Tag Archives: Car Wash

Bob Fernandes Commentary – 18 June 2018

Bob Fernandes

On Friday, 4th March 2016. Lula is coerced to testify at the Federal Police. As he had not refused to testify, coercion without any sense.

Judge Moro said he had decided on the coercion to “avoid tumult”. At that time, there was a large pro-impeachment demonstration set for nine days later: March 13th.

There are no coincidences. There are tactics and strategy, politics and communication. The judiciary and the media feeding off each other. The co-action stirred up the news, people and the demonstration.

Only now, four years, three months and 227 coercitive arrests after the Supreme Court has decide: coercitive arrests are prohibited for questioning…

… There are no coincidences. Lula is in prison, and, albeit late, there is now the risk of affecting friends, colleagues.

There are no coincidences. Three days after that 13th of March Moro leaked a conversation between Dilma and Lula. Dilma was not under investigation. Therefore it was illegal.

And the recording went on for one hour more than the legal time limit set.

In the Supreme Court, Justices Teori Zavaski and Marco Aurelio Mello clearly defined that such actions were illegal.

But the Supreme Court did not act. Once again things had to be stirred up. There were huge repercussions from the leak and the conversations… and the Supreme Court impeded Lula from becoming a cabinet minister.

As a cabinet minister, Lula would have legal immunity, he would have been the political operator on the eve of the impeachment. Without Lula, o month later and Dilma was impeached in the lower house of Congress.

Eleven months afterwards, in a similar situation, the same Supreme Court would maintain Moreira Franco as minister.

Times of facility for some, and very hard for others. Times of labelling people to try and classify those who oppose the herds. Many have given up.

The law firm working for Lula had their telephone tapped. The operator confirmed the phone taps, according to Sergio Rodas on the site Consultor Juridico (Conjur).

The then rapporteur for Lava Jato, Teori Zavaski, reprehended Moro, Said Conjur. Moro alleged not knowing about the phone taps and “promised to destroy the recordings”.

They were not destroyed then. Only much later was this done.

Now, at the Brazilian Criminal Law Meeting, lawyer Valeska Teixeira Zanin Martins denounced:

… Moro made more than 400 recorded conversations of ours available… there are no precedents of such a violent attitude, such an anti-democratic one in democratic countries.

This was how the prosecutors and Police had access to the defence strategies…

There are no coincidences.

Watch the original in Portuguese here.

Dilma declared innocent:

aves imperialistas-640x858
DCM

Purchase of Pasadena refinery: declared innocent in TCU investigation.

Obstruction of Lava Jato: declared innocent in PF investigation.

Money abroad: declared innocent in MPF investigation.

Fiscal manoeuvres: declared innocent in MPF investigation.

Abuse of power: declared innocent in TSE investigation.

WHERE DID THE HATE COME FROM!!!

1) Dilma vetoed the readjustment of 40% to the salaries of the judiciary (irritating the Justice arm).

2) Dilma vetoed the employment Law reform and approval of outsourcing deregulation (irritating the business and Fiesp).

3) Dilma vetoed the private electoral campaign financing (irritating those benefiting from bribes).

4) Dilma gave free reign to the Federal Police and did not interfere in the investigations (irritating the corrupt Congressmen and Senators).

5) Dilma refused to negotiate with Cunha, Leader of Congress (irritating the 300 Congressmen he sustained).

6) Dilma did not accept the handing over of Brazilian oil to foreigners (irritating the USA).

7) Dilma did not accept the privatizing the little that was left of publicly held Brazilian assets (irritating the holders of economic power supported by the neoliberal right).

8 Dilma did not accept forgiving the R$ 2 billion debt for health plans with the government (irritating the powerful in the private health insurance sector).

9) Dilma did not accept forgiving the debt of football clubs with the government (irritating the Brazilian Football Confederation).

10) Dilma did not accept forgiving the millionaire debt of TV channels, especially Globo, with the government (irritating the media barons, especially the Marinho family).

11) Dilma decreed that state banks lower their interest rate below the Selic (irritating rentista and speculative capital)

Do you understand where the hate arose and resides?…”

Walter Gadelha

(public domain)

THOSE WHO WORE THE YELLOW SHIRT AT THE WRONG TIME WERE IRRITATED ABOUT WHAT EXACTLY?

