Temporary prison guard dismissed in the election period

Published on October 26, 2026.

It may be possible. Brazil’s Elections Law prohibits dismissing public servants without just cause in the three months before the election and until the elected officials take office, and many courts extend this protection to those working on temporary contracts. In the 2026 elections, this period began on July 4.

Those who worked as temporary prison guards in the state of Goiás and had their contract terminated after that date can challenge the dismissal in court, including through a writ of mandamus (mandado de segurança). Two cautions, however, must be clear from the start: the thesis still divides the courts, and the deadline for the writ is short, 120 days from learning of the dismissal.

What electoral law prohibits during the election period

Article 73, item V, of Law 9.504/1997 lists conduct prohibited to public officials during elections. Among them is dismissing a servant without just cause, or removing them on the administration’s own initiative, within the electoral district, in the three months before the vote and until the elected officials take office. The law itself says that any act performed in this period is null and void.

The rule exists to prevent public jobs from becoming a bargaining chip in the campaign, with hiring to please voters or dismissals as a form of pressure. That is why the protection is objective: there is no need to prove that the dismissal had an electoral motive.

The law has exceptions. Commissioned posts and positions of trust can be terminated at any time, and prison officers can be transferred or reassigned by the administration. No exception authorizes dismissing without just cause someone who does not hold a commissioned post.

In 2026 there were elections for governor, state and federal representatives, senators and president, with the first round on October 4. Because the state race covers the entire territory of Goiás, the prohibition reaches acts of the State Government. The period began on July 4, 2026. Elected governors take office on January 6, 2027, a new date created by Constitutional Amendment 111/2021.

Does the protection apply to temporary contracts?

In the Electoral Courts, yes. Brazil’s Superior Electoral Court (TSE) records in its case law that dismissing temporary servants after the election and before the elected officials take office constitutes the conduct prohibited by article 73, V. The TSE has also stated that the exception for hiring in essential services does not authorize dismissing temporary staff without just cause.

In the ordinary courts, where the servant seeks annulment of the dismissal, there are many favorable decisions. Several state courts annul the unjustified termination of temporary contracts during the election period and hold that the precarious nature of the relationship does not set the rule aside. There is a specific precedent involving a temporary prison officer dismissed without just cause during this period, in which the termination was annulled and, since the contract had already expired, compensation for wages until the elected officials took office was guaranteed.

The issue, however, is not settled. The Minas Gerais Court of Appeals decided an incident of resolution of repetitive claims, IRDR 1.0000.15.065552-0/003, and established by majority, in 2021, the thesis that the prohibition only applies to tenured servants. Other panels across the country follow the same line and see temporary contracts as a relationship the administration can end at any time.

As of the date of this article, we have not found any repetitive theme from the Superior Court of Justice or general repercussion ruling from the Supreme Federal Court resolving the issue. In practice, the outcome depends on the court and panel that decides the case, and on the evidence in each situation.

What the State may claim as just cause

The law does not protect against dismissal with just cause, and that is usually where the dispute lies. Serious misconduct established in an administrative proceeding is the clearest example. Many courts also accept as just cause the appointment of candidates who passed a public exam for the same functions, because the need that justified the temporary contract no longer exists.

This argument carries weight in the case of the Goiás prison guards. The State Government called 400 candidates who passed the penal police exam, with appointment scheduled for August 7, 2026 and start of duties from August 10, dates that fall within the election period. According to the Penal Police, the exam provides for 1,600 appointments, and 800 officers have already taken office.

Another point the State may raise is ADI 7069. In it, the Supreme Federal Court declared unconstitutional the temporary hiring of prison guards for functions belonging to the penal police in Goiás. The STF itself, however, postponed the decision’s effects for two years from the publication of the minutes, which took place on September 30, 2026, so the State can regularize its staff. Thus, the decision does not oblige the State to end the contracts now, and there are good arguments that it alone does not justify dismissals made during the election period.

That is why each case requires looking at the dismissal act: whether it stated reasons, what reason was given, whether there was a real replacement by an exam-approved officer in the same unit and whether the contract was still within its term.

How the writ of mandamus works in this case

The writ of mandamus is a faster lawsuit, used against an unlawful act by a public authority when the right can be proven with documents alone. Here, the act challenged is the dismissal, and the main evidence is the act itself, with the date it was performed.

The deadline is the most urgent point. Article 23 of Law 12.016/2009 sets 120 days from learning of the act, and this deadline is not suspended or interrupted. Those dismissed at the very beginning of July 2026 are very close to the end of this deadline.

In the petition, the servant seeks annulment of the dismissal and return to service until the end of the protection period or until the contract’s end date, as the case may be. It is possible to request an injunction for immediate return and, if the judge denies it, to appeal to the Court of Appeals by interlocutory appeal.

The writ of mandamus has a limit that must be known. Under STF Summaries 269 and 271, it does not replace a collection lawsuit and does not result in payment of amounts for the period before it was filed. If the contract has already expired, or if the 120-day deadline has passed, the path is usually an ordinary lawsuit to claim wages for the protected period.

What to gather before seeing a lawyer

Temporary contract and extension terms, with start and end dates
Dismissal act (ordinance, termination notice or communication), with the date you learned of it
Reason given by the administration, if any
Pay slips for the last few months
Any record that the position was filled by an exam-approved officer, or that it was not

With these papers in hand, the case analysis is faster, which matters given the 120-day deadline. Each dismissal must be examined individually, because the date, the reason and the contract’s situation change the strategy and the chances. If you were dismissed during this period, consult a lawyer you trust as soon as possible. SPD Advocacia serves public servants online: send your case through our intake page or talk to the team on WhatsApp (61) 99833-1103.

Official sources

By Sidnei Pedro Dias, lawyer, OAB/GO 48.603, OAB/DF 68.207 and OAB/SP 501.693.

Electoral law: prohibited conduct, the election period and its effects.
Public service exams: appointment, taking office and passed-over candidates.
Administrative disciplinary proceedings: defense of public servants.

Did not find your situation? Answer the case review form or see all our practice areas.

Temporary prison guard dismissed during the election period in Goiás: can a writ of mandamus help?