In a petition to the STF, lawyers Maria Carolina Peres Soares Gschwenter and Laerte Luís Gschwenter, demand that the discussion of General Repercussion 966177 be guided “in a preferential and urgent manner, be agreed as soon as possible on the merits judgment by the Plenary of this Worthy Court.”
In its justification, the Gschwenter office points out that 9th art. 1,035 is explicit when determining that: “The appeal that has the recognized general repercussion must be judged within 1 (one) year and will have preference over the other deeds, except those involving the arrested defendant and the requests for habeas corpus.”
It follows the petition emphasizing that RE 966177 is intended to discuss “the reception or not by the Federal Constitution in force in relation to article 50 of Decree-Law 3,688 / 1941, which provides for the criminal contravention of gambling, recognized as atypical conduct by the Court a quo. It remains to be concluded that the controversial issue in these records includes an analysis of a constitutionally relevant issue from an economic, political, social, and legal point of view. In fact, the question brought before the Supreme Federal Court is, above all, constitutional, since the Criminal Appeals Panel of the State of Rio Grande do Sul removed the typical nature of games of chance based on constitutional precepts related to free initiative and to fundamental freedoms, provided for in articles 1, IV, 5, XLI, and 170 of the Federal Constitution.”
In the document, the lawyers note that "more than 4 (four) years have passed since the decision of this Worthy Court for the existence of general repercussions, with the preference and urgency of a new agenda for judgment being mandatory, which is already required."
In the petition, the lawyers emphasize that “it is imperative to face and declare the unconstitutionality of criminal laws that violate constitutional principles. It is imperative and necessary to reflect on the possibility of generating jobs, income and taxes that can be reversed in favor of the population. If, before the harmful effects of the pandemic, the scenario was already very serious, it is currently devastating; in view of the increase in emergency spending, public accounts will be even more negative.”
Source: GMB
