Moraes’s decision reaches the deputy’s family, but insight into the penalty prohibits punish who is not a defendant in the process
Minister Alexandre de Moraes this Wednesday (4.Jun.2025) The Social Networks of the deputy (PL-SP), her mother, Rita Zambelli, and her 17-year-old son. The decision of a punishment that affects third parties is controversial, according to legal operators heard by the Poder360.
The Supreme Court (STF) has used precautionary measures for blockages that reach those who are not defendant – the argument here is to prevent the continuity of criminal conduct. And there is no shortage of examples.
The Constitution, item XLV: “No penalty will come from the person of the convict“It is the principle of the intranscendence of the penalty.
According to the lawyer and teacher, there is no legal basis to punish third parties due to someone’s condemnation: “The only possibility of punishments to third parties is if they are previously investigated and processed individually. None of this has occurred.”
In the case of Zambelli, one of the justifications of STF Minister Alexandre de Moraes is that the deputy transferred her nets to her mother days before the court decision.
The deputy, announced that she would launch her mother and son as future candidate for councilor in Sao Paulo in 2028.
The blockade of the networks extending even to the son would be to prevent Zambelli from continuing, according to Moraes, “Disseminating fraudulent news, attacking the fairness of the elections and promoting aggressions to the judiciary. ”
Even so, it would be unconstitutional. According to the lawyer, having used a third party account cannot assume that the account is unlawful or used to commit illicit.
The lawyer Marco Aurélio, from the prerogatives, group of lawyers and operators of sympathetic law to the Lula government, said that Moraes is right in relation to the measures against Zambelli – to the severity of the crimes. “They deserve recognition, support and applause“, These.
However, it demonstrated concern for decisions that extend to family members. According to him, this type of measure should only be adopted when there are founded evidence.
However, he said that they do not need to be investigated so directly for such adoption. It was likely to be likely that Moraes has fundamentals that have not yet come to public to justify the measures adopted.
Although praising his performance in the defense of democracy, he states that it is essential to respect the principle of individualization of conduct to the individualization of penalty.
“This principle of criminal law is universally used in all legal orders of all modern democracies“, These.
Moraes’s decision requires platforms such as goal, Tiktok, X, Telegram, YouTube and LinkedIn block the profiles associated with Zambelli and their families, under penalty of a daily fine of $ 100,000.
In addition, a daily fine of $ 50,000 was stipulated if Zambelli continues to make posts, even through third parties. That is: any post of the family can lead to a fine to the deputy.
“Still, I consider blocking censorship profiles, as it is prevented the person from talking in networks forever, due to the supposed illicit, future“, Aphirmou Marseille.
