Administering in times of crisis and the annual general review of public servants: the case of Complementary Law No. 173/2020

Administrar em tempos de crise e a revisão geral anual dos servidores públicos: o caso da Lei Complementar no. 173/2020

Abstract

One of the measures adopted in the pandemic context was the edition of the Supplementary Law - LC No. 173/2020, which established, in its article 8, prohibitions to the federative entities. From then on, there was divergence about the possibility of granting the annual general review for public servants. The problem is: what are the interpretative inconsistencies observed, both in the behaviour of the National Congress and the Supremo Tribunal Federal, in taking a position on the possibility of granting general annual reviews to public servants, in light of LC 173/2020? The jurisprudential construction of the STF was highlighted, which, in a first moment, decharacterized and emptied the meaning of the annual general revision. The Legislative Branch, when editing LC no. 173/2020, did not really use the best legislative technique while establishing the prohibitions of article 8, I, because, in other opportunities, when referring to the general revision, it used the constitutional vocabulary, either to establish a prohibition or exception to the rule of containment of public spending. The STF, in the constitutionality control actions that challenged LC 173/2020, decided “without deciding” the main issue: the reach of the prohibition. Only in a Claim did it point out a position on the matter, in a monocratic way. Another decision that can be criticized, as it “reaffirms” something it has never stated. Methodologically, this is a case study, in which a possible terminological confusion is observed in the scope of decisions about the meaning of the annual general revision, based on the interpretative theory of Ronald Dworkin, in view of the duties of integrity and coherence.