A inconstitucionalidade da norma que autoriza o pagamento dos honorários sucumbenciais ao advogado público/ defensor público

Abstract

As proved in the present study, the payment of
succulent fees to public lawyers is in disagreement with
Article 39, § 4th, of the Republican Constitution of 1988,
since the norm in question establishes that the
remuneration of the servants will be made only by subsidy,
being “prohibited the addition of any bonus, additional,
credit, premium, representation fee or other kind of
remuneration”. Moreover, succulent fees are part of the
public patrimony of the entity that the lawyer is registered
and serves as income for the payment of the compensation
of the lawyers themselves, therefore, apportioning the
amount among lawyers is a reproachable and harmful
act to the public coffers. Therefore, it is necessary for the
Federal Supreme Court to comply with the request
formulated by the Attorney General’s Office in the
Unconstitutionality Direct Action nº 6.053, to declare the
unconstitutionality of paragraph 19 of article 85 of the
Civil Code of Procedure of 2015 and of the Articles 27 and
28 to 36 of Law 13.327/166, since the devices questioned
are in disagreement with Paragraph 4th of Article 39 of
the Constitution of the Republic of 1988.