! " !

! !

978-987-722-309-5

3

Introduction“Commentsonanotoriousverdict:The trialofLula”mightbe themost important judicialdocumentpublishedinBrazilfordecades.Thepresentselectionofarticlescametoexistafteraspontaneousmovement,andsignificantenoughaswell,ofBrazilianandforeignlawyerswhocarefullyverifiedtheverdictrenderedintheextentoftheprocedurewhichwasprocessedatthe13ªVaraFederaldeCuritiba,inthecasethatwasknownatthemediaas“theGuarujátriplex”.

Beyondtheunprecedentedaspectof thecriminalconvictionofanex-President inpoliticalcircumstances, in thesisnotcomparable to lastcenturyBraziliandictatorships, theverdict,which in large scale was expected as a non-surprising closure of this criminal process,provokedimmediatereactionbetweentheoneswhoreaditandwerecommittedonlywiththepurposeoftryingtounderstandthereasonswhyLuizInácioLuladaSilvaisbeingpunishedforthecriminalactsofpassivecorruptionandillicitassetlaundering.

The certainty of convictionwas a fact. Admirers and opponents of the ex-Presidentwereawarethattherewouldn’tbeanotherverdict.Thehesitationwasinknowingtheconvictionreasons,normative requirementof the1988Constitution,whichby the inevitablepoliticalrepercussionsof the citedprocedure, showed the1987-1988Constituent’s right actwhenliftingthedecisionfoundationstotheconstitutionalwarrantyleveloftheprocess.

Onlyrecently,aftertwentyyearsofanintensejudicialbattlestarredbyFernandoFernandes,by coincidencePauloTarcisoOkamoto’s lawyer,who isadefendant togetherwith theex-Presidentinthis“Guarujátriplex”case,itwasachievedtoaccomplishtheFederalSupremeCourtdecision,bringingthetrialsaudiostobeknownwhichtheSuperiorMilitaryCourt(SMC)recordedduring1964-1985dictatorship.

Thecitedtrials,nowmadepublic,revealthedemocraticvirtuesoftheprocesspublicityandofthedecisionsmotivation.Sentenceslike“I’mgoingtotakearevolutionarydecision,leavingthelawaside,becausehecan’tbeconvictedinanywaysbythelaw”,saidinthetrials,bythehighestjudicialauthorities,militaryandcivil,inasecretenvironment,nowknownbyallwhotaketheeffortoflisteningtheaudiosofthatsession.

ThemotivationonthedecisionsandthepublicityofthetrialsarethepeacefulweaponsoftheState of Law against arbitrations and abuses, besides providing the courts with theopportunityofbiggerqualityandefficiencyinthedutyofrectifyingconvictionsconsideredunfair,despiterenderedinaccordancewiththesincerebeliefthatthelawwasappliedtothecase.

In addition, the judges work, as an expression of the regulated republican activity by ascrupulous group ofmaterial and procedural judicial rules, is subjected to be known andevaluatednotonlybythedirectrecipientsoftheverdict.Eachperson,interestedintheluckofanequalsubjectedtoacriminalprosecution,disposesofmeansandresourcestopromoteatruearcheologyofthereasonsbywhichsomeoneisconvictedoracquitted.

Thepublicityoftheprocessandthedecisionsmotivationworkasshieldsagainstthattypeofjustificationcitedabove,commonatthattimeattheSuperiorMilitaryCourt(SMC),typicalofpolitical trials. In cases inwhich the conditionof thepoliticalprocess isn’t coveredby thecriminalwaywithwhichitpresentsitself,isbymeansofscrutinyofthemagistrate’sreasonsthatthecitizenshipisfeltprotectedorthreatened.

4

Ifthemotifsofanoccasionalconvictioncorrespondtowhattheactualjudicialbodypredictsand thepenal law isbeingapplied inaccordancewith thedominantunderstandingof thegroup of concepts and produced notions by the so called penal dogmatic in Brazil, it isjustifiabletoassumetheconvictionand,so,itsrightactionwilldependontherectificationofthemagistrate’sjudgmentabouttheproofevaluation,whichmusthavebeenproducedinanenvironmentofrigorousrulescomplianceofthedueprocessoflaw.

However,iftheconceptsandcanonicalnotionsoftheBrazilianPenallawareputawayand,besides,thewarrantiesofthisprocessarevulnerable,thejudgeappealingtoproofevaluationcriteria and other procedural practices at least highly questionable, the common convertsitself into exception and the alert signs, in the defense of the State of Law,must be setimmediately.

