A decade ago, the then minister of the Superior Court of Justice (STJ) Eliana Calmon left her position as national justice inspector, in a mandate that was marked by harsh criticism of corporatism in the Judiciary and disciplinary proceedings against magistrates, which provoked the outcry of class associations. She touched on themes that, to this day, are treated like a hornet’s nest.
He criticized the performance of relatives of ministers and judges in the Courts, the so-called “filhotismo”, and the system of privileges and trinkets.
Today in law, Eliana attacks positions recently adopted by the Judiciary, such as the attempt to increase the salary cap and the perception of retroactive values for federal judges, as revealed by the newspaper O Estado de S. Paulo.
According to her, the practices show the Judiciary “alien to the Brazilian reality”.
The Federal Justice Council approved for the federal judges the return of the five-year period – an automatic increase of 5% every five years -, with retroactive payments. Can an administrative body of the Judiciary have this power? Is this a self-serving decision?
Firstly, I disagree with the decision that ended the five-year period after the subsidy was created. At the time, on the one hand, the subsidy made the judiciary earn more, but the extinction of the five-year term put an end to the difference in remuneration between a new judge and a more senior judge. The judges ended up being silent in the face of the administrative decision that extinguished the five-year period because, in some way, they felt contemplated for having had an increase in another way. But, over time, the error that this represented was realized. It is a decision in its own cause, but it is supported by Loman (Organic Law of the Judiciary), and the Association of Federal Judges (Ajufe) has the competence, yes, to claim the benefit. The error is in the retroactive effect of the administrative decision of the CJF decision, from 2006, when the five-year period was extinguished by the CNJ (National Council of Justice). This retroactive effect imposes the payment of values from the extinction of the benefit.
What is the role of these entities in maintaining privileges?
The class associations within the Judiciary have taken on the role of a true union, as they are committed to claiming benefits and privileges, digging here and there a trinket that yields what we call salary differences. It is a poor posture because it does not discuss, for example, institutional improvement.
In the same week, the president of the Senate, Rodrigo Pacheco (PSD-MG), proposed a PEC that resurrects the benefit for the judiciary and the MP. Does the Senate, which has the prerogative to oversee the Judiciary, fulfill its role?
Today we see a weak Senate that decides according to common interests, in what we jokingly call a “take it, give it here”, which has attacked the Nation as a whole, which I regret as a citizen.
What is the message that the Judiciary sends, for example, when the STF proposes to increase the ceiling by 18%?
The message that he is alien to the Brazilian reality. He lives his own reality, outlined within the standards established by him (Supreme).
When Mrs. was an internal affairs commissioner, she adopted a rigid and critical stance against corporatism. Is there a chance to put an end to this system of privileges, or is it easier for Sergeant Garcia to arrest Zorro?
At that time, it was already difficult for Sergeant Garcia to arrest Zorro. Now we have the sergeant temporarily out of action, even gagged and very afraid of Zorro.
President Lula has criticized those responsible for prosecuting and judging him, but he does not touch on issues such as privileges and “pupilism”. Mrs. Do you see Lula’s chance to mess with this wasp’s nest?
At first, the Executive will join hands with the highest Court of the Judiciary that speaks alone over all Power, but, with time, getting stronger, (Lula) will start to show his claws to his partner.
In a comparison with the PT governments themselves, in your view, did they try to advance the signal at some point?
No, but I’m thinking they’re too aggressive. They are going to make a much more aggressive government.
The information is from the newspaper The State of S. Paulo.
#Judiciary #oblivious #Brazilian #reality #ISTOÉ #DINHEIRO