Prosecutors from Pará want to extend the number of districts considered difficult to access to expand by operating in distant locations, (Federal Supreme Court) on .
The proposal sent by the state’s Attorney General’s Office foresees that the total number of districts will increase from the current 16 to 77. The measure, which is being debated by the Superior Council of the MP of Pará, had the vote interrupted this Wednesday (30), when one of the council members asked for a review (more time to analyze the case).
After the end, Ampep (Association of the Public Ministry of the State of Pará) sent a message to prosecutors, via the messaging application WhatsApp, criticizing the suspension of the session.
In the report, Ampep stated that the request for review, although regulatory, “in practice postpones an urgent and necessary decision, frustrating the legitimate expectation of the class to face the serious effects arising from the decision of the “.
Later, the entity released another statement, this time, cutting the citation to the Supreme Court and stating that the measure “directly impacts the structure of the service and working conditions, especially in the most sensitive regions”.
He also declared that the matter should only return to the agenda in June, “which requires the institution and its members to extend an already critical scenario.”
The bonus for accommodation and residence in a region with difficult access is paid on top of a percentage of 10% of the subsidy, according to state legislation. The salary of a prosecutor at the beginning of his career is close to R$35,500. Therefore, the benefit reaches R$3,500.
In addition to the significant increase in districts considered difficult to access, the municipalities that were included in this classification caught the attention of members of the class who received the message. Among them, for example, Acará, which is 100 km from Belém, and Moju, 128 km and Igarapé, 143 km.
But the proposal from the promoters who are part of the council also foresees a change in the concept of difficult provision, in addition to the distance from the capital and precarious access.
It would include, for example, the analysis of the city’s HDI, the deficiency of human or material resources, demands incompatible with the structure of the Prosecutor’s Office and the location in a strategic region.
The prosecutors also cite the national guidelines established by the National Council of Justice and the National Council of the Public Prosecutor’s Office on the policy of encouraging capacity and permanence in units that are difficult to fill.
Today, only districts with difficult means of access, transportation, communication, subsistence and accommodation are considered difficult to access, resulting in precarious conditions for the effective action of the Public Prosecutor’s Office in the location.
The proposal also states that it is up to the Attorney General of Justice to define the value of the bonus for working in Public Prosecutor’s Offices that are difficult to fill and classify them, by his own act, into different degrees of difficulty, considering the criteria established in the resolution.
When contacted, prosecutor Ana Maria Magalhães, president of Ampep, said that the measure is not intended to compensate for advantages, “but to address a concrete problem, recognized by the STF itself, which is the real difficulty of providing services to certain districts.”
“The focus here is to guarantee institutional presence where it is most needed. Reducing this debate to a logic of compensation does not reflect the complexity of the problem nor the impact it has on the provision of services to the population”, he said.
She also suggested checking how many federal judges, public prosecutors, public prosecutors, and court judges there are in Pará and these other states.
“The region is challenging. Check how many reporters there are in these hard-to-reach cities?”, he pointed out.
The STF’s thesis established that compensation funds in the Judiciary and Public Prosecutor’s Office should be subject to a limit of 70% of civil servants’ salaries.
The rules were defined by the STF at the end of March and came into effect for the base month of April, with payment in May.
