AGU questions STF on release of R$ 533 million

The Advocacy General of the Union (AGU) triggered the Supremo Tribunal Federal (STF) on Friday (6) in search of guidance on how to remove R$ 533 million in accrued benefits by servers. The impasse arose because the Union Public Prosecutor’s Office and Justiça Federal claim to have no money available to comply with court decisions that determine the immediate payment of additional service time.

The total value of R$ 533 million is the sum of two requests for extraordinary credit. The Public Prosecutor’s Office of the Union requests R$ 324 million, while the Council of Justiça Federal demands almost R$ 209 million. These figures serve to cover the Parcel of Valuation for Time of Antiquity in the Career, nicknamed additional for antiquity, in addition to compensation due for holidays not enjoyed and premium licenses.

Insufficient budget for court orders

The bodies reported that the current budget is insufficient to honor these obligations imposed by recent decisions of the Brazilian judiciary itself. The legal advice of the Ministry of Planning and Budget assessed that the alleged urgency was not duly proven.

Although the government recognizes the obligation to comply with court orders, the technical understanding is that the existence of a STF decision, by itself, does not constitute the constitutional urgency necessary to open extraordinary claims. The agency compared the situation to cases of real calamity, such as the indigenous humanitarian crisis or floods in the South, arguing that the payment of benefits to servants does not have the same exceptional nature.

Pendulums and constitutional ceiling

Penduricalhos are extra funds that add to the base salary, often allowing the final remuneration to exceed the constitutional ceiling of R$ 46.366,19. The STF set limits for these funds, but kept the additional 5% every five years of legal activity, and could reach 35%.

In June 2026, the Court ordered the immediate implementation of this benefit for assets and retirees. The decision generated a significant liability for the public coffers, leading the bodies to seek extraordinary credits to comply with the determination.

Divergence between urgency and calamity

The AGU questions precisely whether the decision of STF constitutes an emergency situation that justifies the opening of extraordinary credit, a mechanism reserved for unpredictable and urgent expenses, such as wars or public calamities. The legal advice of the Planning understands that no, because the payment of benefits to servers, even if judicially determined, does not equate to force majeure events.

The impasse puts on opposite sides the need to comply with judicial decisions and the fiscal rigidity of the government. As long as the STF does not manifest, the servers wait for the payment of amounts that have already been recognized in court.

What's at stake

In addition to the billionaire amount, the discussion involves the interpretation of the Constitution on extraordinary credits. If the STF accepts the AGU’s request, the government may open the way for other bodies to request appeals without proving actual urgency. On the other hand, denying the request can lead to non-compliance with court orders and new actions.

The source did not detail when the STF should review the case. The Boca no Trombone Portal will continue to follow the developments of this issue that directly affects the pocket of the servers and the balance of the public accounts.

Read Also

Dark Horse actor accuses Lula of shutting down film in Brazil

Flávio tells US newspaper that Brazil is not a full democracy

Sin Tax Exists in 38 OECD Countries

Font

www.gazetadopovo.com