If, so far, one of the bets of the defendants of the coup plot’s defendants was to argue-so-that the Democratic Rule of Law or vice versa, the rapporteur’s vote, minister, not only frustrates this perspective but launches the defenses on even more swampy ground.
On Tuesday (9), the magistrate not only maintained that he considers that there was the commission of both crimes, but left open if his position is that such crimes would have been committed more than once.
Moraes started his exhibition bringing a PowerPoint presentation with. Thus, he already removes one of the arguments of the defenses, especially that of the former president-that the proven conduct in the case would be mere preparatory acts, criminally irrelevant.
Although it reiterates countless times that, since mid -2021, several executory acts occurred, the minister did not make clear, however, the legal framework of each of these events. With this, it is still possible that he consider, for example, that one has been committed more than once or that he was committed in several steps.
Moraes said, for example, that “the sequence of executory acts planned by the criminal organization with the attempt, with the use of serious threat, to restrict the exercise of the judiciary in the famous.” It is not evident, however, if such an episode would already be, from the perspective of Moraes, a crime by itself.
Experts consulted by Sheet They point out that this definition – which may have repercussions on the calculation of the total penalty – should only be clear at the time of voting on the dosimetry of the penalty, which should occur after all five ministers of the first class manifest themselves and only for cases where there is a favorable majority to the conviction.
For now, both Moraes and voted to condemn all defendants in trial for the abolition of the Democratic Rule of Law, attempted coup, criminal association, qualified damage against the heritage of the Union and deterioration of listed heritage.
The only exception is Alexandre Ramagem, who had part of the action suspended by the House of Representatives, which temporarily freed him from the last two imputations.
“This was a question that I always had, if he [Moraes] It would consider a single attempt to blow with several episodes, or if he would consider several, which would even allow 13 times to apply the penalty, “says Davi Tangerino, professor of Criminal Law at UERJ (Rio de Janeiro State University) and criminal lawyer.
Nevertheless, Tangerino estimates that even if Moraes consider that the crimes were repeatedly repeated, he would not add all possible penalties, as this would only generate negative repercussion, without any practical effectiveness.
According to the lawyer, at first, the only limitations that could already be outlined would be as to the penalty of criminal organization, which could not be more than once, and those related to damage to heritage – to be linked only to the January 8 event.
Also Diego Nunes, who is a professor of History of Criminal Law at UFSC (Federal University of Santa Catarina) and organizer of the book “Crimes against the Democratic Rule of Law”, believes that Moraes’s position regarding the framing of crimes should be clearer only with the dosimetry of penalties.
The teacher points out that if the minister really understands that the same crime was committed more than once, he could also apply the continued crime institute, which would imply an increase in penalty, but avoiding “excessive exasperation.”
Regardless of this discussion, Nunes maintains that, unlike processes exclusively related to January 8, in the case of the coup plot, it makes more sense to argue that it would not be able to absorb one crime by the other, since there are much more facts reported in this process.
On Tuesday, therefore, Moraes not only rejected one of the main legal controversies raised in previous judgments, but indicated that the penalties of at least part of the crucial nucleus may, in theory, be even worse than here.
