Accused of sexual harassment by two women, minister Marco Buzzi, of the STJ (Superior Court of Justice), was discharged from the DF Star hospital, where he had been admitted since February 5th.
Although he is still within the medical certificate period, which lasts 90 days, he is removed from office not for that reason, but because the court’s plenary decided so, in a secret session held last week.
Cardiologist Fabricio Silva reported that Buzzi was hospitalized after feeling palpitations and chest pain. In a message sent via WhatsApp to colleagues on the 9th, the minister said that he was “under cardiac and emotional monitoring”.
There is no information from the hospital about the date of discharge, but people close to Buzzi say that he has been at home since at least Friday and remains under home medical monitoring.
The minister is the target of an inquiry at the STJ itself, an administrative procedure that should result in compulsory retirement, and a criminal investigation at the STF (Supreme Federal Court). A possible conviction could lead to imprisonment.
Buzzi was accused of sexual harassment by an 18-year-old girl who reported having been grabbed and touched by the minister, who is 68 years old, during a swim on the coast of Santa Catarina. She and her parents were staying at the magistrate’s house.
The second complaint was made by an outsourced employee of the STJ, who reported having suffered sexual harassment in the minister’s office. , the fact that the episode occurred within the STJ was crucial for the plenary to decide to remove it.
At the session, Minister Francisco Falcão, president of the committee conducting the investigation, read excerpts from the statements given by women who claim to be victims of the minister. The final vote on Buzzi’s future will be on March 10.
Buzzi’s defense says that the minister “did not commit any improper act, as it will be possible to demonstrate in due course within the scope of the procedures already initiated”. The lawyers also expressed “respectful indignation” at the precautionary dismissal.
The note says that the leak of information seeks to “embarrass due legal process and unduly influence future judicial decisions” and that “counter-evidence is already being collected that will ultimately allow for a calm and rational analysis of the facts.”
LINK PRESENT: Did you like this text? Subscribers can access seven free accesses from any link per day. Just click the blue F below.
