Almost half of the vacancies reserved for black and brown people in judge competitions have not been filled in Federal Regional Courts since 2023. The number, although it represents an increase in relation to the hitherto non-existent number of people approved in this branch of Justice, made up of one of the highest paid careers in the Judiciary, reveals policy bottlenecks.
Racial quotas were instituted by the (National Council of Justice) in 2015. The rule provided for the reservation of at least 20% of vacancies for black or mixed-race people in all careers in the Judiciary. Last week, the board added new segments. In total, 25% will be reserved for black and brown people, 3% for indigenous people and 2% for quilombolas.
But there is a disconnect, as shown by Sheet. By 2023, . Now, a new survey carried out by the report shows progress, despite the persistence of idleness: since then, 16 magistrates have been approved for the 31 vacancies reserved for black and brown people, filling 52% of the vacancies.
The vacancy of vacancies in judicial examinations is usually due to the fact that there are not enough candidates who reach the minimum grades required. It is also common for there to be vacancies offered due to broad competition, but this tends to occur in a greater proportion in those allocated to affirmative policies.
The survey considered competitions for magistrates concluded after November 2023, when no vacancy reserved for black people had been filled. Cases were identified in the Federal Regional Courts of the 1st Region (AC, AM, AP, BA, DF, GO, MA, MT, PA, PI, RO, RR and TO), 2nd Region (ES and RJ) and 3rd Region (MS and SP).
The number of people approved via racial quotas was obtained when the final results of the contests were announced. The number of reserved places was taken from the competition opening notices.
Based on these criteria, there were 6 reserved vacancies in the TRF-2, of which 1 was filled. In TRF-3, the ratio was 21 to 14 in the first contest and 4 to 1 in the second. THE Sheet contacted the courts, but there was no response until the publication of this report.
During the period, TRF-1 completed a competition that had initially foreseen only 1 vacancy, none of which were intended for black and brown people. In the end, however, as the process also serves vacancies that arise throughout the process, there were 7 approved by racial quota. In this case, the data was disregarded, as there was no prior reservation of a place.
Researcher Inara Flora Firmino, from the Center for Applied Research in Law and Racial Justice at FGV Direito SP, states that the policy of quotas in the judiciary and the affirmative actions implemented by the CNJ represent progress, “the problem is the way in which affirmative action has been applied and managed by the courts.”
She points out a gradual exit of black candidates at each stage of the competition, which is made worse because “the courts don’t monitor it. They don’t have the attitude to evaluate this problem, try to resolve it.”
One of the obstacles to filling vacancies is financial. The entire competition process can last a year or more and involves spending on materials, registration, transportation, preparatory courses, in addition to the difficulty of reconciling everything with personal and, sometimes, family costs.
To this end, the CNJ created a program last year for black and indigenous people in two forms: maintenance scholarship with monthly financial assistance and scholarship for preparatory courses aimed at judicial exams.
Professor at UFSCar (Federal University of São Carlos), sociologist Fabiana Luci is co-author of an article that examines the low effectiveness of the racial quota policy in Judiciary competitions for magistrates and civil servants.
The study highlights the precariousness of the data, which compromises the carrying out of a diagnosis on inclusion. Almost a third of courts did not send or inadequately provided information on race in a 2021 CNJ report.
“This is a problem for any public policy, not just for evaluating racial quotas in the Judiciary. Quality data is needed to allow this evaluation”, says the professor.
According to her, there is resistance in adopting the IBGE (Brazilian Institute of Geography and Statistics) terminology of black and brown people. This difficulty in dealing with the topic, he says, is how Brazilian racism manifests itself.
General data from the CNJ statistics panel identify 14% of magistrates as black or mixed race, segments that correspond to more than half of the Brazilian population, compared to 82% white. In the Federal Court, white people make up around 86%, and black and brown people, 11%.
Magali Dantas, a doctoral student in public policies at Enap (National School of Public Administration), argues that the Judiciary adopts measures to apply affirmative actions in all phases of the competition, in addition to the increase in the percentage of quotas, already carried out by the CNJ.
She still maintains an optimistic outlook. For her, there is now more institutional openness and accumulation of knowledge on the topic. “These higher bodies are now receptive, and the Judiciary is really having a discussion, especially on how diversity contributes to the health of democracy. It has raised a level.”
