Minister André Mendonça emphasized that nullity allegations must be analyzed by the appropriate instances, in accordance with constitutional principles, such as due process of law
The trial on the annulment of acts involving Antonio Palocci is in an impasse, with the score tied 2-2. The most recent vote was from Minister André Mendonça, who aligned himself with Edson Fachin’s divergent position. The definition of the case now depends on the vote of Nunes Marques, who has not yet spoken about the issue. Mendonça, in pronouncing, supported Fachin’s argument, who argued that the Supreme should not focus on broad and generic requests related to Lava Jato investigations. The minister emphasized that nullity allegations must be analyzed by the appropriate instances, in accordance with constitutional principles, such as due process.
In addition, Minister André Mendonça stressed that it is not feasible to apply Lava Jato decisions to all the requests that arise, as this could infringe the principle of the natural judge. This consideration is fundamental to ensure that each case is treated fairly and adequately, respecting the established legal rules. The appeal presented by the Attorney General’s Office (PGR) seeks to reverse the annulment of the acts that were previously considered invalid. The expectation now revolves around the manifestation of Nunes Marques, which may decide the outcome of this important judgment, which has significant implications for the future of Lava Jato investigations.
Posted by Sarah Paula
*Report produced with the aid of AI
