Singer rejected a proposal to record retraction video on statement that he would have received $ 1.5 million to support Lula in 2022
The singer Jojo Todynho did not accept the proposal of agreement presented by the PT (Workers Party) during a conciliation hearing on Thursday (18.Jul.2024), in Rio de Janeiro. The party sued the artist after she publicly declared that she would have received an offer of $ 1.5 million to support the presidential candidacy in the 2022 elections.
The agreement required the recording of a retraction video that should remain fixed on their social networks for 30 days. The hearing ended without consensus between the parties.
With the refusal of the proposal, the Public Prosecution Service requested a view of the process, establishing a new deadline for the defense of the singer to present formal arguments. The hearing took place more than 2 years after the presidential election that took Lula to the Planalto Palace.
Jojo’s statements were made during his participation in the podcast Brazil parallelaligned on the right. At the time, in addition to mentioning the alleged financial offer, the singer also stated that other artists would have received payment from the party to express public support to Lula. , President of the PT at the time, denied the artist’s statements.
In an official note, Jojo Todynho’s defense stated that the attempt to criminalize the artist’s statements represents a “Instrumentalization of the judiciary as a coercion tool”.
“The speech in question does not individualize a determined subject, nor attributes criminal or dishonorable fact to the specific person, indispensable requirements for the defamation configuration.”says the statement.
The text also maintains that manifestations of opinion cannot be transformed into criminal proceedings and criticizes the party for, according to the defense, to maintain a network of digital influencers hired to promote their political agendas.
“How then could mention a supposed offer for campaign to be treated as defamation, if the practice is public knowledge and already institutionalized by the party itself?” questions the note.
For lawyers, the episode represents a “paradox” and weakens the credibility of the institutions.
“Democracy is not built by the use of criminal proceedings as a political shield, but by the free and plural debate”concludes the statement.
Here’s the full:
“Official note – CASE Jojo
“The attempt to criminalize Jojo Todynho’s statements reveals not only the lack of text interpretation, but also the most elementary ignorance about the contours of defamation crime. The speech in question does not individualize determined subject, nor attributes criminal or dishonorable fact to the specific person, indispensable requirements for the typical configuration.
“It cannot be accepted that manifestations of opinion are distorted in criminal proceedings, in a clear instrumentalization of the judiciary as a tool of coercion. This work, in addition to injuring the logic of the rule of law, contrasts the subsidiary character of criminal law, which is not lending to silence criticism or curtailing public voices.
“Even more serious is the paradox. The Workers’ Party itself maintains, in partnership with foundations and institutes, an organized network of digital influencers, hired precisely to promote their acts and political agendas. How can the mention of a supposed offer to be treated as defamation, whether the practice is public and already institutionalized by the party itself?
“Democracy is not built by the use of criminal proceedings as a political shield, but by the free and plural debate. Force the criminalization of generic speech is artificially creating a nonexistent conflict, which only distorts the purpose of justice and weakens the credibility of institutions.”
