ADI 5,644
Autonomy of the Public Defender's Office and management of the Assistance Fund
Keywords:
Public Defender's Office, Budgetary Autonomy, Court-Appointed AttorneysAbstract
This article analyzes the Supreme Federal Court's (STF) ruling on Direct Action of Unconstitutionality (ADI) 5.644, which declared unconstitutional a provision of Complementary Law 1.297/2017 of São Paulo. The challenged legislation mandated that 40% of the resources of the Public Defender's Office's Legal Assistance Fund (FAJ) be allocated to the payment of court-appointed lawyers. The methodology focuses on the conflict between state laws and the functional, administrative, and budgetary autonomy of the Public Defender's Offices (Article 134 of the Federal Constitution). The outcome of the ruling reaffirms that, while agreements are lawful, the legal imposition of budgetary percentages undermines the institution's self-management, ensuring that the Public Defender's Office has full freedom to decide how to apply its resources more effectively.
References
BRASIL. Supremo Tribunal Federal. Ação Direta de Inconstitucionalidade 5.644. Relator: Plenário.
BRASIL. Constituição da República Federativa do Brasil de 1988. Art. 134, § 2º (Autonomia das Defensorias Estaduais).
SÃO PAULO (Estado). Lei Complementar nº 1.297, de 2017. Altera a destinação de recursos do Fundo de Assistência Judiciária.
Downloads
Published
Data Availability Statement
Data are available within the body of the article.
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Luiz Rascovski (Autor)
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
This journal provides immediate open access to its content. The license used is Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0).
