The First Panel of the (Supreme Federal Court) rejected this Tuesday (30) the appeals against the decision to end the judgeships as punishment.
“Judges remain subject to lifetime status, but this is not a protective shield when committing very serious infractions”, says the conclusion of the trial.
According to the new decision, which was reaffirmed at the session, the collegiate’s competence to deal with the issue is “crystal clear” and, therefore, the ruling would not need reparation. One of the questions was the competence of the First Panel to define the topic.
“It is incompatible with logic that the STF, which judges the nation’s highest representatives and which can invalidate laws, is considered incapable of assessing the commission (or not) of very serious infractions by magistrates and other public agents”, states the case summary.
On May 26, the group was unanimous in this sense and in maintaining the minister’s understanding for the end of paid leave and for serious infractions by judges to be punished with the loss of their position.
According to the decision, if the loss of the position is approved by the (National Council of Justice), the action must be filed directly with the STF by the AGU (Attorney General of the Union). If the administrative conclusion for the loss of the magistrate’s position is made by a court, the case must be sent to the CNJ, and then go to the STF.
According to the vote of the rapporteur, Flávio Dino, who was accompanied by Alexandre de Moraes, Cristiano Zanin and Cármen Lúcia, punishment with continued receipts would mean impunity.
The loss of the position, by decision, is subject to an action before the Supreme Court itself, after an administrative process in this regard.
According to the CNJ (National Council of Justice), 126 sanctions of this type have been applied since 2006 — the date of the body’s creation —, but there are cases of the same judge being punished more than once with the same penalty.
Until now, administrative processes have had compulsory retirement as their most serious consequence. Then comes the availability of the magistrate with salaries proportional to the length of service. Time away only counts towards retirement, which can postpone the right to leave and career advancement.
Below this, punishments may be a warning or censure, if it is understood that the stance was less serious.
LINK PRESENT: Did you like this text? Subscribers can access seven free accesses from any link per day. Just click the blue F below.
