A decision of the minister who aimed to curb operations against criminal organizations created fear among investigators that the effect is the opposite – and provoke the police and across the country.
Moraes ordered, on Wednesday (20), the suspension throughout Brazil of cases that use reports of the requested by the prosecutor without judicial authorization.
Processes that use these reports were also suspended without opening a formal investigation procedure. Coaf reports provide to agencies such as the MP and the police bank and tax data from any investigated.
The suspension determined by Moraes is valid until the Supreme Plenary decides on the subject. The thesis defined by the ministers will apply to all similar processes in the country.
Currently, it is expected that the mostly forming majority to determine that the sharing of these data is valid, even if there is disagreement of some ministers.
Financial intelligence reports under request have already been used in several cases of repercussion in the country, such as those of the attacks of 8 January and the coup plot involving the former president (), as well as actions regarding criminal factions such as the (first command of the capital).
Moraes decided to suspend the actions at the request of the (Attorney General’s Office), because the lack of consolidated understanding of the matter has made courts such as the (Superior Court of Justice) to decide that the police and the prosecutor cannot directly request intelligence reports without prior judicial authorization.
This led the STJ to overthrow part of Operation El Patrón, which investigated suspicions of the existence of a militia linked to a state deputy in Bahia. Then he reversed the decision.
The STJ also annulled Operation Sordidum, which dealt with a group that moved $ 50 million in money from trafficking in Mato Grosso do Sul.
Although the suspension determined by Moraes intended to wait for the Supreme Court to standardize the understanding of the subject throughout the country, the amplitude caused the possibility that several investigations could be harmed.
The Public Prosecution Service of São Paulo asked in the file that the minister delimits his decision urgently.
The play signed by the Attorney General of São Paulo, Paulo Sérgio de Oliveira and Costa, says that, soon after the decision of Moraes, several defenses requested the suspension of proceedings dealing with complex money laundering and corruption operations.
“In cases brought to the Attorney General’s Office, there are current personal and patrimonial precautions, such as preventive arrests and kidnapping,” says the Attorney General.
“Given this scenario, in parallel with the request for suspension of criminal actions and investigations, the defenses submitted requests to revoke precautionary measures, precisely what was sought to avoid through the monocratic decision in question.”
He specifically cites four major operations against organized crime that were at risk.
One is Tacitus, against police suspected of corruption and money laundering for the benefit of the CCP. Another, are São Paulo transport lines.
In addition, he cites Operation Armageddon on drug trafficking extortion and financing, and Car Wash on suspected drug trafficking, use of controlled chemicals and money laundering.
The São Paulo prosecutor asks the minister to clarify that only the effects of decisions that contradict the previous understanding of the Supreme on the subject, “without prejudice to the continuity of criminal actions, ongoing criminal investigations and the resulting appeals.”
In another petition, the PGR also asked Moraes to suspend only decisions that canceled the evidence from financial intelligence reports, and not “decisions that recognized the validity of reporting requests by investigative authorities.”
Criminal lawyers who have acted in processes related to the theme disagree with the public prosecution’s view, and criticize the under demand of Coaf by research agencies.
Gustavo Mascarenhas, who acted in criminal proceedings that questioned the request of these tax reports without judicial decision, says that Coaf “should not be an accessory body of the authorities in charge of criminal prosecution.”
“Coaf must be a financial intelligence unit, which actively provides data that must be investigated,” he says. “What is doing, if rifs [relatórios financeiros] They can be ordered, is to make Coaf a mere advisory body for the prosecutor and the police. “
Moraes has not yet decided whether to delimit the suspension in the process dealing with the subject.
COAF currently relates in two ways to the police and other investigative bodies. In the first, the board itself produces its rifs and sends to the competent entities to investigate the transactions pointed out as suspicions.
A second form occurs when the investigation body itself requests information about certain people or companies. In this case, Coaf seeks in his database if there is any suspicious transaction point out of the indicated person and then forwards to those who asked.
In 2019, the Supreme Court authorized the sharing of these data with the Public Prosecution Service and the police without the need for prior judicial authorization. At the time, the Supreme evaluated.
Last year, the first class of the Supreme Court that understood that the police could not request data directly from Coaf without authorization from justice.
