Minister Edson Fachin, president of the Federal Supreme Court, canceled the request to take to the physical plenary of the Court the judgment of the last appeal against the overturning of the thesis of the lifetime review of the National Social Security Institute (INSS). Fachin’s request would lead to the discussion being restarted and resumed in an in-person trial. However, with the withdrawal of the request, the unfavorable score for retirees remains, as there was already a majority formed to deny the fourth question to the thesis established by the STF on the subject.
Fachin had requested prominence in the judgment of an appeal by the National Confederation of Metal Workers (CNTM) against the judgment that overturned the thesis in 2024. Requests of this nature interrupt virtual judgments on the topic, making the discussion take place in person. Additionally, the virtual trial scoreboard is reset.
In the case of the CNTM appeal, eight ministers had already presented their votes in a virtual session. Six members of the STF had accompanied the rapporteur, Kassio Nunes Marques, to deny the fourth question to the overturn of the whole life review. Now, with Fachin’s request for a review cancelled, this score is back in effect, unfavorable to retirees.
In the virtual plenary, only minister Dias Toffoli voted to accept the metalworkers’ request. He defended, on a limited basis, the application of the review to policyholders who took legal action between December 2019 and April 2024, a period in which there were decisions in favor of recalculating benefits.
Even though the president of the STF and minister André Mendonça, who has not yet cast his vote, follow Toffoli’s understanding, the majority of STF ministers have already voted to maintain the thesis on the review of the entire life. The case must be judged again in the virtual plenary of the Supreme Court, but there is still no date for this to happen.
The so-called “whole life review” made it possible to include, in the calculation of social security benefits, salaries prior to July 1994, before the implementation of the Real Plan. The STF had validated this possibility in 2022. In April 2024, however, when judging another action related to the social security factor, the Court changed its position and established that the rule that only considers contributions from 1994 onwards is mandatory, ruling out the possibility of the insured opting for the most advantageous calculation.
Continues after advertising
At the end of last week, the Supreme Court rejected another appeal against a decision that rejected the lifetime review of pensions from the National Social Security Institute (INSS). By 8 votes to 2, the plenary followed the vote of the rapporteur, Alexandre de Moraes, who understood that there was no “defect” in the STF’s decision on the topic.
