Why hangers if I can invest in hangers?
This is the question that some ministers must ask themselves when dispensing additional fees. After all, among its abusive practices, there is no violation of the constitutional ceiling.
Penduricalhos are additional remuneration disguised as compensation, they break the ceiling and are exempt from tax. Pendurications are ways in which judges, especially ministers of higher courts, supplement direct or indirect income (“lectures” at lobbying events, sponsorships, and commercial ventures exempt from conflict of interest regulation).
Penduricalhos are paid for with public money. Hanging water gushes private money. Both can facilitate illicit enrichment. Both compromise the respectability of the institutions that practice them. Primer institutional corruption.
The last week has enriched the debate. We learned that, for “a wing of the STF”, the “real problem of the Judiciary” would be the hang-up. In this way, the code of conduct and enrichment via hanging are pushed under the carpet. The “real problem”, if you allow us to retort, begins with linguistic maneuvers (and the advantages that arise from them).
declared: “I don’t use the term penduricalho. We have the subsidy (…). And we have, as any worker has, funds to be received relating to past periods. (…) The compensations will be maintained, as will the subsidies”.
We have, like any worker, to be aware of linguistic maneuvers. Preliminary decision by , the most courageous minister to face forms of institutional corruption in the (secret budget) and in the Judiciary, ordered suspension throughout the country of restrictions not provided for by law and to evaluate “the legal basis of all remuneration and compensation funds currently paid”.
scrutinizes the dialectic of trickery. It describes the “reiterated ways to exceed the remuneration ceiling”, the “undue increases of a remuneration nature disguised as compensation”, the “general non-compliance with the STF’s binding jurisprudence” and the “massive violation of the Constitution”.
Explains the doctrinal beabá: the act of compensating can only refer to amounts spent by the server in the exercise of their function. It has an occasional, not permanent, characteristic. A civil servant cannot be compensated for the regular exercise of his function, for fulfilling the obligations for which he already receives remuneration and pays taxes.
Dino did not just suspend pendants that had no provision in law. He recalled that extras that declare themselves “compensation”, but escape the concept of compensation, violate the Constitution. It is not enough to be called indemnity, it has to be indemnifying.
The magistocratic cudgel does these things. He invents the “compensatory leave of one day for every three days of work” (the 3X1 scale of the magistocracy), the “collection bonus” (a bonus for the accumulation of cases), the “movement allowance”. It even creates “panettone aid” to defy “the decorum of public functions”, as the minister said.
But it’s Carnival. We’re keeping an eye on the “Don’t take my pendant” block. There’s no shortage of perverts here.
LINK PRESENT: Did you like this text? Subscribers can access seven free accesses from any link per day. Just click the blue F below.
