The (Attorney General’s Office) criticized the minister’s understanding of the (Supreme Federal Court) regarding plea agreements and said that, if replicated, it could have an impact on the convictions of the former president (PL) and other defendants in the coup plot.
The body’s statement, which also mentions the case, was made this Monday (2) by the deputy attorney general of the Republic Cláudia Sampaio Marques, in an appeal filed against the decision of the dean of the STF that blocked a criminal action opened against the former governor of Paraíba Ricardo Coutinho (PT).
In January of this year, Gilmar stated that the complaint offered by in 2020, within the scope of the so-called Calvário operation, could not have been accepted by the state justice system, as it was based exclusively on plea bargain agreements, without additional evidence.
The PGR disputes this allegation and says that there are “numerous autonomous and independent elements, which were obtained through investigative measures”, such as breaches of confidentiality, documents, environmental recordings, telephone interceptions and footage from internal cameras.
According to the deputy prosecutor, if Gilmar’s understanding prevails and is replicated, there could be “severe consequences” for other criminal cases analyzed by the STF itself, such as the trial of those responsible for Marielle’s death — the brothers Chiquinho and Domingos Brazão — and the convictions of the defendants in the coup plot.
This is because, according to her, the instructions for these processes were also anchored in evidence derived from plea bargain agreements — in the case of the coup attempt, the lieutenant colonel’s denunciation; in the case of Marielle, those of the perpetrators of the crime, and Élcio Queiroz.
“All the evidence that supported the conviction of the Brazão brothers appeared linked, contextualized and interpreted based on the narrative provided by the collaborators”, states the PGR, asking for the restoration of the criminal action against Coutinho. The rapporteur will analyze the request.
“The maintenance of the decision given is worrying and manifests a contradiction of legal theses, unacceptable in a top court of the Brazilian Judiciary, which is responsible, due to its constitutional role, to establish the theses that guide the national judiciary in its decisions”, he concludes.
Despite the deputy prosecutor’s statement citing risk to other cases, the PGR always denied that their accusations were essentially anchored in denunciations.
The Public Ministry understands that there is evidence that the former governor of Paraíba was part of a criminal organization that carried out acts of corruption and money laundering through social organizations in the health sector and fraudulent contracts in the area of education.
The former governor’s defense denies irregularities. Lawyers claim that the complaint only used what was narrated by whistleblowers, in a movement known as “cross collaboration” — when a complaint is proven only by the words of other whistleblowers, but not by other elements of evidence.
