After 20 years of the scandal, an administrative misconduct action against those involved remains pending in the federal court while the deadlines drag themselves. The case follows without outcome, sunk on procedural matters.
The action was filed in 2007 by the Federal Public Prosecution Service as an unfolding of what was found as a result of the illegal scheme of political funding organized by the PT to corrupt congressmen and secure support in the first government.
The process aims, among others, minister of the Civil House in Lula 1; Delúbio Soares, former treasurer of the acronym; , then federal deputy and today president of; José Genoino, at the time president of the PT; and the publicist Marcos Valério.
Last year, substitute federal judge Leonardo Tavares Saraiva, from the Federal District, had the parties that were missing and determined the case with the “urgency”, in view of the changes promoted in 2021 in the Administrative Misconduct Law.
This is because the deadline for the trial of the controversy is October 26 this year, in less than five months. The temporal framework stems from a decision of the Federal Supreme Court about when the prescription deadlines are resumed to run.
The Court understood that the new prescription rules (when the state loses the right to punish or execute the penalty, because the legal time for this ended) does not retroact and should be applied from the publication of the new legislation.
The text that reformed the law of administrative misconduct speaks in four years to the beginning of the deadline count, and the publication in the Federal Official Gazette took place on October 26, 2021.
Luiz Antonio Muniz Machado, José Genoino’s lawyer, states that the defenses and arguments have already been presented in the process and that there is no news. He also said he considered it difficult for the court to decide the case and end the controversy until October.
Sought, the defense of Valdemar Costa Neto declined to comment. Delúbio Soares’s advisory stated that any demonstration will be made through a lawyer. Already the defense of Marcos Valério and the team of José Dirceu did not return attempted contact of the report.
The action of the Federal Public Prosecution Service originated in an administrative procedure established from the referral of the criminal complaint and the documentation related to the case of the monthly. In the criminal sphere, the main proceedings of the case has already been closed with the Supreme trial in 2012.
The accusation in the misconduct action describes financial transactions, such as real estate purchases and bank looting, and brings testimonies that point to the participation of the main figures in the scandal and detail the distribution of resources.
The MPF requested the conviction of the defendants to the loss of assets obtained illicitly, to the full compensation of the damage, the suspension of political rights and the payment of a fine.
The action packed soon after for a procedural reasons. Upon receiving the case, the first instance judge extinguished the case against most defendants, including Dirceu, Delúbio, Genoino and Marcos Valério.
The magistrate considered that Dirceu, as he held the position of minister, could not be sued for misconduct in that case and that the others were already responding to identical actions for the same facts. The MPF appealed.
Then a legal dispute was installed on what type of appeal is appropriate. The Public Prosecution Service filed an appeal, but the second instance thought that the appropriate piece would be the interlocutory appeal. The dispute arrived at the STJ (Superior Court of Justice).
In 2015, the Superior Court determined the action, but the case is still under discussion through divergence embargoes – a course used to resolve divergences between the understanding of the court classes.
