The São Paulo court ordered the seizure of payments to be made by the Liberal Party and presidential candidate Flávio Bolsonaro, who was announced last week as a strategic marketing consultant for the pre-election campaign.
The decision was taken by judge Christopher Alexander Roisin in an action in which the company DFB Participações (formerly Modal Participações) charges the advertiser a debt currently calculated at around R$114 million, including interest, monetary correction and fine.
The company, represented by Vieira Cruz Advogados, has been trying to obtain payment in court since 2021.
In addition to seizing future credits, the judge ordered the PL and the pre-candidate to inform the list of payments already made to the professional, indicating values, dates and whether the disbursements were made through transfers from the party fund, the campaign fund, the candidate’s own resources or from donations.
The judge rejected the request for the documents to be kept under judicial secrecy, “as they are clearly of general public interest, relating to electoral campaign expenses”.
Considered one of the main advertisers in the country, Fischer was responsible for famous campaigns such as “Brahma nº 1” and “The return of Kaiser’s little boy”. In 2018, he worked on the presidential campaign of Álvaro Dias (Podemos). The then candidate had just over 859 thousand votes (0.80% of the total).
Fischer will work alongside journalist Alexandre Oltramari, who will be the communications and marketing coordinator.
Last week, lawyer Fernando Equi Morata, who represents the advertiser, told Sheet that Fischer had financial problems arising from commercial negotiations in which he appeared as a guarantor and is paying his debts as far as possible.
To the Court, the defense asked for reconsideration of the attachments, arguing that it is contradictory that the company “intends to receive its credit while, simultaneously, adopting attitudes that stifle the debtor’s ability to generate income, subjecting him to a state of penury that goes beyond reasonableness and attacks the fundamental right to the free exercise of any work, trade or profession”.
“Measures that impede the exercise of the profession, such as the systematic persecution of potential clients and the attempt to judicialize political gossip to remove contractors, violate the principle of proportionality and make it difficult to fulfill the obligation itself”, he declared in the action.
