By The Rio Times | Created at 2026-08-06 20:52:00 | Updated at 2026-08-06 22:19:18
2 hours ago
Politics & Society: Brasília
Key Facts
—Judgment. Brazil’s Superior Court of Justice (STJ) judged Justice Marco Buzzi over sexual-harassment complaints brought by two women.
—Penalty. The court weighed the loss of his office, the harshest sanction now available against a sitting justice.
—New rule. In March 2026 the Supreme Federal Court (STF) barred compulsory retirement as judges’ maximum penalty, replacing it with loss of office — without salary; the CNJ has just formalised the rule.
—Dispute. Because the case began before the change, there was debate over which penalty should apply.
—Defence. Buzzi denies all the accusations and has sought his acquittal; the decision can still be challenged.
Brazil’s Superior Court of Justice moved against Justice Marco Buzzi over sexual-harassment accusations, in a case that has become an early test of a new rule replacing forced retirement with outright loss of office for judges.
One-stop reference
Company Intelligence
Every listed company in Latin America — financials, ownership and structure for 1,450+ companies across 26 exchanges, in one place.
A Landmark Disciplinary Case
The Superior Court of Justice (STJ), Brazil’s highest court for non-constitutional matters, put one of its own members on trial in a disciplinary proceeding, a rare and closely watched step.
At stake was the loss of Justice Marco Buzzi’s office, the most severe penalty now available against a sitting justice.
The Accusations
The case stems from complaints of sexual harassment brought by two women, one of them a former employee of the justice’s office.
Buzzi has denied all the accusations throughout the proceeding and asked to be acquitted.
A New Rule on Judges’ Penalties
The proceeding unfolds under a recently changed framework. In March 2026, the Supreme Federal Court (STF) barred compulsory retirement as the maximum penalty for judges, replacing it with loss of office — a sanction that, unlike retirement, does not carry a salary.
The National Council of Justice (CNJ), which also judges disciplinary cases against magistrates, has just formalised the new rule.
A Dispute Over Which Penalty Applies
Because the case against Buzzi was opened before the rule changed, there has been debate over whether the older penalty of compulsory retirement or the new loss of office should apply.
The Prosecutor-General’s Office shifted its request from compulsory retirement toward dismissal, aligning with the STF’s new standard, even as some in the court weighed the earlier penalty.
Why the Case Matters
The outcome is a test of how Brazil’s top courts discipline their own members and of the new rule meant to end the perception that misconduct ended only in a paid retirement.
Whatever the panel decides, the ruling can still be challenged, and it sets a precedent for future disciplinary cases involving senior judges.
Sources: STJ, CNN Brasil, Reuters.
This article was drafted with automated assistance and reviewed before publication. How we use AI · Report an error
