The plenary session of the (Supreme Federal Court) tends to endorse the minister’s injunction regarding the salaries of public servants, although there are reservations regarding the method used by the rapporteur to make his decision.
Scheduled for this Wednesday (25), in a face-to-face session, the trial is seen by ministers as an opportunity to give a nod to society and restore, at least in part, the image of the STF, damaged by the repercussions of the investigation into the .
The main discomfort of a wing of ministers is the fact that Dino analyzed a complaint that concerned only municipal prosecutors in Praia Grande (SP) and extended its effects to public servants at all levels of the federation.
In the preliminary injunction, Dino justifies this expansion, stating that “the controversy goes beyond the subjective limits of the specific case” and that it is necessary to “impose stable, integral and coherent jurisprudence, taking into account the principles of equality and legal certainty”.
The STF has analyzed at least 12,925 cases regarding the civil service ceiling since 2000. According to Dino, “it is not reasonable” for the court to continue arbitrating “case by case” indefinitely.
Another consideration that should be taken up for debate in the plenary, specifically regarding those in the judiciary, is that the regulation of the topic should be the responsibility of the (National Council of Justice).
Although specific differences may arise during the trial, five ministers heard privately by the Sheet state that the expectation is that Dino’s decision will be confirmed, since the STF has firm jurisprudence against penduricalhos.
In similar cases already judged by the court, the understanding prevailed among the ministers that these bonuses do not have an indemnity nature and, therefore, cannot be added to the remuneration without the “ceiling reduction” discount.
One of the most unusual cases and frequently remembered by ministers is that of an additional 40% paid to state judges in Acre just because they have a higher education degree. The benefit was suspended by the Supreme Court in 2019.
In 2023, the STF was unanimous in declaring unconstitutional the law that created “professional development assistance” for magistrates in Minas Gerais to purchase legal books and IT materials.
On Thursday (19), in addition to the injunction, the minister decided to allow the payment of salaries or compensation amounts above the ceiling, set today at R$46,366.19 (salary paid to Supreme Court ministers). This point will also be debated by the plenary.
As shown by SheetDino’s decision suspending the restrictions for municipal, state and federal employees to the president of the court, , exposing an internal conflict around an ethical agenda for the court.
Dino’s interlocutors claim that the minister wanted to show that what is true for the judiciary is the review of super salaries and that setting rules for the judiciary, for example, is something secondary in this context.
The rules of conduct are a bet by Fachin to try to restore society’s trust in the Supreme Court, especially after the crisis that led the minister to the Master’s investigations, now led by .
The ministers rejected an open decision based on a report from the PF (Federal Police), which was located on the cell phone of the banker, owner of Master and the main person under investigation.
Toffoli denies irregularities and says that the PF is based on “inclusions”. The minister, who sold a stake in the Tayayá resort to the Arleen fund, linked to Master. However, he claims to have no friendly relationship with Vorcaro.
The minister is also at the center of the strain resulting from the Master, as the office of his wife, lawyer Viviane Barci, with the financial institution to represent her in court.
The minister said, in a public statement during a session at the STF, that any judge is prevented from judging cases whose legal panel includes a relative. It contains confidential tax data on court ministers and their families.
In the decision suspending the penduricalhos, Dino cited a violation of the principle of morality and characterized them as a “phenomenon of the anomalous multiplication of compensation funds” that reached “levels that are absolutely incompatible” with the Constitution.
Fachin’s assistants claim that the decision on super salaries was not interpreted by the president of the Supreme Court as a negative message, as he himself faces the issue at the CNJ within the scope of the Transparency Observatory, created on the first day of his administration.
About two hours after Dino’s decision, during a break in the plenary session, Fachin spoke to his peers and decided that the best thing would be to deal with the issue as soon as possible, scheduling the trial for February, in an in-person session.
