Brazil's Congress Prepares to Rein in President's Decree

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 02 BRASILIA 000390 SIPDIS SENSITIVE SIPDIS E.O. 12958: N/A TAGS: PGOV KDEM BR SUBJECT: Brazil's Congress Prepares to Rein in President's Decree Authority REF: A) Brasilia 160, B) 07 Brasilia 1670 ¶1. (SBU) Summary. Angered by an alleged overuse of decree-making authority that has caused legislative gridlock, Congress will try to limit the president's ability to dominate the legislative agenda and implement policy through issuance of "provisional measures" (MPs). President Lula's unprecedented use of MPs, which have blocked the legislative agenda since late last year, has served to erode congressional independence and initiative in a system that already heavily favors the executive. With broad multiparty agreement that MPs must be reined in, if legislators can agree on the details of a constitutional amendment on MPs they will reclaim control of the legislative agenda, a change that would significantly enhance the legislative branch's autonomy and power. Congress could approve a constitutional amendment bill by next September, which would take effect immediately. End summary. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Special Committee Takes on MPs - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ¶2. (U) Since last December, the Chamber of Deputies agenda has been completely blocked by MPs, with the plenary constitutionally barred from voting on any other business. The situation was similar in the Senate. As a result, congressional frustration has welled up because legislators were unable to debate bills of their own authorship in the plenary, instead being forced to vote on one MP after another. In February, Chamber of Deputies President Arlindo Chinaglia (Workers' Party, PT, government; of Sao Paulo) appointed a special committee to propose changes to the constitution governing the use of provisional measures (MP),one of the important policy-making tools available to Brazilian presidents. ¶3. (U) MPs have been around in one form or another since 1937, but their use grew rapidly under the 1988 constitution, which gives the president carte blanche to issue an MP, provided it deals with an "urgent and relevant" matter. The 1988 text on MPs was taken directly from the 1947 Italian Constitution, and was intended for a parliamentary system, but Brazilians afterwards chose to retain the presidential system in a national referendum, leading to a poor fit. The text was amended in 2001 to force congress to vote on MPs after 45 days, at the same time removing the president's right to renew MPs without limit. President Lula has used MPs more than any other president in modern times: 311 MPs in five years; his predecessor issued 365 in eight years. - - - - - - - - - - - The Trouble with MPs - - - - - - - - - - - ¶4. (U) An MP takes effect immediately on issuance and remains valid for 60 days. It is automatically renewed once for 60 days. If not voted into law within 45 days of its issuance, an MP "locks" the congressional agenda and the plenary cannot vote on anything else. If rejected by a vote in Congress, or if the MP is not voted on within 120 days, it becomes invalid and the Congress must prepare legislation to deal with any residual effects of its period of validity. ¶5. (SBU) This system has effectively allowed the executive to dominate the legislative agenda by issuing a constant stream of MPs and forcing congress to focus on executive priorities almost to the exclusion of all else. President Lula's reliance on MPs has been so great that he got tangled in his own web last December (ref A). Desperate to have the congress renew the tax on financial transactions (CPMF),the executive branch was actually forced to revoke several supposedly urgent MPs to clear the path for the CPMF legislation. Still later in the game, when the critical CPMF legislation was before the Senate, pro-government legislators in the Chamber of Deputies went into "obstruction" so as not to vote on any MPs, because passage of MPs would have had the effect of forwarding them to the Senate, thereby locking its agenda. Such shenanigans only heightened legislators' perception that it was time to reform the MP rules. Federal Deputy Leonardo Picciani (Brazilian Democratic Movement Party, PMDB, government coalition; of Rio de Janeiro) pointed out another problem: he believes MPs degrade congress, since at present some interest groups make their case directly to the executive in hopes of obtaining an MP, instead of working with congress to seek a legislative result. He added that this process hurts the legislative branch by distancing it from the people. BRASILIA 00000390 002 OF 002 - - - - - - - - - - - What Congress Can Do - - - - - - - - - - - ¶7. (SBU) Recognizing the utility of MPs in certain cases, most government and opposition legislators agree that MPs should not be eliminated, just reined in. Senator Eduardo Suplicy (Workers Party, PT, government; of Sao Paulo) told Poloff on March 17 that "everyone agrees something must change." Deputy Picciani, the rapporteur of the special committee on MPs, will present a draft constitutional amendment in the week of March 24. Poloff asked him on March 19 why MPs should not be eliminated entirely and he said that was "culturally impossible because they have been around for so long." Picciani, opposition leaders, and even some pro-government legislators want to eliminate the 45 day provision, but President Lula is strongly opposed, convinced that without it, there is no incentive to bring MPs to a vote, giving congress the equivalent of a pocket veto. Lula is reportedly fighting hard ensure that MPs will not lose their force of law, stating in a speech on March 18 that it was "humanly impossible" to govern without MPs, and that "The time and agility that things need to happen many times is faster than the time for democratic discussion." This power struggle between the legislative and executive branches will likely strengthen democracy, and this is a rare moment when a single constitutional change will significantly rebalance the two powers. But nobody is pretending this is a win-win situation. The executive branch is going to lose power, and congress will gain power, which is why Lula and his team have been working so hard to minimize the damage. ¶8. (SBU) Picciani said some sort of compromise will be arranged that will probably eliminate the 45 day rule and send MPs to the top of the congressional agenda on issuance, but without actually locking the agenda. He said congress will probably retain the limits on renewal, but might change the length of validity for MPs before they are voted on. A provision to have the Constitution, Justice and Citizenship Committee screen all MPs to ensure that they are "relevant and urgent" would probably also pass. Some opposition deputies want budget and tax matters off limits for MPs, but Picciani said the final version would probably allow the president to continue using MPs for budgetary purposes, but not tax matters. - - - - Comment - - - - ¶9. (SBU) Eliminating the 45 day rule will make it more difficult for the president to dominate the legislative agenda in the way Lula does now. Removing the requirement to vote on MPs first would place more power in the hands of party leaders, as the legislative agenda is set by congressional party leaders in consultation with the president of the Chamber or Senate. And new rules limiting the president to one renewal of an MP would force the president to build stronger alliances with other parties. Picciani said it would make a president use MPs more sparingly, since getting them passed would always incur a political cost and rejection of legislation backed by the executive has political downsides for the president. ¶10. (SBU) Comment, continued: The reforms would also introduce additional incentives for corruption akin to those that led to the mensalao vote-buying scheme revealed in 2005 (ref B). But this potential negative effect will be counterbalanced by a more significant and beneficial democratizing effect. Whatever the details of the reforms, they will increase congress's power and provide more equilibrium to the three-branch system. The executive will undoubtedly learn to govern with the new restrictions - the media have pointed out that governors and mayors do so already without any MP-type powers - and congressional business will be more representative of congressional, not executive, interests. HENSHAW