Pro-impeachment demo
vermelho.org.br

Comentários a uma sentença: o Caso Lula

Do Rede Brasil Atual

A sentença proferida pelo juiz Sérgio Moro contra o ex-presidente Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva é tema do livro Comentários a uma sentença anunciada: o Processo Lula. Editado pela Frente Brasil de Juristas pela Democracia em defesa do Devido Processo Legal, o livro de 542 páginas, está disponível para download em português.

Comentarios-a-Uma-Sentenca-Anunciada

São 103 artigos escritos por 121 autores. Entre eles, Eugênio Aragão, Pedro Estevam Serrano, Wadih Damous, Celso Antônio Bandeira de Mello e Tarso Genro.

O documento jurídico é resultado de um movimento de juristas brasileiros que examinaram cuidadosamente a sentença proferida por Sérgio Moro no âmbito do processo que tramitou na 13ª Vara Federal de Curitiba, no caso que ficou conhecido como “tríplex do Guarujá”.

Os autores fazem um exame técnico da condenação, baseadas em meras convicções de um processo bastante problemático sob qualquer ângulo – e diagnosticam o uso da Justiça com objetivos políticos. Além de um criterioso exame da ciência penal, o livro é o que chamam de Carta Compromisso com a Cidadania, a Democracia e o Estado de Direito.

Da apresentação do livro:
Comentários a uma sentença: o Caso Lula” é talvez o mais importante documento jurídico publicado no Brasil em décadas. A presente coletânea de artigos nasceu de um movimento espontâneo e bastante significativo de juristas brasileiros que examinaram cuidadosamente a sentença proferida no âmbito do processo que tramitou na 13ª Vara Federal de Curitiba, no caso que ficou conhecido na mídia como o do “tríplex do Guarujá”.

Para além do caráter inédito da condenação criminal de um ex-Presidente da República em circunstâncias políticas em tese não comparáveis às das ditaduras brasileiras do século passado, a sentença, que em larga medida era aguardada como desfecho não surpreendente deste processo criminal, provocou imediata reação entre os que a leram comprometidos unicamente com o propósito de tentar entender os motivos pelos quais Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva está sendo punido pela prática dos crimes de corrupção passiva e lavagem de ativos de origem ilícita.

A certeza da condenação era fato. Admiradores e opositores do ex-presidente sabiam que não haveria outro veredito. A dúvida residia em conhecer as razões da condenação, exigência normativa da Constituição de 1988 que, pelas inevitáveis repercussões políticas do mencionado processo, mostraram o acerto do Constituinte de 1987-1988 ao elevar a fundamentação das decisões ao patamar de garantia constitucional do processo.

Apenas recentemente, depois de vinte anos de intensa batalha jurídica protagonizada por Fernando Fernandes, por coincidência advogado de Paulo Tarciso Okamoto, que neste caso do “tríplex do Guarujá” figura como réu ao lado do ex-presidente Lula, logrou-se cumprir decisão do Supremo Tribunal Federal, dando a conhecer os áudios dos julgamentos que o Superior Tribunal Militar (STM) realizou durante a ditadura de 1964-1985.

Os referidos julgamentos, tornados públicos agora, revelam as virtudes democráticas da publicidade do processo e da motivação das decisões. Frases do tipo “Eu vou tomar uma decisão revolucionária, deixando de lado a lei, porque pela lei não se pode condená-lo de maneira nenhuma”, ditas nos julgamentos, pelas mais altas autoridades judiciárias militares e civis, em um ambiente de segredo, hoje são conhecidas de todos os que se derem ao trabalho de ouvir os áudios daquelas sessões.

A motivação das decisões e a publicidade dos julgamentos são as armas pacíficas do Estado de Direito contra arbítrios e abusos, além de proporcionarem aos tribunais a oportunidade de uma maior qualidade e eficiência na tarefa de corrigir sentenças consideradas injustas, malgrado proferidas com apoio em sincera crença de que o direito foi aplicado ao caso concreto.
Ademais, o trabalho dos juízes, como expressão de atividade republicana regulada por um conjunto escrupuloso de regras jurídicas materiais e processuais, está sujeito a ser conhecido e avaliado não somente pelas partes destinatárias diretas da sentença. Cada pessoa, interessada na sorte de seu semelhante submetido a um processo criminal, dispõe de meios e recursos para promover uma verdadeira arqueologia das razões pelas quais alguém é condenado ou absolvido.

A publicidade do processo e a motivação das decisões funcionam como escudos contra aquele tipo de justificação acima referido, frequente à época no STM, próprio dos julgamentos políticos. Em casos no quais a condição de processo político não é encoberta pela forma criminal com que se apresentam, é por meio do escrutínio das razões do magistrado que a cidadania se sente protegida ou ameaçada.

