Post by account_disabled on Mar 7, 2024 5:44:47 GMT -5
President Dilma Rousseff chose to respond to the request for explanations made by minister Luiz Fux in the Writ of Mandamus questioning the cut in the budget of the Judiciary and the Public Ministry for In the response, the president officially says that she sent "to Congress National, through Message / , the proposals to increase the salaries of civil servants in the Judiciary and the Public Ministry of the Union in respect of the principle of separation of Powers".
The Writ of Mandamus was proposed by the Judiciary Workers' Union and the Public Ministry of the Union in the Federal District (Sindijus), and the request for explanations was not compulsory. The response, prepared by the Attorney General's Office, was forwarded with a copy to the president of the Federal Supreme Court, minister Cezar Peluso.
According to the document, the discussion on the budget proposals is now with those who have the power, under the terms of the Constitution of the Republic, to decide on the Union's annual budget project, that is, the National Congress, "which may even through parliamentary amendments, within the limits of article , of the Greater Law, improve the proposed budget law, aiming at better forecasting of revenues and fixing of expenses".
On the other hand, the president makes it clear that the BTC Number Data budget proposal of the Judiciary and the Public Ministry must be compatible with the Budget Guidelines Law. And she attaches an extensive technical note from the Budget and Management Secretariat of the Ministry of Planning, which details detail the effects that the desired adjustment would have on the final budget. Which, according to the document, would imply non-compliance with the fiscal result target.
The defense of the Presidency of the Republic makes a point of highlighting that “the allowances of magistrates and members of the Public Ministry have been placed, with complete justice, at the top of the salaries of public servants in the Union”. In relation to public servants, it would be necessary to “examine the complexity and requirements for each position or functional category”.
The relevance of the Writ of Mandamus is also questioned in the defense presented by the president to the Supreme Court. According to the AGU, “before the process of processing the aforementioned budget bill is completed, there is no illegality to be repealed, nor is there any liquid and certain right to be protected, hence the unfeasibility of this writ of mandamus”.
The president's response to the Writ of Mandamus was not considered satisfactory by Sindijus, which expressed itself, in a note, stating that Dilma's defense “did not present anything new that could make our plan unfeasible”. Also according to the note, Sindjus “expects that Minister Luiz Fux, with the seriousness that is characteristic of him, will carefully examine President Dilma's response and decide, on the Writ of Mandamus, in favor of truth and justice.
The Writ of Mandamus was proposed by the Judiciary Workers' Union and the Public Ministry of the Union in the Federal District (Sindijus), and the request for explanations was not compulsory. The response, prepared by the Attorney General's Office, was forwarded with a copy to the president of the Federal Supreme Court, minister Cezar Peluso.
According to the document, the discussion on the budget proposals is now with those who have the power, under the terms of the Constitution of the Republic, to decide on the Union's annual budget project, that is, the National Congress, "which may even through parliamentary amendments, within the limits of article , of the Greater Law, improve the proposed budget law, aiming at better forecasting of revenues and fixing of expenses".
On the other hand, the president makes it clear that the BTC Number Data budget proposal of the Judiciary and the Public Ministry must be compatible with the Budget Guidelines Law. And she attaches an extensive technical note from the Budget and Management Secretariat of the Ministry of Planning, which details detail the effects that the desired adjustment would have on the final budget. Which, according to the document, would imply non-compliance with the fiscal result target.
The defense of the Presidency of the Republic makes a point of highlighting that “the allowances of magistrates and members of the Public Ministry have been placed, with complete justice, at the top of the salaries of public servants in the Union”. In relation to public servants, it would be necessary to “examine the complexity and requirements for each position or functional category”.
The relevance of the Writ of Mandamus is also questioned in the defense presented by the president to the Supreme Court. According to the AGU, “before the process of processing the aforementioned budget bill is completed, there is no illegality to be repealed, nor is there any liquid and certain right to be protected, hence the unfeasibility of this writ of mandamus”.
The president's response to the Writ of Mandamus was not considered satisfactory by Sindijus, which expressed itself, in a note, stating that Dilma's defense “did not present anything new that could make our plan unfeasible”. Also according to the note, Sindjus “expects that Minister Luiz Fux, with the seriousness that is characteristic of him, will carefully examine President Dilma's response and decide, on the Writ of Mandamus, in favor of truth and justice.