Brazil's Supreme Federal Court (STF) has ruled that state and municipal governments must fund an assistance benefit for domestic violence victims who need to leave work and are not covered by Brazil's social security system. The clarification, issued in a judgment that ended Friday, May 29, accepted a request from the Office of the Solicitor General (AGU), according to Broadcast reporting published by Estadão and partner outlets.
The decision makes explicit that Brazil's federal government will not pay the assistance portion of the benefit. A study by XP estimated the cost could reach R$7.2 billion, roughly USD 1.3 billion at recent rates, over three years.
What the Court Clarified
Justice Flávio Dino, the case's rapporteur, said the clarification was needed to prevent court orders from being wrongly directed to the National Social Security Institute (INSS), which handles social security and the federal Continuous Cash Benefit (BPC) for vulnerable groups.
"To avoid assistance-related court orders being erroneously directed to the INSS — which is responsible only for the BPC and social security benefits — it is necessary to specify that material execution in these cases falls to the subnational entities that manage the local SUAS, as decided by the judge who grants the measure," Dino said, referring to Brazil's Unified Social Assistance System.
The other justices followed Dino unanimously. The ruling addresses a practical gap left by an earlier STF decision on how women protected under the Maria da Penha Law should be supported financially when a judge orders them away from their workplace.
The Legal Gap
The Maria da Penha Law, Brazil's landmark 2006 domestic violence statute, guarantees that a woman facing domestic violence may keep her employment relationship for up to six months if she needs to leave the workplace. The rule is designed to protect victims from losing their jobs while under judicial protection.
The law did not say, however, whether the woman should continue receiving pay during that period or which public body would bear the cost. That omission pushed the issue into the courts.
In a December ruling, the STF held that a domestic violence victim's situation can be treated as equivalent to temporary incapacity for work. The court said the public sector must pay support to women who are ordered away from work.
Two Different Situations
The court's thesis created two routes. For women who contribute to social security, the rules mirror Brazil's sickness benefit: the employer pays the first 15 days of leave, and the INSS covers the remaining period. If the insured woman has no employment relationship, the INSS pays the benefit in full.
For women who do not contribute to the INSS and therefore do not qualify for the sickness benefit, the court determined that the state must pay an assistance benefit. In those cases, a judge must verify that the woman lacks the means to support herself and requires state assistance.
The earlier ruling left uncertainty over which level of government should pay that assistance benefit: the federal government, the states or municipalities. The AGU filed a procedural request known as embargos de declaração, used to clarify omissions or contradictions in a decision, asking the STF to settle that point.
Social Security Rights
Dino had already described these cases as situations of temporary vulnerability, making the benefit an "eventual" form of assistance. Under Brazil's welfare structure, the BPC is funded by the federal government, while eventual assistance benefits are the responsibility of states and municipalities.
The STF also clarified that no social security contribution should be deducted from the benefit paid to women insured by the INSS. Dino said the point preserves both the victim's pension rights and the full value of the economic protection granted by the court.