The article delves into the concepts of 'penduricalhos' and 'penduricaços', two terms that describe additional remunerations and income supplements used within the Brazilian judicial system, particularly by members of the Supreme Federal Court (STF). 'Penduricalhos' are disguised monetary benefits that violate constitutional ceilings and are exempt from taxes, whereas 'penduricaços' refer to direct and indirect methods judges use to augment their income, such as paid speeches or involvement in lobbying events.

The distinction is crucial, as both practices raise significant ethical concerns and highlight systemic corruption that undermines the integrity of judicial institutions. The article notes that while some ministers view 'penduricalhos' as the critical issue within the judiciary, it emphasizes that both terms point to broader institutional failings that enable illicit enrichment and erode public trust. The discussion is timely, shedding light on current debates regarding corruption and financial impropriety in the Brazilian legal system.

In analyzing these practices, the article argues for a reevaluation of how remuneration in the judiciary is structured to prevent both public and private financial influences from compromising justice. It suggests that without meaningful reform, these issues will persist, further damaging the reputation of Brazil's legal institutions and fostering an environment of mistrust among the citizenry.