Inthehypothesisthereisanexpressiveconsensusthattheforeignlawapparentlysubstitutesours,operatingitselfthephenomenonwhichElisabettaGrandecallssymboliccirculationofjudicialmodels arising fromdifferent scopes of judicial culture anddifferent areas of Lawitself.1

Thehandlingofconceptsandnotionsfollowedthisconvictionpath,reverberatingparticularconvictionsandformedpresumptionsinpenalmatterwithnonconformityconcerningthefactanalysissupportedbyproofs.

Howeveritisaboutasimplepresentationofthebook,itisimportanttoclarifythereaderofthemeaning,intermsofdangertoindividuals’liberties,ofconvertingtheexceptionintorule,asinmyopinionitisclearthattheconvictionisofchoiceofthemagistrate.AboutthesubjectJanainaMatidaunderlines:

“Thejudicialpresumptionisn’totherbutthereasoningaboutthefactsdonebythejudge;it’sexpectedthatexistedinjudicialsystemsinwhichthedirectiveoffreeandrationalvaluationisinforce,becauseitisthejudge’sdutytovaluetheproofswithenough information (ornot) for thedeterminationof theoccurredfactsunderdebate.Itsqualityisdirectlyattachedtotheempiricalgeneralizationselectedbyhim;soifthegeneralizationisnotuniversal, it,bydefinitioncarriesthepossibilityofexception.Therefore,thereasoningconstructionmustattendtodemonstratethattheindividualcaseistheruleandnottheexception.”2

Thecondemningreasoningthatholdsitselfontheexceptionrhetoricallyappealstoforeignjudicialmodelsandincorrectlytranslatespenalconcepts–asitjumpstotheeyesintheex-President’s conviction for corruption–makingadead letterof the impossibilityofgendertransplantswarning3,itwouldprovokeavividreactionamongtheLawscholars.

Thetrueteamofjurists,femaleandmaleprofessors, lawyersandintellectualswhocloselyfollowedtheprocess,mobilizedthemselveswhenrealizedtheexceptionalityinthestyleandargumentsusedbythecriminaljudgeintheciteddecision.

1GRANDE,Elisabetta.Imitaçãoedireito:hipótesessobreacirculaçãodosmodelos.TraduçãodeLuízFernandoSgarbossa.PortoAlegre:SergioAntonioFabris,2009.2 MATIDA, Janaina. Em defesa de um conceito jurídico de presunção. Tese doutoral. 2017. (Ainda não foipublicada).3Por todos:HENDLER,EdmundoS.Derecho.Derechopenalyprocesalpenalde losEstadosUnidos.BuenosAires:Ad-hoc,2006.p.45.

5

Thus,theentireprocess–andnotonlytheverdict–waswrittenoutonthearticlesthereaderhasonone’shandsandthatareofexclusiveresponsibilityofeachauthor.

Thehundredsoftextsdetailstheprocedure,clarifieswhatrulesareactuallyinforceandhowthey coincide in the case.According to thearticles’ authors’opinions, these rulesweren’tattendedanditsnonattendanceleadtoarenderedunfairdecision.

It’s relevant to notice that on times of public trial and corresponding publicity of themotivationthereisnomorespacetonotapplyingthelawtocondemn.

Somethingsimilar,whatsoever,subvertsthelogicandwouldhardlybeacceptableespeciallyinthisperiodofpoliticalinstabilityandjudicialinsecurity.Questioningeachargument,fromitsinadequacytoitslegalproceduresandtothecurrentinterpretationconfiguredthemethodwhichauthorsusedtoverifyifandinwhatmeasurethedueprocessoflawwasviolatedorrespected.

Theprobabilityoftheex-President’scondemnationanditsconfirmationaremorethanmereconvictionsofanextremelyproblematicprocessunderanyperspective.

ThereaderhaswithoneselfmorethantheworkofonehundredandtwentyoneauthorsintheversionofthisbookinPortuguese,“ComentáriosaumaSentençaAnunciada:OProcessoLula” and sixty-five authors in this English version, portrayed on one hundred and threearticleswhich subdue all aspects of the long verdict to the judicious exam that the penalscience,Constitutional Lawandotherknowledgeareas consider fundamental to claim theStateofLawinBrazil.

