The minister of the Federal Supreme Court made controversial decisions and led to speed to prevent the case against the former president () from being.
It was criticized by the defendants of the defendants. The main disagreement was in the delay in the lawyers involved in the process.
Braga Netto’s lawyers accused Moraes of being. “His suspicion stems from the fact that the complaint pointed him as the person who would be victimized by the accused, being natural and evident the subjective contamination of the judge,” they say in the final allegations.
Bolsonaro’s defense says the former president has lived a “massacre environment” with almost two years of leakage from the processes. “The defense, weighs, did not have the breadth of defense guaranteed. In repeated opportunities was affirmed and reaffirmed [por Moraes] That the proof that matters is the elected by the accusation, which is a sign for the approaching judgment, “he adds.
Sought, the minister’s office did not comment.
Moraes was nominated for the Supreme Court in March 2017 by () after commanding the Ministry of Justice in this government. He won protagonism in the presidency of the (Superior Electoral Court) during the 2022 elections and, in the Supreme Court, in the rapporteur of fake news, which aims to pockets, scammers and the attacks of.
Check out the main defense complaints about the conduct of the process by Moraes.
Access to tests
Moraes denied access of the full material seized by the defenses for months after the complaint of (Attorney General’s Office). The authorization only came after the opening of the criminal action.
The material was passed on by the Federal Police with five days to go to the testimony of the witnesses. There were about 75 terabytes of files, audios and documents.
Bolsonaro’s defense says in final allegations that the way Moraes conducted the criminal action limited the exercise of the contradictory and the broad defense. An example of this, says lawyer Celso Vilardi, was when the Supreme Minister denied the request to postpone the testimony of the witnesses for the lack of time to analyze the evidence.
Moraes said the PGR complaint “did not use any of these documents, audios, videos and media” of the gross material obtained by the PF. “In fact, they are not even evidence. These are documents that I gathered to the file, at the request of the defense. This cannot disturb the sequence of instruction,” he said.
Vilardi argues: “An unimaginable filter was created in the present case: proof would be only what was of interest to the prosecution. The rest, how much may interest the defense, ‘neither proof are’ and, therefore, need not be known in time for witnesses’ inquiry or even the interrogations of the defendants.”
Braga Netto’s defense compares Moraes’s performance with one – Strategy of dumping excessive and disorganized volume of documents in judicial process to hinder the analysis of defenses.
“The data contained in these records represent the bulky amount of 80 tb […]. A thorough analysis, as required by the exercise of the contradictory, within such a short period, since all the material has been provided, is an unenforceable task, “says the group of lawyers led by José Lima.
Process speed
The total time of the opening of the case against Bolsonaro until the trial began, on September 2, is 144 days. It was one of the main criticisms of the defendants’ defenses.
The main complaint refers to the impossibility of analyzing all the material of the investigation with the short time of process, having to reconcile the work of verification of evidence with the successive hearings of testimony of witnesses and defendants.
“It was impossible to analyze all the material presented in a timely manner,” says Matheus Milanez, lawyer of former Minister Augusto Heleno. “Files in absurd size, which common computers can neither download, without any index or explanation of what can be found.”
Bolsonaro’s defense says it was “run over by speed”, and Braga Netto’s complains that, besides the material, “almost daily instructional acts have survived, making effective analysis over time.”
Sitting without recording
In one of the last acts of the process, Moraes allowed Braga Netto’s license with Mauro Cid and Anderson Torres with Freire Gomes, former army commander. The minister, however, and prohibited press access.
In the minutes of the hearing, Moraes justified the measure by saying it is important to prevent the defendants from being subjected to “undue pressures […] that could compromise criminal procedural instruction. “
Lawyer José Lima says there was no reason for the decision. He recalls that in the interrogation of the defendants, TV Justice broadcast live – the STF used new cameras and made technical adjustments to ensure high definition images.
“Distaniating from all the procedural logic that was being adopted in the present criminal action, the act of core was the only one performed at closed doors,” he adds.
BRAGA NETTO PRISON
Braga Netto’s defense also questions the reasons raised by Moraes to keep the former minister since December 2024. She says that in these almost nine months the minister has changed his argument and repeatedly denied requests for freedom.
“More censurable is to see that, based solely on the word of a whistleblower, without credibility and admittedly coerced, General Braga Netto has been arrested without a guilt since December 2024. His arrest is unnecessary, illegal and disrespectful,” he adds.
Braga Netto’s arrest in one of the army headquarters in Rio de Janeiro was what allowed the process not to be interrupted during the judiciary’s recess in July. The Code of Criminal Procedure states that actions with arrested defendants must continue with the deadlines running even on vacation.
Participation of other nuclei
The defenses also criticized Moraes’ decision to ban the lawyers of the central nucleus defendants to participate in the statements of the complaints of the other nuclei of the coup plot.
According to lawyer Celso Vilardi, this impediment created a situation in which Bolsonaro’s defense could not ask General Estevam Theophilo-to bear the former president’s coup proposal-because the two were in different nuclei.
“There is no violation of the broad defense greater than this: (i) imputing a meeting between two accused; (ii) dismembering the process between these two accused; (iii) from preventing the defenses from participating in the interrogations. But the inquiries of the corridors have been prohibited,” he adds.
