Class 4 TRF4 (Federal Regional Court of the 4th Circuit) is due to hear an appeal in the coming weeks against an action that casts doubt on the validity of preliminary consultations with the university community on the selection of candidates for deans and assistant deans of the UFSK. (Federal University of Saint Catherine). The process took place on April 26.

The trial of the three judges was supposed to take place on the 10th, but was eventually postponed due to incompatibility with the agenda of one of the parties. Until this Tuesday (2) the meeting had not yet been rescheduled.

The consultations took place on 26 April and continued with the election of the CUn and the appointment of the federal government – ​​Photo: Leo Munoz/ND

In the action, economist Bruno Negri casts doubt on the university’s adoption of a parity vote, which established the same weight of votes for students and civil servants (professor and current dean Irineu Manoel received the most votes). Negri advocates for teacher votes to be 70% of the weight.

On the 16th, Judge Vivian Josette Pantaleao Caminha denied the economist’s motion for an injunction. For her, there was no immediate reason for the intervention of the judiciary, since the appointment of the rector and vice-rector is an act of the President of the Republic.

However, on the 26th, the Regional Prosecutor of the Republic Carmem, Elisa Hessel, accepted the appeal submitted by the lawyer Joao De Bona Filho, representing the interests of Negri. Opinion has the power of opinion in the process, but is not decisive in the final jury.

In the document adopted by the MPF (Federal Attorney’s Office), counsel pointed to Law no. 5.540/1968 and Decree no. 1.916/19962. Both provide a mandatory weight of 70% for the category of teachers.

“Having established parity among the three segments listed in Article 4, [da resolução do COMELEUFSC (Comissão Eleitoral da UFSC) […] the aforementioned resolution departs from the legal requirement that a seventy percent weight be given to the faculty vote,” Hessel notes.

“Although it is not ignored that even in the case of formal consultations they will not have binding force, one cannot also reduce the weight that such consultations of opinions have in democratic processes, otherwise they would not even be held,” he concluded.

Bruno Negri demands cancellation of public comment. The procedure is informal and has no direct effect. After him, the name Irineu Manoel was chosen by CUn (University Council) vote and then put forward by the federal government.

“The only official elections were held in CUn,” the UFSC said in a statement.

The university says the public consultation was not conducted by the UFSC, but by the COMELEUFSC, which is made up of private individuals. For this reason, it will not be official and cannot be formalized within the framework of the law and the resolution referred to by the defender Bruno Negri.

“For all purposes, including legal ones, the only official elections were those held in the University Council,” the UFSC said in a note. Check out the full statement:

“The opinion of the prosecutor’s office is a non-binding legal opinion and at the moment is not a predictor of the outcome of the process. The opinion of the public ministry, in the assessment of the Federal Prosecutor’s Office with the FSK, is based on the erroneous premise that the impugned ruling, which mentions equal representation, is an official act of the FSK.

However, this act belongs to COMELEUFSC, an electoral commission formed exclusively from representatives of private organizations. This shows that the consultation carried out is not the consultation referred to in Decree n. 1916, 1996, as the act is supposed to be official. The consultation was carried out or initiated not by the university, but by private individuals. For all purposes, including legal ones, the only official elections were those held in the University Council.

In the defense filed in the suit, the University demonstrated that informal consultation with the university community was not binding, that is, it did not interfere with the prerogative of the University Council to conduct its own elections to prepare the triple lists sent to the federal government.