The Federal Justice is a collection machine

Unlike what happens with the State Courts, the Federal Justice collects much more than it spends (288% in relation to its budget). There needs to be a limit for this machine to stop being efficient, but currently the scenario is still very favorable to the Union.

It is even possible to say, based on the data from Justice in Numbers, that the State Justice fulfills a role in promoting jurisdiction, imposing a cost on the State. This is natural in the promotion of a public policy and in the provision of a public service.

What the CNJ ends up demonstrating is that the branches of Justice are very different and They fulfill very different objectives . The following graphs show the absolute collection by branch of Justice, as well as this same collection compared to the respective budget:

In the end, it is not a good deal for the State to invest in Justice, but - so far - this same investment has proved to be a great deal for the Union. This, however, does not apply to the Labor Courts, which are really an expense for the Union. It fulfills another function, as it is aimed at pacifying conflicts in labor relations.

We cannot lose sight of the fact that the Union does not only spend on this impartial third party, but also on the Attorney General's Office itself. According to data from the Transparency Portal , the AGU's budget is approximately R$ 4 billion per year. In other words, the Federal Government's collection in the Federal Court cannot be understood only as a net revenue, as there are other expenses involved. Even so, the balance is very positive for the Union.