“Commentsonanotoriousverdict:The trialof Lula” isa typeof Letterof commitment toCitizenship,DemocracyandtheStateofLaw.

Trusting that the courtswillmake justice to Luiz Inácio LuladaSilva is tobelieve that thestatementof the 1970s trials, at the SuperiorMilitary Court (SMC) – “I’m going to take arevolutionarydecision,leavingthelawaside,becausehecan’tbeconvictedinanywaysbythelaw”–isdefinitelyburiedbetweenus.Iftherearenocrimes,andtherearen’tany,theabsolutionistheonlypossibledecision.

InthenameofalltheauthorsIthankallwhobroughtthisjudicialdocumenttolife,tothisLetter of Commitment to Citizenship, Democracy and the State of Law. Without theexceptional, courageous and determined Professors Carol Proner, Gisele Cittadino, GiseleRicobomand thecombative, tirelessProfessor JoãoRicardoDornelles,whatwouldbe theindividualresentmentconcerningtheinjusticeofsuchatranscendentdecisionwouldn’tleaveplace to a document of which is expected to be of effective contribution for the re-establishmentoftheEmpireofLaw,withtheabsolutionoftheex-PresidentLula.

Thankyouverymuch,CarolProner,GiseleCittadino,GiseleRicobomeJoãoRicardoDornelles.As Miguel Littín once said, clandestine while in Chile, to Garcia Marques: there are actsapparently courageous, but deep down they are a commitment to civic dignity. You arecourageousandencouragedustomakethepeacefulfightforthecivicdignity.

GeraldoPradoLawyerandprofessoratUFRJ

6

TableofContentsLetBrazilbeBrazilagain.AgainstTheCaseagainstLula.................................................................................9

OscarGuardiola-Rivera..........................................................................................................................................................9Whendueprocessoflawisn'tfollowed,democracyloses............................................................................17

AlvarodeAzevedoGonzaga................................................................................................................................................17Thejudge,thecollaboratorandthegapsoftheconvictionnarrative...........................................................20

BeatrizVargasRamos...........................................................................................................................................................20ThedueprocessoflawisunderthreatinBrazil:jurisprudenceoftheInter-AmericanCourtofHumanRightsuponanalyzingthesentencethatfoundLulaandothersguilty....................................................................24

CarolProner.........................................................................................................................................................................24GiseleRicobom....................................................................................................................................................................24

Thecriminallawofthe(Political)Enemy......................................................................................................29CharlotthBack......................................................................................................................................................................29

Lawfare(or,simply,War).............................................................................................................................32CristianeBrandão.................................................................................................................................................................32

ThesentenceagainstformerpresidentLuizInácioLuladaSilva:anothertragicchapterofthe2016Coup...37EderBomfimRodrigues.......................................................................................................................................................37

Lula’switch-huntthroughthecriminalprocedureofexceptioninthepost-truthage...................................42FernandoHideoI.Lacerda...................................................................................................................................................42

Disrespecttothepracticeoflawandbreachoftheprincipleofjudicialimpartiality.....................................46FlavioCrocceCaetano..........................................................................................................................................................46

Thetyrannyofjustice...................................................................................................................................53FranciscoCelsoCalmon.......................................................................................................................................................53

ThecrisisofthebrazilianinstitutionsreflectedintheconvictionofaformerpresidentoftheRepublicbyasinglejudge..................................................................................................................................................57

GabrielaShizueSoaresdeAraujo........................................................................................................................................57ThemultipleandperversemeaningsofSérgioMoro'ssentence...................................................................62

GiseleCittadino....................................................................................................................................................................62Moro,LulaandtheTriplexApartment:notesonaverdict............................................................................65

JoãoPauloAllainTeixeira....................................................................................................................................................65GustavoFerreiraSantos.......................................................................................................................................................65MarceloLabancaCorrêadeAraújo......................................................................................................................................65

Judicialjugglingandtheendofthedemocraticstateoflaw.........................................................................68JoãoRicardoW.Dornelles...................................................................................................................................................68

Partialityandfetish:Freudexplains..............................................................................................................73JoaoVitorPassuelloSmaniotto............................................................................................................................................73DécioFrancoDavid..............................................................................................................................................................73

TheinvalidityofthepleabargainingunderstatecoationintheLula’sprocess.............................................79JorgeBheronRocha.............................................................................................................................................................79PaulaSalehArbs...................................................................................................................................................................79

