness of Justice, was stuck in the web of the Judiciary."

 

What image did you have of the Judiciary before you came to internal affairs?

I am a critic of the Judiciary. And it would be inconsistent not to come to internal affairs at a time when life allowed me to do something to combat the bureaucracy that I criticize. With only ten days of activity, I am seeing much more than I knew. I knew about the dysfunction, the delay of the Judiciary. But here I became aware that there are no specific culprits. This dysfunction comes from state dysfunction.

 

Why is that?

Each state had an absolutely independent justice system. They organized themselves as they wanted. There was no control over the people who organized justice. From there we were able to detect that we had 27 fiefdoms. They had independence as Power and are managed by groups of judges who do not alternate in power. These specific circumstances of the Judiciary and that the law established (vitality and immovability of the magistrates) to give greater guarantee to the jurisdiction began to harm the Judiciary itself.

 

Who is harmed by this?

All this dysfunction flows into the hands of the courts with the delay in the proceedings. We are 100 years behind in everything: buildings, employees, public service practices, information technology - there are still magistrates who do not use a computer or use it only as a typewriter. It is these practices that lead to this dysfunction. And this dysfunction is of an unbelievable size. In São Paulo alone, we have 16 million cases. And this at a huge Brazil cost. When you enter the Judiciary, you have no expectation of when you leave, how much the process will cost.

 

If it is possible to resolve a dispute without needing justice, do you prefer?

Certainly. Today, I am a magistrate who fears needing justice. I'm afraid I need justice.

 

Is that insoluble?

Nothing is insoluble. I am extremely optimistic. Now, we will not resolve the Judiciary under 10 years. We won't solve it. Because all the controls in society, which are in the hands of the Judiciary, are in trouble.

 

For example?

Prison policy. We have very serious problems. This is not just the Judiciary. It's from the Executive too. Because the Executive does not carry out the necessary public policy, the judge is becoming less interested in the prisoners for which he is responsible. The judge became a paper signer. He signs the guide letter, sends the prisoner to the penitentiary and we are closed. He doesn't examine, he doesn't drive, he doesn't follow.

 

But is it not possible to resolve this more quickly?

I think that justice can only be resolved in the long term. Episodic cases we can resolve. I have a request for São Paulo from someone who has been in court for 24 years fighting with his brother. And after winning in all instances, the process reached the Supreme Federal Court, where there were no less than six embargoes of declaration, resources for the process not to come out of the Supreme Court. Now, the losing party has soaked the judge's hand so that the execution is not completed. This is the reality.

 

How big is corruption in the judiciary?

At a time when there is an organ that is shattered from an administrative point of view, of functionality, of efficiency, we have a fertile field for corruption. Facilities begin to be sold due to the difficulties of the system. To judge a case, sometimes an employee, to help someone, comes to the judge and asks if he can judge a particular case. Here comes a note from a colleague, I do it myself all the time: “As far as possible, give a request for preference to an afflicted Bahian who is trying to be judged.” These things start to happen. And who doesn't have a friend to make a note for the judge?

 

And how does corruption end?

Corruption is done away with as far as the causes of that corruption can be reached. Part of this is the result of indecent intimacy between public and private, between judicial and political activity and the interference of politicians in the courts. Corruption is only ended by fighting the causes, not the consequences. Punishing the corrupt is like building a dam so he doesn't spread his harmful behavior.

 

And do the states' internal affairs offices work satisfactorily to resolve these problems?

No. They never worked to their satisfaction. The local magistrate alone cannot do much. As Aliomar Baleeiro (ex-deputy and ex-STF minister) used to say: wolf does not eat wolf. It is difficult for a prosecutor to start rebelling against his colleagues.

 

Some magistrates, now in Tocantins, are giving injunctions against the publication of articles against politicians. What do you think of that?

We know that transparency is one of the principles of all democracy. The news is naturally beneficial and is linked to the transparency of any and all State activities. The explanation for decisions in this regard can only be in the attempt to protect someone. I firmly believe that.

 

Is the Clean Record Law, which provides for the ineligibility of politicians before being ultimately sentenced, a reaction to the slow pace of justice?

Yes. And it seems that we also put the Clean Record in the slowness of Justice. It's like a spider's web. Even this project, which is rather a reaction to the slowness of Justice, was stuck in the web of the Judiciary. The greatest proof of the dysfunction of the Judiciary is in the processing of this project in the Judiciary.

 

WHO IS IT

Eliana Calmon Alves was born on November 5, 1944 in the capital of Bahia. She graduated in law from the Federal University of Bahia in 1968. She was a federal judge in the Judiciary section of Bahia in the period between 1979 and 1989 and a judge at the Federal Regional Court of the 1st region between 1989 and 1999, assumed the post of minister of the Superior Court of Justice for 11 years.