The minister of the (Supreme Federal Court) denied this Monday (13) a request from the defense of the (Superior Court of Justice) to suspend the court’s investigation against him.
The decision was given on the eve of the session that will deal with the results of the committee responsible for the inquiry. There are two accusations of a sexual nature against Buzzi. The first was made in January by the daughter of a couple of friends of the minister, who said she had been grabbed while swimming in the sea on the coast of Santa Catarina. The second came from an outsourced employee who worked for the magistrate.
Marco Buzzi has denied all suspicions and states that “all accusations are based solely on reports without evidence”. When contacted this Monday, his defense did not respond until the publication of this text.
“The administrative inquiry in regular course at the Superior Court of Justice constitutes a preliminary and preparatory procedure for the subsequent initiation – if applicable – of administrative disciplinary proceedings, disregarding the observance of contradictory proceedings and broad defense”, said Kassio Nunes Marques.
The STJ judge’s defense argued to the Supreme Court that there was no contradiction in the work done.
“The shared oral evidence is unlawful because it was produced with the adversary party exclusively from the prosecution,” Buzzi’s defense told the STF.
This, he says, would violate procedural equality, parity of weapons and the adversarial system, making the evidence illegal.
According to the rapporteur, however, there is jurisprudence to the effect that possible defects in investigations do not contaminate the administrative disciplinary process as it is only a preparatory stage.
Kassio states, in the decision, that the procedure, at the STF, began with information from the São Paulo Civil Police about the incident involving Buzzi on January 14th. The document was accompanied by a copy of the police report with statements from the victim and witnesses.
STJ ministers received last Friday (10) the report of the internal investigation opened to address the issue. As the Sheetthe conclusion was to open disciplinary proceedings against Buzzi. This Tuesday (14), a court session must confirm the initiation of the procedure.
For the ministers of the STJ, the statement from the PGR (Attorney General’s Office) to the STF for the opening of an investigation to investigate Buzzi’s conduct is also important. The assessment is that it would not make sense for the STJ to close the case shortly after that, based on the same evidence and considering that the suspicion of a crime itself is being processed in the Supreme Court.
Under reservation, three ministers also commented that an act can be an administrative infraction, but not a crime. Otherwise, however, it would be impossible. A filing would also cause new embarrassment to judges in the future, if the Supreme Court condemns him for the conduct.
At the beginning of March, the STJ rescheduled the session that will define the opening of a process. Initially, the stage was scheduled for the 10th of last month, but was postponed to complete the organization of the case material.
The tendency is for the investigation to result in the magistrate’s compulsory retirement. For this to happen, at least 22 votes are needed — the court is made up of 33 ministers. Voting is secret.
Administrative processes have the most serious consequence of compulsory retirement. In this scenario, Buzzi would lose his position as minister, but would continue to receive his earnings.
Below that, he could suffer a warning or censure. A conviction in the Supreme Court for the crime of sexual harassment could lead to imprisonment and the loss of values.
