According to the defense, the meetings would be “institutional visits” for “direct and reserved dialogue”
The former international advisor of (PL), , requested a visit from names such as Sóstenes Cavalcante, leader of the Liberal Party in the Chamber, and Sérgio Moro, senator and pre-candidate for the government of Paraná. The statement was sent to Minister Alexandre de Moraes, of the Federal Supreme Court, this Monday (March 30, 2026). Here is the document (PDF – 2 MB).
In the document, Filipe Martins’ defense requests the following visits:
- federal deputy (Novo-RS);
- senator (PL-PR);
- senador (PL-RN);
- senator (Republicanos-DF);
- federal deputy (PL-GO);
- federal deputy (PL-MG);
- federal deputy (PL-PB);
- federal deputy (PL-RJ);
- federal deputy (PL-PR);
- federal deputy (PL-DF);
- senator (Novo-CE);
- federal deputy (PL-SC);
- PL leader in the Chamber;
- federal deputy (PP-ES);
- federal deputy (União Brasil-SE);
- federal deputy (PL-CE).
According to Martins’ lawyers, the meetings would be “institutional visit” to “direct and reserved dialogue”.
Moraes has not yet responded, but this Monday he authorized the first visits to the former advisor. Martins will be able to receive state deputy Gil Diniz (PL) and the councilor of São Gabriel (RS), Giuseppe Chiappetta (União Brasil), on April 4; and the state deputy of Paraná Ricardo Arruda (PL) on April 5th.
PREVENTIVE PRISON
Bolsonaro’s former advisor has been in pre-trial detention since January 2nd. He was taken to the Public Prison of Ponta Grossa (PR). The order, determined by Moraes, as a basis an email that would indicate possible non-compliance with the precautionary measures.
At the end of February, Moraes asked for explanations about the transfer Filipe Martins was transferred to Curitiba without his prior authorization. According to the minister’s order, Martins was transferred on January 6 to the Penal Medical Complex. Moraes ordered his return to Ponta Grossa.
“The transfer of the defendant carried out without prior authorization from this Supreme Court constitutes an undue mitigation of the jurisdiction of this Court, in addition to compromising the regular monitoring of criminal execution”wrote the minister. Read the (PDF – 115 KB).
Ain turn, stated that the was carried out for security reasons and requested the Court to validate the act. The General Directorate of the Criminal Police Department stated that the measure was “based on technical analysis” which highlighted the need for an environment with greater access control, continuous monitoring and stricter restrictions on visits. According to the general director of the Criminal Police department of the State of Paraná, Ananda Chalegre dos Santos, the unit has a “safer and more compatible” with the situation of the custodian. Here’s the (PDF – 201 kB).
According to Martins’ lawyer, Jeffrey Chiquini, the prison in Ponta Grossa is a provisional unit, unable to hold prisoners for a long time and with signs of overcrowding. The defense claims that the decision to allocate Martins should be the responsibility of the state penitentiary department and that the new unit could compromise the former advisor’s safety.
The defense presented a request for reconsideration so that the accused could return to Curitiba and remain in prison with “more security“. The document will be analyzed in a virtual plenary session by the 1st Panel from Friday (April 3).
PRISON MAINTAINED
Martins’ arrest was motivated by a report from Ricardo Wagner Roquetti, a retired Air Force colonel. He told Moraes’ office that his LinkedIn profile recorded a visit from an account identified as “Filipe Garcia Martins”. The platform allows users to view access to their pages.
When decreeing the arrest, Moraes assessed that there was non-compliance with the court decision that prohibited the use of social networks. “These circumstances, in themselves, demonstrate the defendant’s contempt for the measures imposed and for the legal system itself”wrote the minister. Read the (PDF – 154 kB).
Moraes maintained Martins’ preventive detention in a decision published on February 26. He followed the statement by the Attorney General of the Republic, Paulo Gonet. According to him, the conduct attributed to Martins would demonstrate the ineffectiveness of alternative precautionary measures. “Precautionary segregation remains as a suitable means to ensure the application of criminal law and the regularity of the process”stated the PGR.
In a request for reconsideration, the defense maintained that the last access to the profile was on September 13, 2024, from an IP located in the United States, which would be compatible with the work of a registered lawyer who was in that country. The lawyers stated that Martins remained in Ponta Grossa (PR), under electronic monitoring, and attached the account’s access history. Here’s the (PDF – 41 kB). Gonet declared that the documentation presented does not rule out the registration of use of the social network on December 28, 2025.
The defense also argued that simple access would not constitute a violation of the measures, as there was no publication of content. The attorney general disagreed. According to him, the judicial prohibition covered the use of social networks broadly, including access and navigation, and not just posts.
Gonet concluded that there are no new facts capable of changing the situation that supported the preventive detention. He spoke out against the repeal or relaxation of the measure.
TIMELINE
Here are the main dates of the case:
- fev.2024 – Filipe Martins is preventively arrested for the first time;
- ago.2024 – Moraes converts prison into house arrest, with precautionary measures;
- set.2024 – Martins’ profile on LinkedIn is accessed with a US IP;
- 16.dez.2025 – 1st Panel of the STF sentences Martins to 21 years in prison;
- 29.dez.2025 – Ricardo Wagner Roquetti sends the email to Moraes’ office;
- 30.dez.2025 – Moraes for explanations of Filipe Martins’ defense;
- 31.dez.2025 – lawyers that Martins used LinkedIn;
- 2.jan.2026 – Martins in Paraná by determination of Moraes;
- 20.jan.2026 – Moraes gives the PGR 15 days to respond;
- 24.jan.2026 – PGR defends preventive detention;
- 26.jan.2026 – Moraes remains in preventive detention;
- 27.fev.2026 – Moraes asks for explanations about the transfer of a prison unit;
- 28.fev.2026 – Moraes orders Filipe Martins to return to Ponta Grossa prison;
- 2.mar.2026 – Paraná Criminal Police say they transferred Martins for security reasons;
- 30.mar.2026 – Moraes authorizes visits from state deputies and Martisn asks to receive names from the opposition.
NO INTERVIEWS
Alexandre de Moraes Filipe Martins to give an interview to Poder360 “in order to avoid the risk of turmoil at this procedural moment”. The judge did not elaborate on what he understands to be a “risk of riot”. Read the of the July 2025 decision (PDF – 145 kB).
The request of the Poder360 it was filed with the STF on March 12, 2025. In the application, this digital newspaper claimed that carrying out the interview is not irreconcilable with due respect for the precautionary measures imposed (read below what they are) and says there is a public interest.
O Poder360 also stated that authorization to carry out the interview is a “an essential measure to meet the undeniable public interest involved and based on freedom of the press and information, whilst also safeguarding equal treatment between defendants”. Moraes did not respond to this argument presented, about there being a need to “equal treatment between defendants”.
“It is necessary to differentiate between the journalistic activity to be carried out by a professional and competent press vehicle when publishing an interview of clear public interest and any communication between the investigated party and third parties that qualifies as a violation of the current precautionary measure. […] It is clear that the person being investigated must be aware of all their obligations before this STF and in view of the ongoing investigation. He must, therefore, when granting the interview, respect all the terms of all precautions imposed. And if he doesn’t, he should certainly be held accountable. […] However, depriving it of any and all manifestations –of undeniable public interest, it is emphasized– does not seem like the right option to us. It represents the imposition of a silence that can be framed as prior censorship – a censorship that the Federal Supreme Court has repudiated so many times throughout history.”argued the Poder360 in the request rejected by Moraes.
This digital newspaper appealed to the 1st Panel. The action is still awaiting judgment.
Read more about the Filipe Martins case:
