Minister Gilmar Mendes created, this Tuesday (16), a clash with his colleague from the Federal Supreme Court, during the trial that.
When disagreeing with rapporteur André Mendonça, minister Gilmar Mendes stated that he saw parallels between the conduct of investigations and practices adopted during Operation Lava-Jato.
“It is with some incredulity and some sadness that I note that the measures adopted in the case have similarities with Lava-Jato inequities”, declared Gilmar.
The minister voted to replace Henrique Vorcaro’s imprisonment with house arrest and to grant Felipe Vorcaro freedom through precautionary measures. For him, the elements presented so far would not justify maintaining the prisons.
The divergence opened a direct confrontation with André Mendonça, who reacted to the comparisons made by Gilmar and sought to differentiate the investigation of the Master case from the methods used in Lava-Jato.
“We are not judging Lava-Jato. We are judging the biggest financial fraud in the history of our country and one of the biggest in the world”, stated the rapporteur.
Mendonça maintained that the investigations point to a complex criminal structure, involving illegal monitoring, infiltration of public bodies, destruction of evidence and the use of violence to protect financial interests.
“We are talking about the squandering of a guarantee fund. Here there are contours of the mafia, there are contours of mafia organized crime, machine guns, shaved weapons, infiltration of the police system”, he said.
Old strategy
When justifying his disagreement, Gilmar stated that one of the most criticized features of Lava-Jato was the use of measures against family members of those being investigated as an indirect way of pressuring collaboration agreements. According to him, the current case raises similar concerns.
Continues after advertising
The minister also criticized what he classified as an excessively heroic view of judicial action in criminal investigations.
“It is up to the Judiciary to become drunk with the social expectation of a hero judge. The Constitution does not establish public agents to fight social battles against crime”, he stated.
Disclosure of evidence generates new friction
Another point of tension involved André Mendonça’s decision to remove the confidentiality of new investigation documents just hours before the session.
Continues after advertising
The measure took place this Tuesday morning and included information recently produced by the Federal Police. For Gilmar Mendes, the disclosure on the eve of the trial created difficulties for the adequate analysis of the material by the defenses and even by the members of the Second Panel.
“Gathering information today allows us to glimpse practices that may prove to be abusive,” he stated.
According to him, not all ministers had prior access to the evidence used to support the maintenance of prisons.
Continues after advertising
Mendonça countered the criticism. The rapporteur stated that he decided to release the documents precisely to ensure transparency and allow everyone involved to become aware of the new information. The minister added that the volume of material is so large that not even he himself had completed the complete analysis of the documents.
