The Chamber of Deputies and Senate defended on Monday (18) the validity of the Dosimetry Law — legislation that allows sentence reductions for those convicted in the January 8, 2023 acts — against four direct actions of unconstitutionality pending in the Supreme Federal Court. The legislative houses responded to a request from rapporteur Alexandre de Moraes, who suspended the law's application until a final decision on its constitutionality. ✓
Press quotes (2)
"A Câmara dos Deputados e o Senado defenderam, nesta segunda-feira (18), a validade da Lei da Dosimetria"
"As manifestações foram enviadas ao Supremo Tribunal Federal (STF) após solicitação do relator do caso, ministro Alexandre de Moraes, que suspendeu a aplicação da lei até decisão final sobre a constitucionalidade da lei"
Law 15.402/2026, enacted on May 8 by Senate president Davi Alcolumbre after Congress overturned Lula's veto, modifies the Penal Code and Penal Execution Law in three areas: imposes formal concurrence for crimes against Democratic Rule of Law committed in the same context, creates a sentence reduction cause for crowd conduct without leadership, and authorizes sentence remission in house arrest. ✓
Press quotes (2)
"O presidente do Senado e do Congresso, Davi Alcolumbre, promulgou nesta sexta-feira (8) a Lei da Dosimetria (Lei 15.402, de 2026)"
"ela altera a Lei de Execução Penal e o Código Penal em três frentes: impõe o concurso formal próprio para crimes contra o Estado Democrático de Direito praticados no mesmo contexto, cria uma causa de diminuição de pena para condutas em multidão sem liderança ou financiamento, e autoriza a remição de pena mesmo no regime domiciliar"
ADIs 7966, 7967, 7968 and 7969, all reported by Moraes, were filed by the Brazilian Press Association, PSOL-Rede federation, PDT and PT-PCdoB-PV federation. Applicants allege violation of separation of powers and sentence individualization principles, arguing the law "substitutes judicial evaluation of crimes with criteria defined in law" and creates a "privileged regime for crimes against Democratic Rule of Law". ✓
Press quotes (2)
"As Ações Diretas de Inconstitucionalidade ADIs 7968 e 7969 foram apresentadas, respectivamente, pelo Partido Democrático Trabalhista (PDT) e pela federação formada pelo Partido dos Trabalhadores (PT), Partido Comunista do Brasil (PCdoB) e Partido Verde (PV)"
"a norma substitui a avaliação do Judiciário sobre o cometimento de crimes por critérios definidos em lei, violando os princípios da separação dos Poderes e da individualização da pena"
The Senate argued the plenary should overturn Moraes' individual decision, claiming the suspension produces "grave and potentially irreversible" effects by depriving convicts of a "more beneficial law in force". The Chamber argued Congress has constitutional prerogative to give the "final word" on presidential vetoes. The case will proceed to AGU and PGR opinions before plenary judgment at STF. ✓
Press quotes (2)
"O Senado defendeu que o plenário derrube a decisão individual de Moraes. Segundo a advocacia da Casa, a suspensão produz efeitos "graves e potencialmente irreversíveis""
"A Câmara acrescentou que Congresso tem a prerrogativa política de dar a "palavra final" sobre o veto presidencial da matéria"
Alexandre de Moraes is rapporteur for all four ADIs challenging the Dosimetry Law
Process will proceed to AGU and PGR opinions before final judgment
Covered by only some sources, or where the accounts diverge.
Covered by only some sources (2)
Conflicting versions (1)
Total number of actions challenging the Dosimetry Law
-
Which specific doctrinal test will the STF apply to evaluate constitutional violation allegations?
Why it's still unknown: No source details whether proportionality test, balancing judgment or other specific precedents will be applied
-
What is Justice Alexandre de Moraes' historical position on analogous sentence individualization cases?
Why it's still unknown: Sources do not mention precedents or previous votes by the rapporteur on similar matters
-
How many convicted for January 8 acts would benefit from the law?
Why it's still unknown: No source presents numerical estimates of the law's impact
-
When should the STF plenary judge the actions?
Why it's still unknown: Sources mention expectation of judgment 'this month' but without specific date
Did not cover: Poder360