Supreme Court Justice Halts Reinstatement of Ousted Arapuá City Councilor

Supreme Court Justice Alexandre de Moraes has suspended a decision by the Minas Gerais Court of Justice (TJMG) that had ordered the reinstatement of councilor Gilson da Cunha Matos to his position in Arapuá, Minas Gerais. This preliminary injunction, granted on Wednesday, April 29th, reinstates the legislative decree from the Arapuá Municipal Chamber that originally revoked Matos' mandate. The Municipal Chamber had filed a complaint, arguing that the TJMG failed to adhere to federal legislation regarding the removal of councilors, instead relying on the Municipality's Organic Law. The Chamber contended that this procedural misapplication invalidated the TJMG's decision to return Matos to office. Gilson da Cunha Matos stated his intention to appeal the Supreme Court's ruling. The Arapuá Municipal Chamber, however, affirmed that the Supreme Court's decision upholds the chamber's institutional autonomy and internal competencies. They emphasized that the political-administrative process followed all applicable legal norms, ensuring Matos' due process rights, including the right to be heard and a full defense. Previously, the TJMG had ordered Matos' reinstatement, interpreting Binding Precedent No. 46 of the Supreme Court as exclusively pertaining to impeachment proceedings against mayors, not cases of parliamentary misconduct against councilors. Binding Precedent No. 46 stipulates that only the federal government can set rules for impeachment crimes and the process for judging and removing political officeholders, prohibiting states and municipalities from establishing differing procedures. The TJMG had cited this precedent to argue that Arapuá's Organic Law, which states that a voter cannot file a complaint for misconduct against a councilor, was applicable. Parliamentary misconduct refers to a councilor's obligation to maintain ethical and respectful conduct. Suspected breaches of this conduct can lead to impeachment proceedings, potentially resulting in the removal from office. Because the initial complaint against Matos was filed by a voter, the TJMG deemed the procedure irregular and ordered the suspension of the impeachment, the swearing-in of the substitute councilor, and Matos' return to his mandate. In his preliminary decision, Justice de Moraes indicated that the TJMG appeared to disregard the Supreme Court's binding understanding by applying municipal law instead of federal norms governing the impeachment process for political officeholders. He asserted that Binding Precedent No. 46 also applies to the procedural rules for judging these cases, as these fall under the exclusive jurisdiction of the federal government. Consequently, Moraes provisionally restored the effects of the legislative decree that revoked Gilson da Cunha Matos' mandate. The minister also ordered the responsible authority for the contested decision to comply with the ruling, requested information regarding the case, and sought the opinion of the Prosecutor General's Office before the case is definitively assigned to a rapporteur. The original administrative process against Matos was initiated to investigate alleged parliamentary misconduct based on a complaint filed by voter João Alves Neto and received by the Municipal Chamber on May 26th. The chamber's plenary session approved the impeachment on July 1st by a unanimous vote of the eight councilors present, leading to the summoning of the substitute councilor. The specific grounds for the voter's complaint remain unclear, as the STF did not provide a response when questioned by g1.