Throughout the republican period, the attorney general of the Union, 45, could become the sixth longest-serving minister of the (Supreme Federal Court), if this is achieved, shows a survey of Sheet.
The projection takes into account that both he, if sworn in, and the other ministers of the current composition remain in post until the deadline of 75 years of age.
Born in February 1980, the current head of the court could remain at court until the beginning of 2055, when he would complete approximately 29 years in the post — an exact calculation that would depend on the date of inauguration.
The first place on this list, in the court’s 134-year history, could go to , who would reach the milestone of 33 years on the court, if he retires by the deadline. Among the 161 ministers who have already left the court, only five stayed on the court for more than 25 years.
In the current composition, there are already six judges who can potentially expand this category: in addition to Dias Toffoli, Gilmar Mendes, , , and . With Messiah, the group would number 7, out of 11 ministers.
The other two names that were also considered for the vacancy opened by the departure of , the senator (-MG) and the head of the TCU (Tribunal de Contas da União), Bruno Dantas, are close in age to Messias and could also complete more than a quarter of a century at the court.
Considering the ministers from the Republican period who have already left the court, the record for time is held by ministers Marco Aurélio, who.
Before them, the longest-serving were on the court until the 1920s, at a time when the Constitution did not even provide for a deadline for ministers to leave the court.
Herminio do Espirito Santo, appointed by Floriano Peixoto in 1894, remained at the court until 1924, when he died at the age of 83. He is followed by André Cavalcanti, who also left the court due to death—appointed in 1897 by Prudente de Moraes, he left the court in 1927, close to turning 93 years old. Messiah could follow this list.
Established under this name by the 1891 Constitution, the STF initially did not have a mandatory retirement rule based on age, which would only be introduced by the 1934 Constitution.
According to the Supreme Court that rescues the trajectory of the rule, it was the 1946 Charter that began to establish the age of 70 as a limit. Maintained by the 1988 Constitution, this ceiling would only have been changed in 2015.
A five-year portion, therefore, of the potential longevity of current ministers and those who left the court in recent years can be attributed to this change. At the time, the new ceiling would in practice prevent the then president () from making five new appointments in her second term. Beyond this extension, however, nominees with the potential to serve longer on the court were also nominated younger than many of their peers.
Of the 31 ministers appointed since 1985, ten were under 50. Six of them correspond to members of the current composition who could spend more than 25 years in the toga — of all when taking office.
Two other names are Celso de Mello and Marco Aurélio, current record holders for time at court. And the list is completed by ministers Joaquim Barbosa and Francisco Rezek, who, despite being nominated in this age group, chose to leave the court early.
Rezek even made up the court twice. Appointed during the dictatorship, he left the court seven years later to join the government of . Appointed again, he left the court again, after less than five years in office. Barbosa, on the other hand, left the court at the age of 59, after 11 years in the post.
In addition to them, other nominees already in the redemocratization, such as Ellen Gracie and Nelson Jobim. Just as there are two ministers who died: Teori Zavascki and Menezes Direito.
Looking at the entire republican period, law professor at UFPR (Federal University of Paraná) Heloisa Câmara highlights that there are also those who left the court ahead of schedule, but not of their own free will.
She recalls the three ministers retired by the military dictatorship by decree, in the wake of the , just as six other ministers were removed by Getúlio Vargas. “So, the mechanism of compulsory retirement was used as a way to intervene in the court, in a very direct way,” she says, who wrote her doctoral thesis on the STF during the military dictatorship.
“It is not for nothing that it is established that a person can stay for such a period [na corte]because this will guarantee independence so that you can judge without having to please yourself or anything like that”, he explains.
Luciano Da Ros, a professor at UFSC (Federal University of Santa Catarina), who has among his research topics the careers of members of the Judiciary, reflects that, if the intention of the political elite, when nominating names that will remain in the court for long periods, is to perpetuate their influence over time, in the long term, the result may be opposite to what was intended.
“Politicians may be indicating that they are thinking about the longevity of their influence over the court, but perhaps, unintentionally, they are contributing, interestingly enough, to making the court even more independent than it is,” he reflects.
“If a person spends 20 years in court, he becomes a kind of creature with his own interests over time. He distances himself from those who nominated him, who approved him in the court”, says Da Ros.