Se os motivos de eventual condenação correspondem ao que prevê o corpus jurídico vigente e a lei penal está sendo aplicada em conformidade com o entendimento dominante acerca do conjunto de conceitos e noções produzidos pela chamada dogmática penal no Brasil, há de se presumir justificável a sentença e, assim, o seu acerto dependerá da correção do juízo do magistrado acerca da avaliação da prova, que deve ter sido produzida em um ambiente de rigorosa observância das regras do devido processo legal.

No entanto, se os conceitos e noções canônicos do direito penal brasileiro são afastados e, além disso, as garantias do devido processo são vulneradas, recorrendo o juiz a critérios de avaliação da prova e a outras práticas processuais no mínimo altamente discutíveis, o ordinário converte-se em exceção e os sinais de alerta, na defesa do Estado de Direito, imediatamente devem ser acionados.

Na hipótese há expressivo consenso de que o direito estrangeiro aparentemente substituiu o nosso, operando-se o fenômeno que Elisabetta Grande denomina de circulação simbólica de modelos jurídicos oriundos de diferentes âmbitos da cultura jurídica e de diferentes áreas do próprio direito.

O manejo dos conceitos e noções seguiu por essa trilha na condenação, reverberando convicções particulares e presunções formuladas em matéria penal em desconformidade com a análise de fatos apoiada em provas.

Embora se trate de simples apresentação do livro, não custa esclarecer o leitor acerca do significado, em termos de perigo para as liberdades individuais, de converter a exceção em regra, como em minha opinião fica claro na sentença tratar-se da opção do magistrado. Sobre o assunto sublinha Janaína Matida:
“A presunção judicial não é outra coisa senão o raciocínio sobre os fatos realizado pelo julgador; é o que se espera existir em sistemas jurídicos nos quais seja vigente a diretiva de livre e racional valoração, pois cabe ao juiz valorar as provas como informações suficientes (ou não) para a determinação da ocorrência dos fatos sob discussão. Sua qualidade está diretamente vinculada à generalização empírica por ele selecionada; logo se a generalização não é universal, ela, por definição suporta a possibilidade de exceções. Portanto, a construção do raciocínio deverá cuidar de demonstrar que o caso individual é regra e não exceção.”

O raciocínio condenatório que se apoia na exceção, recorre retoricamente a modelos jurídicos estrangeiros e traduz indevidamente conceitos penais – como salta aos olhos na condenação do ex-presidente por corrupção – fazendo letra morta da advertência da impossibilidade de transplantes do gênero, haveria de provocar vívida reação entre os estudiosos do direito.

O verdadeiro escrete de juristas, professoras e professores, advogados e intelectuais que seguiam de perto o processo, mobilizou-se ao constatar a excepcionalidade do estilo e dos argumentos empregados pelo juiz criminal na mencionada decisão.

Assim, o processo todo – e não somente a sentença – foi passado a limpo nos artigos que o leitor tem em mãos e que são de exclusiva responsabilidade de cada autor.

A centena de textos esmiúça o procedimento, esclarece que regras efetivamente estão em vigor e como incidem no caso concreto. Na opinião dos autores dos artigos estas regras não foram observadas e a sua não observância levou a que se proferisse uma decisão injusta.

Releva notar que em tempos de julgamento público e correspondente publicidade da motivação não há mais espaço para deixar de aplicar a lei para condenar.

Algo do gênero, portanto, subverte a lógica e seria dificilmente aceitável ainda mais neste período de instabilidade política e insegurança jurídica. Interrogar cada argumento, indagar de sua adequação aos procedimentos legais e à interpretação corrente configurou o método que autoras e autores utilizaram para verificar se e em que medida foi violado ou respeitado o devido processo legal.
A probabilidade de condenação do ex-presidente Lula e a sua confirmação são muito mais do que meras convicções de um processo bastante problemático sob qualquer ângulo.

O leitor tem consigo mais do que a obra de cento e vinte e um autores, retratada em cento e um artigos que submetem todos os aspectos da longa sentença ao criterioso exame que a ciência penal, o direito constitucional e outras áreas do saber consideram fundamentais para afirmar o Estado de Direito no Brasil.

“Comentários a uma sentença: o Caso Lula” é uma espécie de Carta Compromisso com a Cidadania, a Democracia e o Estado de Direito.

