✓ verbatim from the press ? no verbatim passage
The decision determines that CNJ must reanalyze disciplinary processes and, if it understands there is proof of serious infractions that should be punished with loss of office, send cases to the Attorney General's Office for presentation of appropriate judicial action before the Supreme Court. STF President Edson Fachin announced he will present a proposal within 30 days to reform the magistracy's disciplinary regime, replacing paid mandatory retirement with definitive loss of office without remuneration. ?
Press quotes (1)
"A Primeira Turma do Supremo Tribunal Federal (STF), em sessão realizada nesta terça-feira (26), anulou decisão do Conselho Nacional de Justiça (CNJ) que havia mantido a pena de aposentadoria compulsória a um juiz estadual do Rio de Janeiro. O colegiado confirmou decisão do relator, ministro Flávio Dino, na Ação Originária (AO) 2870"
According to a survey by Estadão cited in the press, CNJ has mandatorily retired 126 magistrates in the last 20 years, spending at least R$ 59 million annually on these retirees. The current model is provided for in article 42 of the National Magistracy Organic Law, a norm created in 1979 during the military dictatorship. ?
Press quotes (1)
"O ministro também ressaltou que a aposentadoria compulsória punitiva, além de não estar mais prevista na Constituição, transfere um ônus individual (a responsabilidade por um ato ilícito) para toda a sociedade. Esse tipo de sanção, segundo ele, não representa punição, porque o magistrado que cometeu um crime passa a ser sustentado pela coletividade."
STF First Panel decided by majority on May 26, 2026 to maintain Flávio Dino's decision on extinction of mandatory retirement
Covered by only some sources, or where the accounts diverge.
Covered by only some sources (1)
-
What is the timeframe for CNJ to regulate the new disciplinary system?
Why it's still unknown: Fachin mentioned a 30-day proposal, but there is no official timeline for CNJ implementation.
-
What happens to the 126 magistrates already mandatorily retired?
Why it's still unknown: The decision does not specify if there will be retroactive review of previous cases.
-
What specific doctrinal test did the First Panel apply to analyze the incompatibility?
Why it's still unknown: The primary source does not detail the constitutional framework used to interpret the effects of EC 103/2019.