Post by account_disabled on Mar 7, 2024 12:25:34 GMT 2
Judicial decision that considered unconstitutional municipal law that granted vacation bonuses, th salary and representation funds for mayor and vice-mayor has general repercussions recognized by the Federal Supreme Court.
Upon recognizing the existence of general repercussions, Minister Marco Aurélio highlighted two topics to be debated in the appeal. "The first is linked to the performance of the Court of Justice, in an objective process, present the conflict of municipal law not with the State Charter, but with the Federal". He highlighted that the protection of the Charter of the Republic in the concentrated control of constitutionality belongs to the Supreme Court.
"It is also worth examining the question relating to the possibility, or not, of the subsidy being satisfied accompanied by the payment of another type of remuneration. In short, it is necessary to define whether or not the subsidy is a single installment owed to those who are reached by the institute (constitutional )", concluded Minister Marco Aurélio.
When judging a Direct Action of Unconstitutionality, the Court BTC Number Data of Justice of Rio Grande do Sul considered that the law of the municipality of Alecrim contravened the constitutional provision that determines that the holder of an elective mandate must be paid, exclusively, by a subsidy fixed in a single installment, prohibiting the increase of any bonus, additional, allowance, prize, representation allowance or other type of remuneration (paragraph of article of the Federal Constitution).
The municipality appealed this decision to the Supreme Court through an Extraordinary Appeal in which it claims that the issue goes beyond the subjective interest of the parties involved in the dispute given the possibility of the same situation occurring in other municipalities.
In the appeal, the municipality of Alecrim points out that it is impossible for the state court to revoke a municipal law for violating the Federal Constitution. Another argument is that, in this case, the remuneration of political agents is linked to municipal autonomy and that the funds in question are not remunerative in nature and can be paid to public agents who receive subsidies. Still according to the municipality, the Supreme Court had already decided, in the judgment of the Direct Action of Unconstitutionality (ADI) , that paragraph of article of the Federal Constitution is not self-applicable. With information from the STF Press Office.
Upon recognizing the existence of general repercussions, Minister Marco Aurélio highlighted two topics to be debated in the appeal. "The first is linked to the performance of the Court of Justice, in an objective process, present the conflict of municipal law not with the State Charter, but with the Federal". He highlighted that the protection of the Charter of the Republic in the concentrated control of constitutionality belongs to the Supreme Court.
"It is also worth examining the question relating to the possibility, or not, of the subsidy being satisfied accompanied by the payment of another type of remuneration. In short, it is necessary to define whether or not the subsidy is a single installment owed to those who are reached by the institute (constitutional )", concluded Minister Marco Aurélio.
When judging a Direct Action of Unconstitutionality, the Court BTC Number Data of Justice of Rio Grande do Sul considered that the law of the municipality of Alecrim contravened the constitutional provision that determines that the holder of an elective mandate must be paid, exclusively, by a subsidy fixed in a single installment, prohibiting the increase of any bonus, additional, allowance, prize, representation allowance or other type of remuneration (paragraph of article of the Federal Constitution).
The municipality appealed this decision to the Supreme Court through an Extraordinary Appeal in which it claims that the issue goes beyond the subjective interest of the parties involved in the dispute given the possibility of the same situation occurring in other municipalities.
In the appeal, the municipality of Alecrim points out that it is impossible for the state court to revoke a municipal law for violating the Federal Constitution. Another argument is that, in this case, the remuneration of political agents is linked to municipal autonomy and that the funds in question are not remunerative in nature and can be paid to public agents who receive subsidies. Still according to the municipality, the Supreme Court had already decided, in the judgment of the Direct Action of Unconstitutionality (ADI) , that paragraph of article of the Federal Constitution is not self-applicable. With information from the STF Press Office.