STF makes punishment for politicians for improbity more rigorous, expands loss of positions for the convicted

Brazil's Supreme Federal Court (STF) has significantly strengthened penalties for administrative improbity, broadening the criteria for the loss of public office among convicted politicians and officials. In a recent decision, the court mandated that judges must offer explicit justifications if they opt not to remove an official from their post following a conviction for administrative misconduct.

This ruling revises the application of the Improbity Law, which serves as a key instrument in combating illicit acts by public agents against the administration. The STF's decision aims to ensure greater accountability, moving away from a previous interpretation that allowed for more leniency. The court also clarified that the suspension of political rights begins only after a final conviction, and asset freezes can now cover the full amount of illicit enrichment to guarantee public fund reimbursement.

The STF's deliberation involved analyzing several articles of the Improbity Law, particularly concerning the potential loss of public function. Minister Dias Toffoli proposed a shift in logic: instead of the loss of function being limited to the specific role where the infraction occurred, the conviction should generally lead to the forfeiture of all public positions held by the agent at the time of the sanction, unless specific justifications are provided.

"Often the manager, as a manager, committed an act of improbity, but he is an excellent university professor at a federal university, at a state public university," Toffoli explained. "And in this way, he can have it preserved, provided it is justified, to the extent that the judge justifies it, the maintenance of that office, that public function." This approach seeks to balance accountability with the preservation of legitimate public service roles when appropriate, ensuring that sanctions are targeted yet robust.

“

Often the manager, as a manager, committed an act of improbity, but he is an excellent university professor at a federal university, at a state public university. And in this way, he can have it preserved, provided it is justified, to the extent that the judge justifies it, the maintenance of that office, that public function.