Labor judges canceled hearings scheduled for this Thursday (26), one day after the (Supreme Federal Court). So far there is no data on the scope of cancellations.
Class entities have not commented on the matter nor confirmed whether there is a mobilization in protest against the Supreme Court’s decision.
There are reports among the legal profession and in the courts that hearings have been rescheduled in the capital of São Paulo and Greater São Paulo. Records of posters on court doors or forums communicating the postponement without an apparent formal explanation are circulating in the legal community.
At the end of the afternoon, the General Inspectorate of Labor Justice summoned the Regional Inspectors of all states to inform by noon this Friday (27) in which courts “there was an unjustified withdrawal of cases from the agenda” this Thursday, adding that, in these cases, the names of the respective judges must be informed.
“It has come to the attention of this General Inspectorate of Labor Justice that some first-degree magistrates promoted the withdrawal, in an unjustified and sudden manner, of the cases included in the hearing agenda today, to the flagrant detriment of those under jurisdiction and the smooth running of judicial provision”, states the Inspector General of Labor Justice, José Roberto Freire de Pimenta.
On Thursday afternoon, the magistrate of the TRT-2 (Regional Labor Court of the 2nd Region), judge Sueli Tomé da Ponte, in turn, issued a letter to the court’s judges stating that news of hearing postponements had reached the body’s attention. The judge asked for “prudence and serenity” and recalled that, according to the rules, it is recommended that, in the event of a last-minute postponement, lawyers be notified by email or phone call.
“Respect for citizens and their representatives is the way to achieve reciprocity between society and the Judiciary,” she wrote. “I count on everyone’s collaboration and reaffirm the commitment to respect the functional independence of the judiciary in its jurisdictional understandings.”
TRT-2 covers the courts of Greater São Paulo and Baixada Santista.
A Sheet visited the Ruy Barbosa Regional Labor Forum, located in Barra Funda, west of São Paulo, and heard from lawyers and civil servants. According to defenders, notifications about postponements took place from Wednesday night (25). It was also reported that movement this Thursday was below normal.
“No one has information about why they are closing, but we are receiving reports that several places with reassignments are being made at the time the lawyer arrives,” said Roberta dos Reis da Silva, 42, labor lawyer.
There are fears among lawyers that postponements will affect the hearing agenda throughout this and next week. “In many of the courts that stopped today, we have a hearing next week. If it continues, we will be hit”, says lawyer Cleber Guerreiro Belucci, 51.
In message groups with labor lawyers, a list circulates with the courts of the Barra Funda forum that would have adhered to the suspension. Questioned by the report, the TRT-2 informed, through its advisors, that it was unable to determine how many of the 217 labor courts had hearings postponed.
In a note, the president of the court stated that “the designation of the hearing agenda falls within the sphere of autonomy of the magistrate responsible for conducting the process”. He further added that “the internal affairs department, upon becoming aware of specific postponements, reiterated the need to substantiate decisions and advised that any reassignments be communicated as quickly as possible to the parties and their patrons, preserving functional duties and judicial independence.”
When contacted, Anamatra (National Association of Labor Justice Magistrates) said via press office that it did not have any information about the matter. Amatra 2 (Association of Labor Justice Magistrates of the 2nd Region), which represents judges in the region, did not respond.
The OAB-SP (Brazilian Bar Association São Paulo Section) confirmed that it had received reports of an unusual number of hearing cancellations and said it will investigate. The president of the institution, Leonardo Sica, said he does not believe that “judges delay the provision of judicial service due to salary demands” and that, “if this were happening, it would be something very serious”.
The OAB-SP Prerogatives Commission for the labor area reported that it had not been formally notified of strikes, but confirmed some postponements for no apparent reason.
This Wednesday, the Supreme Court determined the Judiciary and the Public Ministry. The court allowed the payment of a restricted list of allowances, totaling up to 35% of the respective salary, in addition to an additional payment for length of service – also of a maximum of 35%.
In the case of STF ministers, who receive the civil service ceiling of R$46,366, these additional payments could reach R$32,456.
The court prohibited, however, other frills, such as compensatory leaves for accumulation of assets and one day off for three employees. The Supreme Court’s decision was criticized in a note from the AMB (Association of Brazilian Magistrates) which declared “deep disagreement and concern with the judgment”.
Carlos Ari Sundfeld, professor at FGV Direito SP, states that judges cannot go on strike. “They are not ordinary public servants, but considered members of Power, and the jurisdictional function cannot be interrupted or suspended under any circumstances”, he says.
The professor also adds that, as far as he is aware, the STF has not yet had the opportunity to decide this expressly in any action, but it makes a parallel with another case. “[O STF] has already decided that police officers cannot go on strike – and for reasons that, with even greater force, apply to judges.”
A Sheet also contacted TRT-15, which covers courts in the interior of São Paulo. The agency stated via press office that “there was no record of cancellation of hearings at TRT-15 for this reason.”
The Amatra-15 judges’ association stated that it had no news “of any reassignment of hearings for our members, due to the recent decision of the Supreme Court”.
