Portuguese 
English 
Spanish 
4 min of reading 
0 comments 
Experts Warn That The Shield PEC May Weaken Transparency In Amendments, While Lawmakers Defend Protection Against Alleged External Judicial Interference
The Proposed Amendment to the Constitution (PEC) of Shield, under discussion in the National Congress, has been provoking strong debate. The measure seeks to prevent the opening of criminal actions against deputies and senators without prior approval from Parliament. For critics, the text could open avenues for more corruption and undermine control mechanisms. The information in this article comes from Agência Brasil (READ HERE).
Civil society organizations have positioned themselves against the initiative. The Movement Against Electoral Corruption (MCCE) emphasized in a public note that the proposal strengthens impunity and limits transparency.
The use of secret voting in decisions regarding the accountability of lawmakers is seen as particularly problematic.
-
The noise law will no longer be in effect at 10 PM starting in June with a new rule valid during the 2026 World Cup.
-
The Chamber opens a debate on driver’s licenses at 16 years old as part of a reform that includes around 270 proposals to change the Brazilian Traffic Code and may redesign rules for licensing, enforcement, and circulation in the country.
-
The new Civil Code could revolutionize marriages in Brazil with “express divorce” and changes that could exclude spouses from inheritance.
-
Banco do Brasil sues famous influencer for million-dollar debt and intensifies debate on delinquency, risks of seizure, and direct impact on Gkay’s credibility.
Lack of Transparency
Luciano Santos, director of MCCE, stated that the significant increase in parliamentary amendments amplifies the risk of resource diversion.
In 2025, the federal budget allocated approximately R$ 50 billion for these funds, a figure similar to the projected amount for 2026. According to him, the PEC emerges as a reaction to ongoing investigations.
“We are clear that what is being sought is precisely a shielding due to these investigations regarding the amendments. It makes no sense to shield politicians, especially knowing that there are several ongoing investigations,” the expert highlighted.
Santos also emphasized that the control has come from the Supreme Federal Court (STF), and not from Congress itself, which reinforces the need for external measures.
Operations and Investigations
In recent years, amendments have become a constant target of operations by the Federal Police and inquiries at the STF.
Legal scholar Marco Aurélio de Carvalho, coordinator of the Prerogatives group, believes that the real motivation behind the proposal is related to these investigations.
“They are already shielded, in a way, by the lack of transparency. The PEC will actually bring about more tranquility. It’s almost a club among friends. Almost everyone or a large part is involved in suspicious actions regarding the payment of amendments. They will have an interest in protecting each other,” he assessed.
For Carvalho, the proposal would function as a pact of self-protection among lawmakers, as many would be under suspicion of irregularities involving the payment of amendments.
This perception reinforces concerns that the approval of the text would further undermine oversight.
Risk of Making The Country Inviable
Another critic of the proposal is Bruno Bondarovsky, coordinator of the Central of Amendments. He explained that even with the current rules, transparency is already insufficient.
The dispersion of resources and the absence of technical criteria hinder efficient application. “If corruption investigations are limited, these amendments will be a drain that could make the country unviable,” he warned.
Recent numbers reinforce this concern. In August, STF minister Flávio Dino authorized the Federal Police to investigate 964 individual amendments, known as “Pix amendments,” totaling R$ 694 million.
In December 2024, Dino had already suspended the payment of R$ 4.2 billion due to fraud suspicions.
Audits and Blocks
The Comptroller General of the Union (CGU) has also been identifying serious flaws. An audit in ten municipalities found problems in nine of them.
For this reason, Dino blocked new transfers to nine cities this week. The disputes between the Supreme Court and Congress over the amendments show that the issue is far from consensus.
Critics point out that changes approved in March 2025 by Parliament did not ensure sufficient transparency.
The new rules, although they followed STF guidelines, still leave gaps for diversion.
Concerning History
Transparency International recalled in a statement that between 1998 and 2001, when a similar rule was in effect, the Congress blocked 253 requests for investigations against lawmakers and authorized only one.
The entity classified the proposal as a setback that more addresses the fear of accountability than the defense of the public interest.
The Institute I Do Not Accept Corruption also expressed its opinion. For the entity, the PEC seeks only to guarantee impunity for a “class of untouchables,” in affront to the constitutional principle of equality.
Arguments in Favor of The Shield PEC
Among the proponents of the PEC, the main argument is the protection of the mandate against external interference.
Opposition lawmakers say that the text guarantees the sovereignty of the vote and protects against political persecution.
The rapporteur, deputy Claudio Cajado (PP-BA), stated that the proposal does not authorize abuses but strengthens respect for the Legislative.
Deputy Nikolas Ferreira (PL-MG) reinforced the idea that Congress would not leave crimes uninvestigated. “Anyone who commits a crime will pay, right? It’s as simple as that. We vote and show that the house is against criminals,” he declared.
Shield PEC: Debate Continues
Despite the justifications, critics remind us that past experience showed the opposite. Luciano Santos, from MCCE, stated that it is “impossible to believe” that lawmakers will authorize investigations against their peers.
For him, internal corporatism and delays in processes practically guarantee mutual protection.
The debate about the Shield PEC remains heated, with radically different positions between supporters and opponents.
While some argue that the proposal preserves the autonomy of the Legislative, others warn that it could deepen the crisis of transparency and increase the risks of corruption in the country.
The information in this article comes from Portal Agência Brasil.
-
-
2 pessoas reagiram a isso.