7

Criminalconvictionwithoutevidencesandspecialtribunalasathreattodemocracy-amaculatobeovercome.....................................................................................................................................................................83

JoséCarlosMoreiradaSilvaFilho........................................................................................................................................83Pleabargain,papernewsandtheverdict:elementary,mydearWatson!.....................................................92

JoséFranciscoSiqueiraNeto................................................................................................................................................92Theoffenseofpassivecorruptionandthesentencethatviolatestheprincipleoflegality............................97

JuarezTavares......................................................................................................................................................................97AdemarBorges.....................................................................................................................................................................97

Captureofpopularsovereignty,stateofexceptionandjuridicism..............................................................112JulianaNeuenschwander...................................................................................................................................................112MarcusGiraldes.................................................................................................................................................................112

TheconvictionofformerPresidentLulaasthemaximumexpressionoftheexerciseoflawfare.................117JulianaTeixeiraEsteves......................................................................................................................................................117CarloCosentino..................................................................................................................................................................117

Lula,theenemytobefought......................................................................................................................122LaioCorreiaMorais............................................................................................................................................................122VitorMarques....................................................................................................................................................................122

Moro’ssentenceprovesthattheunrestrainedjudicialassessmentofevidencemustcometoanend........125LenioLuizStreck.................................................................................................................................................................125

Apoliticaltrial............................................................................................................................................133MarceloRibeiroUchoa......................................................................................................................................................133InocêncioRodriguesUchoa...............................................................................................................................................133

Lawfare,thiscrimecalledjustice................................................................................................................135MarcioSoteloFelippe........................................................................................................................................................135

Thecapitainofbushandthecarrierpigeon.................................................................................................139MarcioTenenbaum............................................................................................................................................................139

TheconvictionofLulaandthenegativeargumentationintheconstitutionalstate.....................................141MargaridaLacombeCamargo............................................................................................................................................141JoséRibasVieira.................................................................................................................................................................141

ViolenceandspectacleinthedecisionagainstpresidentLula.....................................................................145MariaCristinaVidotteBlancoTarrega...............................................................................................................................145SamiraAndraosMarquezinFonseca..................................................................................................................................145

Whoisabovethelaw?...............................................................................................................................149MariaGorettiNagimeBarrosCosta...................................................................................................................................149

Lula’scase:Acountryonthefringesofthelaw..........................................................................................152MaríaJoséFariñas..............................................................................................................................................................152

ThealreadyforeseentrialofPresidentLula................................................................................................154MartonioMont’AlverneBarretoLima...............................................................................................................................154

TheconvictionofLula:apromisefulfilled...................................................................................................158NasserAhmadAllan...........................................................................................................................................................158

8

Usingandabusingthecompulsoryprocessofawitness.............................................................................161OtávioPintoeSilva............................................................................................................................................................161

JudiciaryactivisminLula'ssentence...........................................................................................................164PauloPetri..........................................................................................................................................................................164FabianoMachadodaRosa.................................................................................................................................................164

Theprocess’unconstitutionalitycondemningLulaandBraziltoimprisonment..........................................167PedroPulzattoPeruzzo......................................................................................................................................................167TiagoResendeBotelho......................................................................................................................................................167

JudgementagainstLulaimpingetheprincipleofequalityofarms..............................................................172RicardoFrancoPinto..........................................................................................................................................................172

Thedueprocessbetweenjusticeandpolitics.............................................................................................176RobertodeFigueiredoCaldas............................................................................................................................................176

Lula’sconviction:Brazil’smoststrikingcaseoflawfare..............................................................................182RicardoLodiRibeiro...........................................................................................................................................................182

Julybonfires...............................................................................................................................................186RosaCardosodaCunha.....................................................................................................................................................186

Punitivepowerandthemanifestspeechofpunishment:averticaldecisionofpower................................190RubenRockenbachManente.............................................................................................................................................190

Thecriminalsentenceandtheagnostictheory...........................................................................................194SergioF.C.GrazianoSobrinho...........................................................................................................................................194

Anall is fairgametocondemnLula:LéoPinheiroandthecaseofthe informalaward-winningcollaborator...................................................................................................................................................................197

TaniaOliveira.....................................................................................................................................................................197Moro’ssentence:“checkmate”&bouncedcheck.......................................................................................202