Confiar que os tribunais farão justiça a Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva é acreditar que a máxima dos julgamentos dos anos 70, no STM – “Eu vou tomar uma decisão revolucionária, deixando de lado a lei, porque pela lei não se pode condená-lo de maneira nenhuma” – está definitivamente sepultada entre nós. Se não há crimes, e crimes não há, a absolvição é a única decisão possível.

Judge’s ruling confirms the Guarujá triplex belongs to OAS, not Lula

Judge rules on the seizure of the company’s assets, amongst them the famous apartment attributed to Lula in operation Lava Jato – translation of article found at Brasil de Fato

Revista Fórum*

Triplex
Courtesy/lula.com.br

Judge Luciana Correa Tôrres de Oliveira, of the Second of Execution and Deeds Court in the Federal District, ruled on the seizure of OAS assets, notably including the asset of the triplex apartment which Lava Jato says belongs to ex-President Lula.

According to information on the blog of journalist Mino Pedrosa, this ruling goes against the investigation in Lava Jato about the Guarujá triplex. The legal action attends to a company seeking payment of debts against OAS Empreendimentos.

The business centre that was being built in the Federal District had a Specific Purpose Business contract, and the creditor company filed a legal suit for recovery of R$ 7.2 million corrected for inflation. The Judge admitted the claim and ruled on the judicial blocking of the accounts of OAS Empreendimentos, holding just R$ 10,000. The creditor company did a search of notary offices throughout Brazil and found four properties in Guarujá in the name of OAS Empreendimentos under one company taxpayer number (CNPJ).

Escritura TriplexProperty deed for the triplex in the name of OAS, in the notary office for Guarujá São Paulo

To the surprise of the Brasília businessmen, one of the properties was the controversial triplex apartment in Guarujá, attributed to ex-President Lula. In Brasília, the Judge understood that the apartment in the Solaris Building, in Praia das Astúrias, in Guarujá, that the triplex which led to the conviction in the court of first instance of ex-President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva, registered in the notary Office in the name of OAS Empreendimentos, could be seized in payment of debts contracted to OAS which is the de facto owner of the property.

*With information from the blog of journalist Mino Pedrosa

 

“Lula cannot get a fair trial from Judge Moro” says prominent international human rights lawyer Geoffrey Robertson QC

 

The Lessons of Operation Lava Jato

This operation to investigate a money laundering case was officially launched in March 2014, and within a week reached the preventive detention of a procurement director of Petrobras, the Brazilian state oil company. The operation is still ongoing and has resulted in many convictions and many more preventive detentions, with suspects being involved from large state and private companies, and many politicians from a wide variety of government and opposition parties.

The result has been a wave of popular outcry and highly emotional accusations being raised by the established media and corporation backed opposition groups against the government and the Worker’s Party, leading to widespread cynicism about politicians of all colours.

A few cooler heads have likened the situation to the Mani Pulite (Clean Hands) operation in Italy, where the Judiciary mounted a similar operation to this one in Brazil, successfully convicting many leading politicians, including former Prime Ministers. The effect was to change the face of Italian politics drastically, with the two leading parties that had alternatively shared power over the last 45 years being reduced to very minor players. However, in the aftermath, the leading judge, who had meanwhile enjoyed huge popularity, himself entered politics and was eventually accused of corruption, facing disgrace, with the allegation that the new Prime Minister, Silvio Berluscone, based in Milan which was the centre of the scandal, owner of one of the leading Milan football clubs and a dominant media holding, being said to have brought this about.

The aftermath of all this judiciary operation was only that corruption became more sophisticated, remaining endemic in Italian society. I conclude from this that corruption can not be cleaned up by any one single branch of the state, in this case the judiciary, but requires all three, the executive, the legislature and the judiciary to be fully involved in reform. Society learns from these examples, and the failure of Italian society in this case, means that no country has to repeat the same lesson, or rather that once any society sees this being repeated in their own situation, that they can then apply that lesson and make the appropriate adjustments. This is the great hope for the Brazilian situation, that the Brazilians, who are engaged on a massive and widespread scale, will realise this and organise to cancel out this negative element.

The positive side-effect of the military dictatorship in Brazil, was the organisation of civil society, based on the already widespread movement that included the Catholic Church pastoral movement, the literacy and the land reform movements, was that the resistance movement against the repression was successful, but of which the Worker’s Party was only the most high profile component. I consider this to have been the downfall of this party, who considered itself to be the sole component. The result was that this party neglected the other important elements in the recipe, which was the middle-class, one key element of its very own support base. This was evident in the campaign carried out by civil society for direct voting of the President in a mass organisation of public support. With the establishment media actively siding against this campaign, the country was successfully able make the Constitution a legal basis for direct elections of the executive power. All this took place before the internet was available, and this is important, because the Brazilian people learned the value of democracy through actively building it.

