The (Supreme Federal Court) denied this Friday (13) the former president’s request () to take action on the attempted coup d’état of 2022 and the coup acts of January 8, 2023. Minister André Mendonça was the last to vote and the only one to dissent.
Last Friday (6) and, despite the deadline of up to a week for ministers to vote, on the first day 7 votes were cast in the same direction — 6 of them in just four hours after the session began. Moraes does not participate.
The president of the court, , rapporteur of the case, voted to reject the request and was followed by , , , , and later on Friday. On Tuesday (10), Luiz Fux joined the majority.
This Friday, Kassio Nunes Marques, in favor of Moraes, and André Mendonça voted.
For Mendonça, there are elements in the process that show Moraes as a victim of the crimes investigated. “I understand that the appeal now being considered presents in a clear, objective and specific way the factual and legal reasons for characterizing the reporting minister’s impediment,” he said.
In the vote, the minister discussed the principle of natural justice —which defines who should judge each case— and judicial bias, specifically citing the monitoring of Moraes and the plan to kill him as central parts of the attempted coup d’état.
“At this juncture, upon realizing that the eminent defendant minister would suffer, directly and immediately, serious and tangible consequences, such as imprisonment – or even death –, if the reported intentions of those being investigated were carried out, the condition seems present to me that ‘ directly interested'”, says Mendonça.
Also appointed by Bolsonaro to form the court, Kassio stated in his vote that the judge’s impeachment is characterized if he, or the people linked to him, has a direct interest in the outcome of the process. “From this perspective, I do not see the legal interest being characterized in this way, justifying the acceptance of this argument,” he said.
In February, the request had already been denied, which has now gone to the virtual plenary for analysis by the full collegiate — in this environment, there is no interaction between the ministers, who cast their votes in an electronic system.
In addition to Bolsonaro’s request, another 191 requests from defendants in related cases were denied by the president of the STF. All requests followed the same line of argument, according to which the judge’s impartiality is compromised because he is also identified as the target of the coup plot.
The former president’s lawyers filed an action called an impeachment argument, used to remove the magistrate who would direct the process, based on the causes of suspicion and impediment.
When rejecting the defense’s attempt to change the report of the case, on February 20, Barroso stated that the facts narrated do not characterize, in the slightest, the legal situations that would make Moraes’ action impossible.
According to the president, there is a consolidated understanding regarding the need to demonstrate, in an objective and specific way, that the situation falls within the rules of impediment and suspicion provided for in the CPP (Code of Criminal Procedure).
“Generic and subjective allegations, devoid of legal basis, are not enough,” said Barroso.
In the new decision, the president of the court said that the simple allegation that Moraes would be a victim of the crimes under investigation does not automatically prevent the minister from reporting on the case.
The defense made the request on February 14, days after fulfilling it in , on the coast of Rio de Janeiro.
“Both the content of the representation and the decision undoubtedly reveal a narrative that places the reporting minister in the role of central victim of the alleged actions that were the subject of the investigation, highlighting several action plans that directly targeted him,” they said. the lawyers.
The petition states that, in the 135 pages of the decision, there are more than 20 mentions of Moraes, as well as describing episodes that expose the magistrate’s vulnerability as a result of monitoring and the plan drawn up by those investigated, “outlining a context that makes it evident and strongly questioned your objective and subjective impartiality to decide in these cases, given your position as a victim“.
The most recent documents included in the process reinforce the target position that those involved attributed to the magistrate.
On November 19, the PF launched an attack against four military personnel and a federal police officer suspected of developing a plan to kill the then-elected president, (), the vice-president, (), and the minister.
In the case of Moraes, the police representation sent to the STF states that the suspects, in addition to mentioning poisoning, .
In the case file, the (Attorney General’s Office) agreed with Barroso’s understanding in a demonstration on March 11. He argued that the action does not have an individual victim, since , like , and the electoral system, discrediting it.
Rules are provided for in the Code of Civil Procedure and the Code of Criminal Procedure, applicable to STF ministers.
Impediment occurs in processes in which the magistrate has previously acted, whether as a lawyer, defender or for the Public Prosecutor’s Office, police authority, judicial assistant and expert witness – or as a witness.
Suspicion is created when the magistrate acts in cases involving close friends or enemies and their lawyers. Suspicion is also expected if he has received gifts from people interested in the process or who have creditors or debtors of his spouse or relatives.
The rule also applies to cases in which the judge has an interest in the trial. In these cases, the magistrate can declare himself a suspect on an intimate basis, without having to give a reason.
