Note was published in response to criticism that suggested non-compliance with the STF decision by the Military Justice
O (Superior Military Court) published this Wednesday (May 6, 2026) a clarification stating that the of hangings approved by the court is in accordance with the decision of the STF (Supreme Federal Court).
The statement refers to the 3 resolutions approved by the STM in April that increase funds paid to Court magistrates and allow amounts above the constitutional ceiling of R$46,000. The approval came just days after the STF’s decision to limit the payment of so-called penduricalhos. One of the resolutions, approved on April 10, changes the rules on the additional paid for the accumulation of magistrates’ functions. The benefit now has a compensatory nature, without counting towards the salary cap.
Check out the full note, signed by STM president Maria Elizabeth Guimarães Teixeira Rocha:
“Due to the journalistic articles published about the failure to comply with the determinations of the Federal Supreme Court (STF) by the Federal Military Justice regarding payments to the judiciary, I clarify that the resolutions approved by the Superior Military Court (STM) are in line with what was decided by the Supreme Court and regulated by the National Council of Justice in conjunction with the National Council of the Public Ministry.
“The STM resolutions were approved to regulate the situations outlined, both by the STF and by the aforementioned Superior Councils, in order to provide due transparency to the acts.
“Initially, it is worth noting that the increase in the percentage from 33% to 35% of the Bonus for Cumulative Exercise of Jurisdiction strictly followed the dictates of the judicial determination issued by the Federal Supreme Court, which authorized it as the maximum limit to be paid. Furthermore, the right to receive it within the scope of the Military Justice of the Union is provided for in ordinary law, Law No. 13,096, of January 12, 2015.
“Regarding the change in the nature of the aforementioned bonus, which went from being remunerative to becoming compensatory and which is now the subject of questioning, it is reported that the matter was dealt with in Joint Resolution No. 14, of April 16, 2026, of the National Council of Justice and the Council of the Public Prosecutor’s Office which, in its article 5, paragraph b, provided:“Article 5. Magistrates and members of the Public Prosecutor’s Office will be able to receive the following amounts of a compensatory nature:
“Gratification for cumulative exercise of jurisdiction, attribution and office; dLikewise, §5 of art. 9th of the aforementioned Joint Resolution determined that “The Superior Courts and the bodies of the Public Ministry that act before them will have the hypotheses of incidence of the bonus for cumulative exercise of jurisdiction, attribution or office defined by the respective Presidents and the Attorney General of the Republic.
“Therefore, the inclusion of work in the Court of Honor and the Guarantee Judge Center as hypotheses of incidence for the purposes of payment of the aforementioned bonus was made to adapt the new standard to the reality of the Union’s Military Justice, including, in line with what was regulated in item 16 of the STF’s General Repercussion Thesis, when it recognizes the need to implement all the measures provided for there.
“With regard to Resolution No. 394, of April 16, 2026, it must be clarified that it refers to the Permanence Additional paid to military ministers based on the law regulated in Provisional Measure No. 2,215-10/2001, which gives military personnel the right to their perception when inactive.
“It should be noted that, in the same way that the adequacy of the funds recognized as constitutional in the Repercussion Thesis is being provided, the regulations that regulated, among others, funds such as compensatory leave and birth aid, which will no longer be paid to magistrates, are also being revoked, as they have been extinguished.
“Finally, regarding the estimate of the budgetary impact generated by such changes, it is clarified that the calculation is subject to analysis by the financial and budgetary sectors of this Military Court, with a view to the extinction of salary funds and the adequacy of others, such as those that were the subject of the explanations above.
“In this sense, the STM carried out a detailed analysis of the expenses resulting from the provisions contained in the resolutions, however, it did not present numbers because, for the purposes of assessing the impact, the amounts that will no longer be paid and those that still depend on adjustment and clarification by the National Council of Justice must be considered.
“Without the completeness of such information, the presentation of any value would be compromised with accuracy.
The Union Military Justice complies with the legal standards and judicial decisions established by the National Council of Justice and the Federal Supreme Court.
Maria Elizabeth Guimarães Teixeira Rocha
President of the Superior Military Court”.
