The former mayor of Belo Horizonte, Alexandre Kalil (PSD), was convicted on Thursday, 7, to the loss of political rights for five years in an administrative misconduct action.
Judge Danilo Couto Lobato Bicalho, from the 3rd Court of Municipal Public Treasury of Belo Horizonte, understood that Kalil and the Community Association of the Mangabeiras III Neighborhood deflected judicial determination by blocking with gates and barriers access to the roads of a luxury condominium in the mining capital. It is up to appeal.
The case refers to Kalil’s management period at the head of the City Hall (2017-2022). The former mayor and the association were ordered to pay R $ 100,000 in collective moral damages to the Special Fund of the Public Prosecution Service of the State of Minas Gerais (FUNEMP).
Continues after advertising
The conviction stems from a civil inquiry opened by the Public Prosecution Service in 2020 to investigate the irregular closure of public roads and the appropriation of Sebastião Paes de Almeida Square by the association that would become defendant.
The association, chaired by Andréa Machado de Araújo, claimed that a concierge published by Kalil management authorized that use of the roads. Although the permission was revoked months later the MP alleged, in December 2021, that, “without justification, after more than a year of the decision of the decision, the architectural obstacles were not demolished, and the integration of the Hunters Club with the Municipal Urban Mesh was not realized.”
For the Housing and Urbanism Prosecutor’s Office, the willful conduct of the defendants deprived people of using public property, “which translates into injury to the treasury in the sense of loss of an invaluable good for the population.”
Continues after advertising
“The omission of defendant Alexandre Kalil to enforce the court order after the administrative annulment of permission, practicing such conduct and the recalcity of the association to remove obstacles configure the intent and injury to the purse for deprivation of public use of collective goods,” said the judge.
Kalil contested the accusation and denied administrative misconduct because he understood that the initial petition was “vague and inaccurate, violating the duty to individualize the imputed conduct.” It also stated that the case could not be characterized as disobedience, “because the issue of the result of the sentence of the popular action still pending”, and asked the MP’s action to be directed only to the Association.
The Association defended itself by saying that it never performed public function or interfered in an administrative act, and that there was no judicial breach, since it was based on a decree and permission term. Andrea argued that he was never related to the Public Administration and that “it only acted in the exercise of its term as president of the neighborhood association.”
