The Union paid up to R $ 376 thousand liquids to prosecutors and prosecutors in December 2024, with pendurical and retroactive values that, in practice, exceed the ceiling of functionalism.
The paycheck of members of the MPT (Public Prosecution Service), MPDFT (Federal District and Territories), MPF (Federal) and MPM (Military) was turbocharged with indemnities, temporary remuneration and amounts related to previous exercises.
Asked, the institutions stated in a statement that all payments follow the rules provided for in the Constitution and regulations of the category, but did not specify what motivated the disbursement. The MPT did not speak up.
The expenditure follows the same. Laws, administrative acts and measures approved by the CNMP (National Council of the Public Prosecution Service) authorize the payment of advantages outside the constitutional limit.
The remuneration ceiling of the members of the Federal Prosecutor’s Office is the fixed and monthly amount that receive the ministers of (Supreme Federal Court):, but about $ 44,000 in December last year.
That month, the average remuneration of these prosecutors and prosecutors ranged from $ 60,000 to $ 88,000, but specific cases jump even more to the eye, especially in the MPT, where the salaries plus benefits reach the hundreds of thousands.
For example, three labor prosecutors pocketed amounts over R $ 300 thousand net in one month: Anderson Luiz Corrêa da Silva (R $ 376 thousand), Luciano Aragão Santos (R $ 344 thousand) and Alpiniano do Prado Lopes (R $ 321 thousand).
If the clipping is R $ 200 thousand, considering the total income and the funds for previous exercises, both liquids, the number rises to 13, all from the Labor Prosecutor, including the three already mentioned.
The numbers even detach the standard observed in the other branches of the Public Prosecution Service. The highest value net remuneration of a MPF prosecutor was R $ 181 thousand net, by the Deputy Attorney General Luciano Mariz Maia.
In MPDFT, in turn, who received the most in December was the prosecutor Thiago André Pierobom de Ávila, with R $ 140 thousand liquids. In the case of MPM, she was the Deputy Attorney General Herminia Celia Raymundo, with $ 69,000.
The analysis considered net total income, funds related to previous years, temporary remuneration and indemnity funds. The data were collected by the transparency portals of each organ.
In the purposes of the purpose of the constitutional ceiling, funds of indemnity character, such as payment for unpaid vacation and converted cash, and eventual or temporary, such as some scholarships.
Despite being the branch of the Federal Prosecutor’s Office that paid the most for the criteria of the analysis, the MPT said it would not speak when asked what had motivated the payments and what was the agency’s position on them.
The MPF stated that the analysis of paychecks must be individual, considering the concrete situation of each member or server, legal provisions and eventually court decisions, but does not clarify why payments were made. It also says that everyone is subject to the rules established by the CNMP and the Constitution.
MPDFT and MPM answered questions in notes forwarded separately, but with identical content. They said the compensation paid in December refer to previously recognized commitments, but whose disbursement was made that month due to budget availability.
They stated that the reason is a “recognized measure by law and regulated by the Union Public Prosecution Service”, without specifying, and that “any payment related to indemnity funds is made in accordance with what is established by law and authorized within the scope of MPU “.
They add that, in the month, Christmas bonus and compensation for vacation worked are also paid and that the observation of the payroll only of December does not reflect the remuneration reality of the members of the organs.
“[O MPDFT e o MPM] observa[m] strictly the limits of the Constitution’s remuneration ceiling. All personnel payments made by[s] institution[ões] They are subject to monitoring and supervision by the internal audit of the MPU, the CNMP and the TCU, and there is no registration arising from these bodies regarding payments outside the legal parameters. “
