This Tuesday, the STF analyzes the PGR's appeal on the maximum punishment of magistrates
The First Panel of the STF (Supreme Federal Court) analyzes this Tuesday (26) an appeal by the PGR (Attorney General's Office) against the decision of Minister Flávio Dino who considered compulsory retirement as the maximum punishment applied to magistrates to be extinguished.
The case involves a judge from the TJ-RJ (Court of Justice of Rio de Janeiro) who is accused of administrative irregularities in the district of Mangaratiba (RJ). In March, Dino annulled the judgment of the CNJ (National Council of Justice) that had maintained the magistrate's compulsory retirement, on the grounds that there had been procedural turmoil and a violation of due legal process.
In the decision, Dino maintained that the 2019 Pension Reform removed from the Constitution the basis for the so-called "sanction retirement". According to the minister, extremely serious infractions committed by magistrates must result in the definitive loss of their position.
"Constitutional Amendment No. 103/2019, by promoting changes to the Brazilian social security system, also expressly reached the legal regime applicable to magistrates and the powers of the National Council of Justice, revoking the sanction of 'compulsory retirement', by eliminating its constitutional basis", says the minister, in the decision.
The understanding reached one of the most criticized punishments in the Judiciary's disciplinary system, often called "reward punishment" for allowing dismissed magistrates to continue receiving proportional remuneration.
In the appeal scheduled for this Tuesday (26), the PGR agrees with the annulment of the disciplinary procedure due to procedural flaws in the CNJ, but contests the thesis established by Dino about the end of compulsory retirement.
According to the Prosecutor's Office, the decision created an "unprecedented interpretation" by concluding that EC (Constitutional Amendment) 103 automatically extinguished the penalty.
The body maintains that the reform merely removed the topic from the constitutional text, without revoking the provisions of LOMAN (Organic Law of the National Judiciary), which continues to authorize compulsory retirement as a disciplinary sanction.
In the statement sent to the Supreme Court, the PGR states that there was a "deconstitutionalization" of the matter, that is, the punishment was no longer provided for in the Constitution, but remained valid in the complementary legislation.
The Federal Public Ministry requests that proportional compulsory retirement be maintained as the maximum administrative penalty for the judiciary.
Flávio Dino prohibits compulsory retirement as the maximum penalty for judges | CNN 360º
Source: CNN