STF Majority Signals Approval for Relatives in Political Appointments, Sparking Nepotism Debate
Brazil's Supreme Federal Court majority supports appointing relatives to political offices if qualifications are met, but dissent raises nepotism concerns.
- • Six STF justices favor allowing relatives in political roles under legal criteria.
- • Minister Flávio Dino dissents, warning against nepotism in political appointments.
- • The case involves a Tupã law permitting municipal secretaries to be relatives.
- • Minister Luiz Fux highlights political appointments as governance acts requiring qualifications.
- • The ruling will have broad implications for similar nepotism-related cases nationwide.
Key details
The Supreme Federal Court (STF) is advancing with its deliberation on whether appointing relatives to political positions constitutes nepotism, focusing on a contentious case from Tupã, São Paulo. On October 23, the court saw six justices voting in favor of allowing relatives of political authorities, such as municipal secretaries or ministers, to be appointed to political roles, provided they meet legal qualifications and moral standards. Only Minister Flávio Dino dissented, arguing that nepotism prohibitions under Súmula Vinculante 13 should apply to these positions to avoid what he described as "family allotment" in government roles.
The case originated from a local law in Tupã that permitted the appointment of family members to municipal secretary positions. This law was challenged by the Public Ministry of the State of São Paulo and initially overturned by the state court based on nepotism concerns. However, the STF's majority opinion interprets the constitutional prohibition of nepotism as not extending to political appointments within the executive branch. Minister Luiz Fux, acting as the relator of the Recurso Extraordinário 1133118, emphasized that political appointments are governance acts and can be valid if candidates are professionally qualified and possess moral integrity.
The ruling carries general repercussions (Tema 1.000) and will influence similar cases across Brazilian courts. Ministers agreed that these exceptions should be confined to executive roles, excluding judicial and legislative branches. Flávio Dino’s dissent underscores ongoing apprehensions about political nepotism undermining impartiality and principles of public administration.
The deliberations will continue with further discussions scheduled for October 29, as the court seeks to define a guiding thesis on the scope of nepotism laws in Brazilian political appointments.