TarsoGenro.......................................................................................................................................................................202TheconvictionofPresidentLulaasaviolationofinternationalhumanrightslaw......................................204

TatyanaScheilaFriedrich...................................................................................................................................................204LarissaRamina...................................................................................................................................................................204

ConvictionsprevailinLula’sguiltysentence...............................................................................................208ValeirErtle.........................................................................................................................................................................208

Convictionforrealpropertyownership:withoutpossessionortitle...........................................................211WeidaZancaner.................................................................................................................................................................211CelsoAntônioBandeiradeMello......................................................................................................................................211

ThelawinBrazilhasdied...........................................................................................................................215WilsonRamosFilho............................................................................................................................................................215RicardoNunesdeMendonça.............................................................................................................................................215

9

LetBrazilbeBrazilagain.AgainstTheCaseagainstLula

OscarGuardiola-Rivera*

I. Discomforters.

Let’sbeginwiththeclassicalstoryofoath-makinginritualsofsacrificialviolenceorwarriorsemiophagyaswellaslove,asdescribedbymythmakersandanthropologists.Let’sthenreferto the futuristic genres of horror fantasy and science fiction that, after all, are alwaysphilosophical.Let’ssaythatinthesecinematicgenreswearepresentedwithsomethingourbodycannotperceiveasitsown,asisthecaseinDavidCronenberg’sVideodromeorScott’sandVilleneuve’sBladeRunnersaga.Notdifferentworldsorganizedinlinearorprogressivemanner,butrealitiesthatexistinthepresentasthegiftoftimeinthesensethatalthoughtheyarenotcurrently livedtheyconfirmrealityanduniversalitybyrigorouslyundoinganycompromise or accommodation with it. The figure that characterizes this cinema is the‘discomforter’,whoalsoappearsincontemporarytheatricalplayssuchasAiméCésaire’sASeasonintheCongo.Justwheneverybodyunderstandswhatispossibleandismoreorlesssatisfied with things as they are, when everything is under control, then comes thediscomforter,whorefusestheinquisitorialoriginsoftruthandfrustratesanyeasyreturntooldergroundsuponwhichwecanjustifyjudgment,compromiseandsatisfactionwithgivenreality.Therealemergeswhenthediscomfortermakesheardthecontradictionandpursuesthequestionthatnoonewantstohear.

SuchisMaxRennandthephilosopherscoupleBrianandBiancaO´BlivioninVideodrome.SuchisDeckard.Such isK, the ‘decoyson’ inBladeRunner2049.Such isPatriceLumumba inASeasonintheCongo,whocallshimself‘thediscomforter’.Convincedthat“Africaneeds[his]intransigencehesetshisowndeathinmotionwhenheruinsthecommonsenseconsensusarounddipenda(independence)byproclaimingasthetruegoalforthepeopleofAfricathesameconceptoffreedombutexpressedintheirowntongue:Uhuru!”SuchisLulaofBrazil,thelastinalongseriesofdiscomforterstobesubjectedtoinquisitorialjudgment.HiscrimeisthesameasLumumba’s:tobelievethatcompromiseinfreedom(dipenda)wasnotenough,thatapurely formal transition todemocracy, libertyandequalitywasnotenough,and toproclaim,togetherwiththeWorkersParty,theLandlessandtheBaseCommunitiesofBrazilthatthetruegoalforthepeopleofBrazilwasthesameconceptoffreedombutdeliveredandperformedinadifferentkey,anothertongue,asabattlecryforfreedom(Uhuru!).

AsSouleymaneBachirDiagne,quotedabove,hasexplained,Uhuruisacrideguerre,alsotheveryfirstwordpronouncedbyCalibanwhenappearsfortheveryfirsttimeinTheTempest:Uhuru!Caliban tellsProspero.FromShakespeare’s transliterationof the figureof thedarkskinnedcommonermade landlessbyconquestandoccupation into theenemy, tobeerasmetaphorforpoliticsandthestruggleforliberation,tobeingpoliticalandtransformingangerintolaughter,therebyunderminingtheestablishedordersofcolonialismandtechno-realitycapitalismbybeingmischievoustothehighestdegree.Thishigh levelofmischiefoperatesperformatively,asarefusalofthegivensymbolsofjustice(corruptedbythoseinpower)andtheenactmentofanewdimensionalityintimeandspace,aninterval,inwhichnewalliancesandnewforcesmighttakeplaceinactuality,inaction,beyondtheoncecriticalbutnowtrivial

*Birkbeck,UniversityofLondon

10

topicsoffragmentationandbreakdownthatwritersofthepostmodernusedtoencompasscontradiction,exclusionandresiduation.Forgetgoodordersandcanonicalbehaviors.Justtodoit!Forcethebeneficiariesofpastinjusticetoabandontheirbiasofendowments!Bringthenewtimes,doithereandnow!SuchisthebattlecryofdiscomforterslikeLumumbaandLula.That’stheircrime.

