The ministers were involved in a discussion during the trial session of the Second Panel of the (Supreme Federal Court) this Tuesday (11).
The collegiate debated a process that questions in which court an action for moral damages filed by a federal judge against an attorney from the (Federal Public Ministry) should be analyzed.
During the reading of his vote, André Mendonça cited a 2021 vote by Toffoli in an appeal about this same case. The colleague saw in the quotes an attempt by Mendonça to distort his vote.
Toffoli, the rapporteur, defends that the case be analyzed in the state court, and Mendonça believes that the process falls to the Federal Court, as he understands that the prosecutor gave the interview in the context of his functional role in the Public Ministry.
“Your excellency is distorting my vote, with due respect,” said Toffoli. André replied: “I’m not.” The rapporteur reinforced that “you are putting words in my vote that did not exist”.
André Mendonça reread the excerpt from Toffoli’s old vote and said that, in his interpretation, the correct position to adopt in the case would be the rapporteur’s dissenting position.
“Your Excellency interprets my vote, and I interpret yours”, said Toffoli afterwards. André Mendonça stated that his colleague could interpret his vote however he wanted and that his colleague was “a little excited […] without need.”
Toffoli replied: “I am exalted by cowardice.”
The case deals with a 2005 action filed by federal judge Macário Ramos Júdice Neto against the prosecutor. The MPF member gave an interview in 2005 criticizing the value of legal fees set by the judge.
For 20 years, the action has faced back and forth in several instances due to disagreements over the correct jurisdiction for the case. This Tuesday’s trial was not closed because Minister Nunes Marques requested a review (more time for analysis).
LINK PRESENT: Did you like this text? Subscribers can access seven free accesses from any link per day. Just click the blue F below.
