The Federal Supreme Court (STF) begins on Tuesday (2) the trial of the so-called “crucial core” of the coup plot, which has former president Jair Bolsonaro (PL) among the defendants. The process is considered the most sensitive phase of the investigation by bringing together the main figures accused of articulating a democratic rupture after the 2022 electoral defeat.
In this first stage, lawyers will have up to an hour to exhibit their theses, repeating the points already presented in August in the final allegations. It is not allowed to include new evidence at this time, which limits the strategy to emphasis on known arguments.
Understand, below, what are the known arguments of Bolsonaro’s defense, which should be repeated by lawyers during the trial, between Tuesday (2) and Wednesday (3).
Free tool
XP Simulator
Learn in 1 minute how much your money can yield
Contestation to the legitimacy of the process
From the beginning, Bolsonaro and his defenders claim that the investigation violates constitutional guarantees. Among the main points are the allegation of defense curtailmentfor the difficulty in accessing evidence produced in other inquiries, and the fragmentation of complaints in different nuclei, which would have limited the lawyers’ performance.
The defense also accuses the Supreme of having restricted the time for the analysis of bulky evidence, a technique called document dumpingwhich happens when there is the attachment of several documents to confuse the opposing party.
The dispute over the “scam draft”
“On the merits, an accusation prevails as absurd as alternative,” Bolsonaro’s lawyers criticized, in reference to the complaint made by PGR.
Continues after advertising
One of the most controversial points of the prosecution is the draft found at the house of former Justice Minister Anderson Torres and also on the phone of Lieutenant Colonel Mauro Cid.
The document provided for a state of siege and other exception measures to prevent Lula’s possession. For investigators, it is a clear sketch of a coup plan. The defense insists that The draft is apocryphal, without identified authorship, and which has never been formalized as an official proposal.
In the final allegations, Bolsonaro’s lawyers pointed out that neither witnesses nor whistleblower Mauro Cid confirmed that they saw the former president deal with the text as a concrete plan.
Continues after advertising
Mauro Cid’s denunciation
Mauro Cid’s award -winning collaboration is one of the pillars of the accusation against Bolsonaro, but also the most attacked point by the defense. The lawyers question the credibility of the former joint orderclaiming that he presented contradictory versions and only decided to collaborate after months arrested.
At different times, Cid admitted to being pressured by the Federal Police to quote Bolsonaro. The episode led Alexandre de Moraes to summon him again to testify, when he reaffirmed the voluntarity of the agreement. The defense, however, maintains that this pressure has compromised the validity of the denunciation.
Minister Luiz Fux even expressed reservations about the case, noting that Cid gave nine distinct testimonials, each adding new elements, which, in his view, could indicate “omissions”.
Continues after advertising
Another element of the accusation is the account of former Army commanders, General Freire Gomes, and Aeronautics, Admiral Baptista Junior. Both said Bolsonaro consulted them about the possibility of adopting exception measures after the defeat.
These testimonials corroborate Mauro Cid’s narrative and reinforce the former president’s connection with the draft of the coup.
The defense, however, states that the meetings had merely advisory character and that Bolsonaro sought only to discuss scenarios provided for in the Constitution, such as the state of defense or siege. The lawyers argue that there was no practical order or attempt to put a rupture plan into march.
Continues after advertising
The government transition
To remove the thesis of coup intent, the defense points out that Bolsonaro authorized the transition from government institutionally. As an example, he cites early possession of military commanders already appointed by Lula management.
For lawyers, this gesture would be incompatible with the accusation that the former president prepared a coup.
The absence on January 8
Another point emphasized by the defense is the absence of Bolsonaro in acts of January 8, 2023, while in the United States since December 30.
Continues after advertising
The argument is that It would not be possible to coordinate the invasion of the headquarters of the three powers being outside the country.
Lawyers recall that before traveling, Bolsonaro recorded public messages condemning acts of political violence.
The thesis that “the crime did not exist”
At the center of the strategy is the idea that there was no attempt to blow, but only Political discussions and manifestations of opinion – Which, according to the lawyers, would be protected by freedom of expression.
For the defense, there were no concrete acts of violence or serious threat from Bolsonaro to constitute a crime.
“The prosecution is limited to turning political discourses into crimes,” the lawyers said in the final allegations. Bolsonaro also said that a blow would require “tanks on the streets and armed conspiracy,” elements that they said never existed.
