Os limites da imunidade material dos parlamentares federais no âmbito da jurisprudência do Supremo Tribunal Federal.

Abstract

The article explores the limits of the substantive immunity of federal
parliamentarians in Brazil, emphasizing its historical and contemporary interpretation within
the jurisprudence of the Supreme Federal Court (STF). Substantive immunity, provided for
in Article 53 of the 1988 Federal Constitution, guarantees Deputies and Senators immunity
from civil or criminal liability for their words, opinions, and votes in the exercise of their
mandate. However, the practical application of this prerogative raises questions about its
scope and potential misuse.
The study revisits the historical development of parliamentary immunity,
tracing its origins from English constitutionalism to its adoption in Brazil in 1824. It
analyzes normative evolution through various constitutional periods, including
authoritarian regimes that restricted these guarantees. From a contemporary
perspective, the research examines the boundaries of immunity concerning statements made outside Parliament and the requirement of functional connection
with the mandate.
The study highlights the STF's role in developing interpretative criteria, such
as the reciprocal implication nexus, which links parliamentary statements to the
exercise of legislative duties, given the concise constitutional wording. Additionally, it
discusses political and administrative accountability for breaches of parliamentary
decorum as a counterbalance to potential excesses in the application of immunity.
Finally, the article contributes to the legal debate by proposing an approach
that balances the protection of parliamentary freedom with the constitutional
principles of responsibility and the fight against privileges, reinforcing the
commitment to the Democratic Rule of Law.