II. Standardization.

Put otherwise,whenwepress the distinction between symbolic formation (extensive orbackground/foregroundimage)andforce(intensive,performativeimageandspeech),orthatbetweenmechanicalsuccessionandcataclysmicsplit,itselftheeffectofanelementarypastinjusticesweepinginandoutratherthanbeinganabyss,revivedinnegotiation,theentirefocusofthepresentshiftsawayfromreciprocityandtheeconomicexchangeofthepresenttothepresentationoftimeitself.

SuchisthepointmadebyClaudiaRankine’sevocationoftheindifferencebetweentheritualhandshakeandapoem.Thehandshake,agestureofpeacemaking,isaritualofbothassertingandhandingover.Thepoemisalsothat.“Here.Iamhere”.Itcanbeunderstood,inotherwords,asbothcompleteandreciprocaldetermination.AsinVelázquez’spaintings,whereonecanseeavanishingpointinrelationtowhicheverythingslides;orintheNorth-SouthaxisofAmerindianvillagesandtopologicalformationsthatappeartohavenopurposeatallotherthantoallowthesocialstructureoflifeassuchtoexist.Whatwehavefound,onceagain,issomethinganthropologistsandtheirindigenousinterlocutorsworkedoutintheirdialogicalnegotiations: the ‘zero-value’ institutions thathavingno contentof theirownopenupaninterval between absence and fullness that goes beyond the (inquisitorial) morality ofjudgmentadjudicatingbetweendifferences.

Assuch,these‘zero-value’institutions,andthediscomfortersthatactualizethemintroduceaprovocationtothink.Thatistosay,theybringback(fromthefuture,asitwere)areminderofthe intolerableor the impossibilityofcarryingonwiththingsas theyare. Inotherwords,theseforms-performative,visualandtopological-openupanewpath,apathos,aspathosforms(Pathosformeln)thatinduceanaffectbridgingupjustificatoryreasonsandaction.Theaffectinquestionisasenseofinsufficiencythatcarriesnothingoftheweightoftheinevitablebutcannotendthere.Fromhereonwardsaradicalinvestmentbecomesnecessary.

Capitalismwantsnothingtodowithsuchradicalinvestments,foritcanonlydealintamedrisks.Likeradicalpoliticalaction,capitalismalsoworksinthedifferentialspaceopenedupbytheintervalanditslogic.Butitdoessobydisplacingdifferences,slicinganddicingthegiftasaninstanceofthedividual(ratherthanindividual)characterofthegiverthatisattachedtoit,and exchanging the resulting fragments. It deals with people, or their sliced and dicedattributesastokensofgiventypes.Hence,thekindsofrelationssupportedunderCapitalismarerelationsofsubsumptionorabsorptionongroundsgivenpriortothefact.The“facts”inthiscasearefabricatedaprioriandrepeatedseriallysoastocreateagroundoranexpectationofguiltorabnormality.Thatiswhythelegal-theologicalformthatismostproperofcapitalismisjudgment,theabsorptionofacaseundergivennorms–normalizationorstandardization.

Capitalismtreatspeopleasdividualsthatenterinexchangeswithotherdividualsintheirrolesas traders, enemies, familiars, ancestors, debtors, creditors and so on. It can deal with‘activists’who denounce the illegal force used to found capitalism and its legal orders byquicklydismissingthemorcontainingthemforawhile.ButittotallyabhorsdiscomforterslikeLumumba,Che,SalvadorAllende,orLula,whorefusetoplayaccordingtotheirrole.

