Legal procedure confronts divergent versions of those investigated and witnesses to clarify contradictions in investigations
The decision of the minister, of the Federal Supreme Court (), to call a joint hearing between the heads of the , the BRB and the brought to light a specific legal term: confrontation. The procedure, scheduled for next Tuesday (30), is a tool used by magistrates and delegates when there is a need to align conflicting versions within an investigation.
In direct legal terms, confrontation consists of placing two or more people — be they accused, victims or witnesses — face to face to be questioned about divergent points in their previous reports. The main objective is to clarify the real truth of the facts, pressuring deponents to support or rectify their versions in front of the opposing party.
In the context of the investigation investigating fraud of R$12.2 billion involving Banco Master and , the measure aims to confront reports about the negotiation vetoed by the Central Bank. The judicial authority seeks to identify, through this direct confrontation, who holds the true version about the issuance of unbacked securities and the exact moment in which the irregularities were noticed.
Although the practice traditionally takes place in person, legislation and recent adaptations by the Judiciary allow it to be carried out via videoconference, the format chosen for next Tuesday’s hearing.
Legal experts note that confrontation is commonly a last resort, applied after collecting individual testimonies where contradictions are evident. However, in the current case, Toffoli’s determination anticipates this stage, seeking speed to understand the dynamics between the three cores of the operation: the selling bank (Master), the purchasing bank (BRB) and the supervisory body (Central Bank).