The value of the educated classes cannot be underestimated in carrying the torch of human enlightenment forward through the generations. The very success of the Brazilian poverty eradication programme implemented by the Lula government, was to considerably broaden the middle-class, with new layers of families being included in the university educated categories. However, the government did not realise that its economic policies were also strangling the growth it had sought and successfully implemented. In fact, the balance of the national accounts austerity cuts and high indirect taxes on the middle-class, through education fees and costs, health costs not covered by the problematic public health system, transport, in part, led to the shrivelling of the very basis of the Brazilian success

That is why the Brazilian case is so important to watch. The middle classes have turned against the previously popular government. In my assessment, this is partially quite justified, but the elements involved still have to be weighed and judged, because there are other factors in the mix that are not yet fully appreciated. I believe that the weight of the media bias in reporting issues, such as these corruption cases, and reporting or lack  of it, of successes and failures, is one of these.

There have been cases of tax avoidance, including by the Globo media empire, that amount to billions of dollars. Of course, Globo does not advertise this fact, but the blogosphere does. There is a loosely knit network of journalists and bloggers who publish, organise and discuss these questions. When the documents proving the Globo tax scheme came to light, they organised 30 bloggers to publish at the same time, so that no one person or site could be targeted successfully and eliminated from the picture. This is a tactic that was learned by resistance movement during the dictatorship, when trust was a matter of life and death. Humanity has recognised this necessity of sharing, and the whole internet phenomena and communication between humans, is dimly acknowledged by many in this recent innovation.

However, in the Brazilian case, this has resulted in the known persecution of  bloggers and the freedom of the internet, by both employment of the judiciary, allied with media campaign of disinformation against the bloggers. Other corruption scandals and reporting of wealth accumulation from the privatisation programme have been documented, with journalists being persecuted through the courts and the traditional media actively participating to denigrate these alternative sources of information.

The blogosphere has naturally accompanied this whole Lava Jato revelation and reporting process. They have been labelled the ‘dirty press’ by the conventional media and opposing political players. Tactics employed including smear attacks on family members, including small children, physical assault, and the full onslaught through the courts, where judges are able to impose injunctions on reporting of information and impose huge prohibitive fines for having spoken out (http://www.ocafezinho.com/2016/04/21/os-senhores-da-lei-fundamentos-e-funcoes-da-operacao-lava-jato/).

The Daniel Dantas story is a case in point. Already referred to in this series of articles, I shall expand on it to illustrate the difficulties faced. Daniel Dantas was a key figure in the privatisation programme, whereby all the nationalised industries were obliged by law to go through his private company, and he was initially placed on the board of the newly privatised companies with a hugely disproportionate share of the controlling votes. This resulted in the epic court battle for control of the board, between the Brazilian shareholders, that included the public banking sector pension funds and Telecom Italia.

As explained elsewhere in this series, Dantas was able to walk free through judicial intervention, although he ultimately lost his control of the board. However, the judiciary was able to persecute journalists who reported this process, counteracted by financial support garnered through the internet. This is important, because this freedom of information and backing that the internet provides is a new factor, that was not present in the Italian case, for example.

The neglect of the middle-class in Brazil is a key element, because these people are overwhelmingly the users and beneficiaries of the internet. They are literate in the broadest sense of the word, in terms of reading and digesting information, but also of passing this on and influencing the atmosphere within their society. Literacy has many levels, but in the Brazilian case, literacy in the strictest sense of the word, has improved hugely since the first Lula government, as a priority target of government policy, in marked contrast to previous governments. One requirement for receiving the state anti-poverty support, was that all children must be attending school. Such incentives had never existed before, and real disincentives weighed heavily against children going to school, because they could help the family earn some kind of a living, however frugal.

One of the Supreme  Court Judges that so hounded the Worker’s Party has since retired and is now under a deepening cloud of suspicion, most recently in the Panama Papers leak. Joaquim Barbosa, was a negro judge, who enjoyed the limelight of the Mensalão scandal. Only the future can confirm such a role.

However, the Lava Jato pay-off scheme has recently been shown to have been working since the 1980’s, thus spoiling the game, as the target of preference was to have been ex-President Lula and President Dilma Rousseff.