Defenders of benefits for their careers, associations of magistrates, prosecutors, prosecutors and public lawyers are mostly silent about the decision of the minister, of the (Supreme Federal Court), which suspends penduricalhos.
on Thursday (5) that, within a period of up to 60 days, bodies at all levels of the federation review the funds paid to their members and employees. The order is for installments that do not have a legal provision to be immediately suspended after this period.
The decision aims at the unusual multiplication of payments which, according to him, have reached levels incompatible with the . These are tricks, such as “turkey aid” or “panettone aid”, used to circumvent and exceed the salary ceiling.
this type of funding is sometimes classified as compensation, even without being so in practice, so that it falls outside the constitutional limit. This is because, since the purpose of compensation is to compensate for something, it does not go into the remuneration account.
Part of this mechanism works based on the principle of symmetry, which guarantees parity between the judiciary and . So when judges get a handout, prosecutors ask for the same. Other careers also don’t want to be left behind.
This is the . They work with communication and lobbying strategies on different fronts. One of them is to ask for a salary to be understood as compensation; another is to request equality with the neighboring profession.
“After all, as the grass is greener on the other side, it is ‘natural’ that there is a constant race to repair this ‘injustice’, with the creation of more ‘compensation’ above the ceiling, which will be extended to other categories, in an eternal ‘looping'”, described Dino in the decision.
A Sheet contacted on Saturday (7) entities representing public legal careers and asked them about how they evaluate the measure given by Dino, but only one responded at the time of publication of this report. They were asked by email:
- AMB (Association of Brazilian Magistrates);
- Ajufe (Association of Federal Judges of Brazil);
- Anamatra (National Association of Labor Court Magistrates);
- Conamp (National Association of Members of the Public Ministry);
- ANPR (National Association of Public Prosecutors);
- Anape (National Association of State and DF Attorneys); and
- Anajur (National Association of Members of the Careers of the General Attorney’s Office of the Union).
In addition to a general assessment of the decision, the Sheet asked whether the entities consider the payment of these funds to be legitimate and whether they need to be reviewed, as well as the criteria adopted. It was also asked whether the association intends to react in any way.
The only one to respond to the questions was Anape, from state and Federal District prosecutors. The entity defends the legitimacy of compensation funds, maintains that the debate on the salary cap is up to the Legislature and states that it will follow the judicial deadline.
According to her, the STF’s decision is an opportunity. “For careers, clarity regarding remuneration rules is fundamental for the stability of institutions, as long as the autonomy of the federated states to organize their own staff is respected.”
The association considers it “premature” to label a budget as illegitimate now. “In advance, Anape considers all indemnity funds intended to compensate for expenses or extraordinary services carried out in the interests of the administration to be legitimate”, he states.
He also says that it is “reckless to talk about tricks to increase remuneration” and defends the fight against possible excesses, so that they do not harm “fundamental rights” and compensation funds duly supported by law.
Dino’s decision will be submitted to the Supreme Court plenary in a face-to-face session so that the other ministers can confirm the determination, revoke it or modify what was decided.
At the origin of the discussion is the case of municipal prosecutors in the municipality of Praia Grande, in . They included an understanding from the TJ-SP (São Paulo Court of Justice) that limited the class’s remuneration to 90.25% of the STF ministers’ allowance.
According to the entity, the payment of resources should respect the maximum limit for public service, which corresponds to the full value of the remuneration of Supreme Court ministers, currently more than R$46 thousand, and not the sub-ceiling applied by the state court.
