The Federal Supreme Court (STF) was the scene on Tuesday (10) of a clash of versions about an alleged threat of arrest to Jair Bolsonaro during ministerial meeting in December 2022. The former president, sixth defendant to testify in the criminal action, categorically denied being threatened with arrest by military commanders, contradicting previous reports.
The case investigates an alleged conspiracy to prevent the inauguration of President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva after the 2022 elections. The Attorney General’s Office (PGR) points out Bolsonaro as a central figure of the plot, which would have involved high-patent military personnel and federal government authorities.
Bolsonaro denies arrest threat
Asked by Minister Alexandre de Moraes about the meeting in which the scammer draft was presented, Bolsonaro was emphatic: “At no time, as I saw in the file, someone threatened me as prison if he continued on that mission.”
The former president complemented his denial with a reflection on the nature of military orders: “To the Armed Forces, the legal mission given is mission accomplished. Illegal mission is not fulfilled.” The statement seeks to demonstrate that the military would not have supported illegal actions, contradicting the thesis of a coup conspiracy.
Bolsonaro also made a provocative statement about who would defend a blow: “In my view, he has to join those who had such an intention,” suggesting that anyone with coup intentions should be hospitalized.
Contradictions between military commanders
The arrest voice issue became one of the most controversial points of the investigation, with conflicting versions among the military commanders themselves. Former Air Force commander Carlos Almeida Baptista Júnior had told the Federal Police that General Marco Antonio Freire Gomes, former army chief,.
Continues after advertising
According to Baptista Júnior, the statement was made during a meeting called by the then Minister of Defense, Paulo Sérgio de Oliveira, on December 14, 2022. “It is not a simple thing to forget the general dealing with a hypothesis of arrest,” the former Air Force commander told the STF.
Freire Gomes denies prison voice
However, General Freire Gomes himself contested Baptista Júnior’s version in a statement to the STF on May 19. “Would I have given a prison voice to the president? It hasn’t happened at all,” said the former army commander.
Freire Gomes admitted to having warned Bolsonaro about legal consequences, but denied any direct threat: “What I warned to the president is that if he came out of legal aspects, until he could not count on our support and could be legally framed.”
Continues after advertising
“Hypothesis” versus “order” of prison
The divergence between the military focuses on the nature of Freire Gomes’s statement. Baptista Júnior made a point of clarifying that this was not an order, but a hypothesis: “It was not an order of prison as I saw in the press, it was hypothesis. My word I keep: by education, he told the president that by hypothesis he would have to arrest him.”
This semantic distinction may be crucial for the assessment of the case, as a “hypothesis” suggests theoretical discussion, while an “order” or “threat” would indicate direct confrontation between the president and the military command.
Crucial moment of the process
Bolsonaro’s testimony is considered the most crucial moment of this procedural phase, especially after Mauro Cid’s revelations about the former president’s direct involvement in the preparation of scammers. Contradictions about the prison voice illustrate the complexity of reconstructing the events of December 2022.
Continues after advertising
The divergence between the versions of Baptista Júnior, Freire Gomes and Bolsonaro about the alleged threat of arrest will be fundamental for the evaluation of the STF ministers. The credibility of each statement and the consistency of narratives can significantly influence the unfolding of the process.
