Last year, the Court of Justice denied a new attempt to resume investigations into the former office of the senator (-RJ) in Alerj (Rio de Janeiro).
In September, the 2nd Chamber of Public Law rejected an appeal to carry out a new breach of the senator’s banking and tax secrecy.
The process is being carried out under judicial secrecy. According to Sheet found out, the request had been made together with a public civil action for administrative improbity proposed against eight of Flávio’s former advisors at Alerj, including the PM appointed as operator of the scheme.
The judges understood that Flávio should be included in the defendant side of the action to be the target of the measure. However, as the Public Prosecutor’s Office’s civil proceedings against the senator have already been filed at the end of 2024, this change is unlikely to occur.
In a statement, the senator, who is now a pre-candidate for President, states that he had “his accounts raided and his life turned upside down” without any irregularities being found.
“The investigations are irrefutable proof of Flávio Bolsonaro’s honesty. Unlike Lula, who was condemned by nine different judges. Currently, there is no investigation that accuses or investigates Flávio Bolsonaro for wrongdoing or malfeasance”, says the senator’s office, in a note.
The new attempt to break the senator’s confidentiality was made in 2023, shortly before the prescription of possible administrative improbity in the case – an interval of five years after the end of the term in which the alleged irregularity was committed, the period that the Prosecutor’s Office has to file a public civil action.
At the time, the Public Ministry filed a public civil action against Queiroz and seven other former employees of the senator at Alerj. Its main basis was the first Coaf report that pointed out suspicious movements in Queiroz’s accounts, the origin of the entire case. This was the only evidence not annulled by decisions of the (Superior Court of Justice) and the (Supreme Federal Court) against the criminal investigation.
When offering this action, the Public Ministry also asked for Flávio to break confidentiality, in order to expand investigations into the transactions. The assessment was that, with the Coaf report alone, it was not possible to include the senator among those accused, as the document does not indicate any financial transactions by him.
In the first instance, the understanding was that Flávio’s breach of confidentiality could only occur if he was part of the process. The Public Ministry appealed the decision, but lost last September.
In the period between the first and second instance decisions, the Superior Council of the MP-RJ archived the civil proceeding against Flávio. The collegiate understood that the denied breach of confidentiality was essential for the progress of the investigation and that, five years after the end of Flávio’s term as state deputy, the case would already be prescribed in relation to him.
Now, it is up to the Prosecutor’s Office to assess whether to maintain the proposed action only against Queiroz and Flávio’s former advisors.
This was not the first time that the MP-RJ tried to reactivate the “rachadinha” case after the annulment of the evidence obtained against the senator.
as to Sheet the Prosecutor’s Office requested a breach of confidentiality by Flávio and 38 former employees and companies within the scope of this same civil procedure. The measure, called early production of evidence, was also denied in the first and second.
The measures aimed to reconstitute the evidence obtained in the criminal procedure that supported the accusation of criminal organization, embezzlement, money laundering and embezzlement. He was identified as responsible for the diversion of R$6.1 million from public coffers through a scheme used by his former employees for his own benefit — a practice known as “rachadinha”.
All decisions by judge Flávio Itabaiana, who ordered the breach of confidentiality of Flávio and his former employees. The understanding was that the senator should be judged by the special body of the TJ-RJ, a special forum of state deputies, a position he held at the time of the facts investigated.
Subsequently, it was collected by the MP-RJ throughout the procedure.
With these decisions, the Public Prosecutor’s Office itself requested the withdrawal of the complaint, as the evidence that supported the accusation had been annulled. The special body in May 2022.
The Attorney General’s Office appealed against the way in which the archiving was carried out, as it understood that the decision prevented the. Last year, the , imposing the end of criminal investigations into the case.
