On October 23, Minister Gilmar Mendes of Brazil's Supreme Federal Court (STF) made a significant ruling regarding indemnity payments for members of the judiciary and public ministry. He determined that such payments, referred to as 'penduricalhos' in Brazil, can only be disbursed when explicitly outlined in legislation approved by the National Congress. This decision comes following a direct action of unconstitutionality filed by the Attorney General's Office, highlighting ongoing debates about compensation structures in the judiciary system.

Mendes set a deadline of 60 days for state courts and public ministries to halt any indemnity payments established by state laws. Additionally, a 45-day deadline was imposed on federal and state courts, as well as public ministries, to suspend any payments originating from administrative decisions or secondary normative acts. This dual deadline aims to rectify a landscape where many current perks do not comply with national legal standards, paving the way for a more uniform approach to judicial compensation across Brazil.

The implications of Mendes' ruling are significant, as it seeks to ensure that any indemnity paid is not only justified but also legislated by the appropriate national channels. This could prevent future irregularities and excessive compensatory practices within Brazil's judiciary and public ministry, fostering a more accountable system that reflects the boundaries set by national law. The case will now proceed to the full STF for a vote, potentially further reshaping the judicial compensation landscape.