Denying the extradition of the former federal deputy imposes a new setback on the minister and expands the repertoire of criticisms of the (Federal Supreme Court) at a time when the court’s image is being damaged.
Last instance judges in the European country considered the role of the minister in the (National Council of Justice) in which Zambelli was convicted a problem. Document obtained by Sheet cites “multiple elements that lead us to doubt the impartiality, from an objective aspect, of the court”.
Experts consulted by Sheet they consider that the measure reflects the structure of the Brazilian Judiciary itself and say that it can serve as an argument for critics and opponents of the court.
In the decision, the Italians cite a dual role assumed by Moraes, one of the members of the First Panel, and victim of the crime attributed to her. Zambelli was convicted of acting to issue a false arrest warrant with the minister.
Political scientist Marjorie Marona, from Unirio, places the Italian denial in the context of the pressures that Moraes has suffered in recent years, with attacks from Bolsonarism, requests being filed with and sanctions imposed by the United States.
The difference is that, now, “whoever raises doubts about the impartiality of the minister or the court is not a directly interested political actor. It is a court of cassation of a consolidated democracy”, he says. “This changes the repertoire available to Supreme Court critics.”
Even though she is critical of the foreign decision, the political scientist states that the Italian court’s understanding reveals how the cost of Brazilian institutional design is being charged outside the country.
Last year, the one done by Brazil, in the case of blogger Oswaldo Eustáquio Filho. In 2024, the . And this year, Argentine authorities granted .
In a note released this Friday afternoon (12), the president of the STF, minister Edson Fachin, stated that the process against Zambelli and all his acts “took place in strict compliance with the Constitution, due legal process, the adversarial process, broad defense and the international commitments assumed by the Brazilian State”.
For Antônio José Teixeira Martins, professor of criminal law at UFRJ and Uerj, part of the problem is the result of the Brazilian institutional arrangement itself. The Supreme Court has criminal powers, which is why it ends up having to judge attacks directed at its own ministers. According to him, this design makes a certain degree of overlap “inevitable”.
“The Federal Supreme Court has broad criminal jurisdiction,” he says. “It has the functions of a constitutional court, but it is also a court designed to judge certain people who occupy or have occupied certain positions. As it is the last instance, it therefore accumulates these functions. There is no reviewing instance.”
Added to this is the fact that the political context led the STF to assume a very large role, which made it, at the same time, the target of attacks and responsible for judging them.
Zambelli’s case is even more glaring because Moraes was directly involved as an affected person.
But the professor argues that distinctions need to be made. It is one thing to discuss, based on the Brazilian institutional design, whether there would be room, for example, for a redistribution of the case; It is quite another to think about the Italian court judging an extradition request. “The Italian Court of Cassation is not, nor can it claim to be, a reviewing body for Brazil’s processes.”
Professor Ana Laura Barbosa, from ESPM, assesses, on the other hand, that Zambelli’s case affected the Judiciary as an institution, more specifically the CNJ, and not the figure of the minister. “Consequently, no judge in this country could judge her”, she states, extrapolating the Italian thesis.
Barbosa also assesses that the decision is based on mistaken premises. According to the professor, the issue of not having a double degree of jurisdiction for people with jurisdiction is a legitimate debate, but it is not a peculiarity of Zambelli’s case.
“The main justifications behind this denial of extradition seem to me to have more to do with an aversion to the Brazilian system than the way in which the process was conducted”, he states.
Despite understanding the criticism as unfounded, she believes that the outcome could reinforce attacks directed at the Supreme Court by sectors of the extreme right.
Former federal deputy Eduardo Bolsonaro (PL-SP) was one of those who criticized the STF after the announcement by the Italian authorities. “Moraes was a victim and a judge at the same time. Who could have imagined that a democratic rule of law could say something like that, right? (irony) Moraes’ abuses only apply in Brazil,” he wrote on social media.
The Italian court will still consider a second request for Zambelli’s extradition, related to his conviction on the eve of the second round of the 2022 elections.
