The minister, of the (Supreme Federal Court), gave a tough speech on Wednesday (10) about the judgment of the former president (PL) in the court. The magistrate voted for nullifying the process due to the incompetence of the court.
In it, he spoke of the nullity of the criminal action because of the trial in the first class and addressed issues such as Mauro Cid’s denunciation and specificities of criminal types analyzed in the action, such as the criminal organization.
The minister’s vote was interrupted for break and continues later this Wednesday. See main points raised by the minister no.
1. Incompetence of the Supreme
The magistrate stated that, as Bolsonaro no longer held the position of president, he should be tried at a lower court. He stated that the rule is “very clear” in the Constitution.
He also said that the Court changed the jurisdiction for the trial in the Supreme Court after the date of the crimes discussed in the criminal action. The magistrate stated that the issue has undergone “numerous modifications” and spoke of “trivialization of constitutional interpretation.”
2. Judgment in the First Class
Fux said that if former president Bolsonaro, who should be tried in the first degree, were still tried by the Supreme, it should be done by the plenary, not by the first class.
The magistrate of this that the STF plenary has the mission of judging the most relevant positions in the country and that, by lowering the competence for one of the two classes, there was a risk of silencing the voices of other ministers.
3. Data dump
The magistrate also addressed the allegation of defendants’ lawyer that there would be defense curtailment due to the practice of Data Dump, explained by the minister as “late availability of a true data tsunami.”
Fux highlighted an excerpt from Bolsonaro’s defense, which pointed to curtailment from practice. He also said that the fact can interfere with the guarantee of the contradictory.
4.
The magistrate also spoke about Cid’s denunciation, voting to validate it. Earlier, the minister had given questions about the collaboration, citing the many ICD trips to the Federal Police for demonstration.
5. CRIMINAL ACTION AGAINST RAMAGE
Regarding parliamentary Alexandre Ramagem, the minister defended the suspension of all crimes, because he was a parliamentary. Currently, there is a suspension of crimes of damage and deterioration of heritage, since they would have occurred after the diploma of branch as a federal deputy.
6. CRIMES FRAMEWORK
Fux played in the typification of the crimes discussed in the criminal action. He stated that it is important that the defendant’s conduct is framed in what is foreseen in the law as “hand that fits the glove perfectly.”
He also spoke in the danger of employing the extensive interpretation of criminal types, signaling typicality (adequacy of conduct to the description of the crime) as a basic to the rule of law.
7. CRIMINAL ORGANIZATION
Fux then leaned over the crime of criminal organization. He understood that this would not be the case of Bolsonaro and allies because they lack characteristics provided for in the legislation, such as stability and permanence, which would not have been proven by the case.
He said he understood that, in fact, it is a case of people contest, when two or more agents act together, in communion of will, to practice the same offense. The minister also said that he was not specifically demonstrated the use of the firearm by the group.
8. Crime de dano
Fux said damage crimes require action, which requires the defendant’s physical and direct participation. He also stated that there is no evidence in the file that the defendants judged have ordered the destruction of 8 January.
According to the minister, an accused cannot be held responsible for a third party, especially if no bond, direct determination or omission regarding the duty to prevent the result is proved.
