The minister of the (Supreme Federal Court) compared this Thursday (23) the actions by the presidential candidate (Novo) to portraying the former governor of Minas Gerais as a homosexual and questioned whether this would not be “offensive”.
“If we start making jokes about serious things, about institutions, imagine that we start making dolls of Zema as a homosexual. Isn’t that offensive? Or if we make him steal money from the state, isn’t that offensive? Is it right to joke about that? Can public men do that? That’s the only question. That’s what needs to be evaluated”, stated the Dean of the Supreme Court in .
In response to the minister, Zema stated in a publication on X (formerly Twitter) that “it only offends when it has a basis of truth”. “You can do what you want, my conscience is clear”, he wrote, after the federal deputy (PL-MG) questioned whether Gilmar’s speech had been homophobic.
The former governor of Minas Gerais also reacted with a laughing emoji to an image generated by AI (artificial intelligence) that shows a doll of him holding a flag of the LGBTQIA+ community and a sign that says “Zema with pride”.
Gilmar sent his colleague an inquiry into fake news after the politician released, last month, a video on his social networks in which a doll that imitates the magistrate talks to another that represents the minister.
In the images, Toffoli’s puppet asks Gilmar’s puppet to suspend the breach of his confidentiality, determined by the Senate’s CPI (Parliamentary Commission of Inquiry) into Organized Crime. The magistrate’s puppet then overturns the decision.
In return, he asks for “just a courtesy from your resort, which is paid for, I’m ready to play a little this week”, referring to Tayayá, which had a stake in Toffoli and was bought by a fund linked to , owner of .
Moraes sent the case to the (Attorney General’s Office), which has not yet responded. The procedure is confidential.
During the interview with Metrópoles, Gilmar also said that he has “no dispute” with Zema and that he will not “waste time with this type of debate”. The dean of the court stated that, “when there is an offense that deserves judicial criticism, the Rule of Law is there to respond.”
“I simply think that it is legitimate for his party to defend whatever it wants. There is no relevance to this. It is up to the voters to make the decisions. This is absolutely normal and is always under control. I even think it is a waste of time to engage in dialogue with this type of politics”, he stated.
