Corregidor suspends rule prohibiting the use of cropped tops and sleeveless shirts in the STJ

The national inspector of justice, minister Luís Felipe Salomão, suspended this Friday (12) the rule of the Superior Court of Justice (STJ) prohibiting people from accessing court facilities wearing sleeveless blouses or crop tops. The normative instruction had been published in February this year, by the president of the STJ, minister Maria Thereza Rocha de Assis Moura.

The rule also prohibited the use of shorts and their variations, shorts, mini blouses, mini skirts or swimwear and gymnastics, leggings, blouses that expose the belly and costumes. The minister stated that the rule aimed to guarantee “formality and legal liturgy”.

In addition to suspending the determination, the magistrate, who is a minister of the STJ, established the opening of an “Administrative Control Procedure” by the National Council of Justice (CNJ) to investigate the reasons that led to the preparation and publication of the restriction.

The CNJ must also determine “whether there has already been a ban and/or impediment of access to male and female employees of the STJ based on the aforementioned normative instruction, indicating its proportion in relation to the female gender, as well as its motivation”. Salomão considered that the restrictions could cause embarrassment to the female public.

“There is a possible non-compliance with such regulations and guidelines in their effects, since specifications referring to skimpy clothes and other attire – such as, for example, sleeveless blouses or skimpy suits – are used as a means of approach and possible embarrassment linked to the female gender”, wrote the minister.

The attire permitted by the rule is a suit, dress shirt and tie for people who identify with the male gender and a dress, blouse with pants or a skirt “of a social nature” for those who identify with the female gender. The resolution should be applied to employees, students, service providers and visitors who wanted to enter the court.

“The indication of expressions that are too open and with a degree of subjectivity, in addition to enabling arbitrary results in limiting access to the Court’s facilities, does not, on the other hand, indicate devices that demonstrate concern or prohibition of acts that violate the gender issues”, pointed out the inspector.

“The likelihood of discriminatory and limiting effects on access to justice in its broadest sense, therefore, is extremely high,” added Salomão.