The minister, of the (Supreme Federal Court), made a defense of the quality of the virtual plenary used by the court during the session on Wednesday (21). According to him, there is criticism when decisions are not expected.
“Those who often criticize the virtual plenary do not understand that in the virtual we have even more time to reflect on processes in progress and on trial,” said the minister.
“There will always be those who will agree and those who will disagree because the final solution was not the ones who attended them, it was not what they imagined, but the final voice is the voice of the Constitution,” he said.
The plenary began to analyze a case about the validity of proof obtained on a cell phone found at the crime scene. The appeal began in virtual plenary and the rapporteur made adjustments after disagreement and request for views. Before reading the report, the minister made the comment on the virtual plenary.
“This case is a good example. That is, he came in with a vote, was in a sense, came votes in other ways, when he resumed view, I readjusted the vote, and then came the vote of Cristiano Zanin that I will incorporate some things, Minister Flávio Dino understood as well to bring the theme to face -to -face,” said Toffoli.
According to the minister, the case demonstrates the possibilities of the virtual.
“It demonstrates that the virtual plenary is perhaps a dynamic of reflection and those who think that the physical in person occurs in much faster dynamic, to demonstrate that quality is equal, whether in virtual or in person, the quality of judgment and the quality of the decision,” said the rapporteur.
At this Wednesday’s session, the six ministers are present in the plenary. In recent weeks, part of the ministers have followed the work remotely. In some sessions, as on trips a.
Gift Link: Did you like this text? Subscriber can release seven free hits from any link per day. Just click on F Blue below.
