The TRF-2 (Federal Regional Court of the 2nd Region) archived, at the request of the Federal, the agreement that pointed out alleged irregularities committed by judge Marcelo Bretas, responsible for the case in Rio de Janeiro, and prosecutors from the task force.
The archiving occurred in the final stretch of the instruction of PADs (disciplinary administrative proceedings) against Bretas at the (National Council of Justice). Nythalmar testified as a witness this Tuesday (17) to the agency in a tense hearing that lasted around six hours.
The CNJ decided to officiate the TRF-2 to obtain information about the filing of the plea. The non-approval of the agreement does not directly interfere with the progress of the proceedings against Bretas. The council analyzes Nythalmar’s reports to identify possible disciplinary infractions, while the collaboration needs to indicate alleged crimes.
When contacted, the lawyer declined to comment on the filing of his statement.
Bretas also declined to comment on the decision. However, on his social networks, without making direct reference to the TRF-2 decision, the magistrate stated that Nythalmar’s accusation “has been dismantled”.
“The farce was revealed and, as always, Justice prevailed. The issue is not just about defending a work, but about ensuring that truth and integrity are not tarnished by shady maneuvers,” he wrote.
Bretas was arrested in February 2023 under suspicion of irregularities in the conduct of the processes. The measure is valid until the conclusion of the three PADs against him.
One of the procedures originates from Nythalmar’s plea bargain agreement. The lawyer contacted the (Attorney General’s Office) in 2020 after being the target of a search and seizure during a client acquisition process.
He reported alleged agreements made with the judge before sentencing with the involvement of prosecutors. One of the cases refers to the alleged how the confession of businessman Fernando Cavendish during interrogation would affect the .
Nythalmar’s plea agreement was signed by former deputy attorney general of the Republic Lindôra Araújo, whose performance during the Augusto Aras administration at the PGR was marked by .
The request for approval was sent to the (Superior Court of Justice), due to the summons to regional prosecutor Leonardo Freitas, whose special jurisdiction is in the court.
This year, with the PGR under Paulo Gonet, deputy attorney Luiza Frischeisen asked the STJ not to approve the agreement in relation to the facts related to Freitas. The argument was that it was not possible to obtain evidence to corroborate the employee’s testimony. The court accepted the request and sent the statement to TRF-2.
This month, the court decided to archive the procedure in relation to Bretas and the other prosecutors mentioned under the same argument: lack of corroboration of the reports.
The filing occurred on a date close to Nythalmar’s testimony at the CNJ, held this Tuesday. The content of the hearing is confidential. According to Sheet As it turned out, the act was tense and lasted around six hours.
In addition to Nythalmar’s accusation, the PADs against Bretas deal with alleged interference in the production of reports by the Federal Police and a complaint by the mayor of Rio de Janeiro, Eduardo Paes (PSD), of alleged political action in the 2018 election in favor of the then candidate to Governor Wilson Witzel, former federal judge.
Bretas’ interrogation was also scheduled to take place this week, but it ended up not taking place.
Removed almost two years ago from the 7th Federal Court of Rio de Janeiro, the magistrate lost his right to an armored car and personal security as determined by the inspector of the Federal Justice Council, Luis Felipe Salomão.
The basis for the determination is that Bretas signed a term of commitment, common in this type of situation, not to expose himself. However, the dismissed judge had been publishing photos on his social networks of trips to the football stadium, gym, and lectures he would participate in.
In a note published on his social networks, Bretas stated that “it is not true that only now the Federal Court has stopped taking care of my personal safety.” “Since 11/04/24, the TRF-2 considered it unnecessary”, he stated.
“Finally, I note that the irresponsible leak of this information, which should be confidential, is just another attempt to punish a Judge who dared to exercise his role independently.”