11

III. RoleandPlay.

AnthropologistsworkinginBrazilandelsewherehavebeenquicktonoticethattheideaofrole is itself sodeeplyanchoredtothe ideaofapriorgroundthat itdoesnotcapturethegroundlessnessoutofwhichoursocietiesareactuallygrantedexistence.Capitalism(anditlegalorder)keepspromisingusanewground(orareturntooldergrounds)wherenoneexists.Tokeepsuchapromise,ithastogotowar–warfareandlawfare-andinsteadofproducinggroundittakesthelandheldincommonbyAmerindiansorAfricans,ordistributedbylotsundertheseeingwaysofNemesis,GoddessofRhamnous,daughterofJustice.Bythisfirstlogicnomosisborn,intheveryactofdispossessingwomenoftheirownbodiesandvoices(aswhenTelemachustellsPenelopetoshutupandgobacktothesewingroom)andtakingthemasobjectsofexchangeforhousekeeping(oikonomosagathe)andwarideology.

Thisfirstlogicisthatofthetotemicandmetaphorical(asopposedtometonymic)conjunctionbetween two terms, each on their respective role: for instance, distribution and vengefulretribution,ornomosandoikos.Itisanactofmassexpropriationthatconjoinsthem,givinguseconomics;andasPaulLafargueputit,inthatsameactsanctionstheinequalitiesoflandandwomentakenbyforceasanactofStatejustice(Solonicnomoi,orLuisdeMolina’s‘justwar’),therebyturningthechanceof lots(byinvertingit) intoaninescapabledestiny. In itsapparent simplicity, thisdualism (oikos/nomos) elevates to the levelof theuniversalwhattoday’sbehavioraleconomistscall‘thecognitivebiasofendowments’,thehabittokeepone’sown,meanwhileobscuringthethirdtermthatkeepsnomosandoikostogether,namely,war.

This totemic logic of permutations, extensive redistributions, and inversions (in Spanishinversiónmeansboththeactionofinvertingandofusingresourcesforindustry,profitandrent) gives place to (fore-grounding) practices of value, discursive justification, pragmaticcontestation and ‘expert’ decision-making. This is the logic of ‘spirit’ or redemptive andimitative magic (as theorized by Max Weber, Émile Durkheim, Frank Knight, and MarcelMauss, among others), which stresses what we could call the “scientific” or theoreticalsubjectivation-ethical level of motivation and social hedging against danger: double-entrybook-keeping, the rational disposition towardsparsimony, and aspirational ethics.Ground(certainty)isproducedherebythepracticeofmethodicalprofit-making(thefamous‘spirit’ofCapitalism) but persistent uncertainty becomes an existential condition that cannot beresolvedinthislife.Thecosmologythatresultsfromthislogicofspiritualgroundingseekstoeliminateambiguitybyeither integratingdeath intothemanagementof lifeas if itwereaportfolioofoptionsor,quiteoften,bypromisingimmortalitytoman.Itsethicsisamatterofeliminatingtheambiguitybymakingoneselfpureinwardnessoranexchangeableobject,byescaping from the sensibleworld or enclosing oneself andone’s environment in thepuremomentofdecisionandjudgment.Indoingso,ratherthangrantingexistencetheCapitalistspirittakesitaway.

Butthesecondlogic,whichgivesrisetothevirtualyetactualizing‘zero-value’ofinstitutions,entirelyreorientsthefirst.Itdoessointhesensethatitsimultaneouslyelevatesonesideoftheexchangelogictoamoreabsolutewholeandinthismanneralsoshowstheveryideaofduality,exchangeandthepresupposedground–theideaofone’sselfasaneconomicselfrealizing his dreamof keeping to oneself- to be quite a limiting and limited idea. It takescapitalism’sspiritmoreseriouslybyshiftingtheplaneofanalysistowhatwecanunderstandas the structural level of institutionalization and techniques of differentiation andrecombination,akintothosereferredtobyanthropologistsstudyingcontagiousmagicandlinguistssuchasRomanJakobson.Thelatterobserved,inthisrespect,thatthebestwayto

12

influencesomeoneistospeakhernameforitremainsconnectedtoherevenwhenutteredinherabsence. Inthisway,Jakobsonandtheanthropologistshelpus identifynotonlythespiritofoikos-nomosbutthe(symbolicanpathetic)formsthatdiscursivelyandpragmaticallytest, justifyandcriticizeprices,wagesandquantifiableoptionsinasortofWittgensteinianway–asalanguagegame,butonethatdisplacesdifferencesgeographicallyandtemporally.

Thisisthepointofshiftingfrom‘spirit’to‘forms’suchasstandardization,theformationoftrends(suchasfashion),theassetorderivativeformdistinctiveoffinancialmarketsandthecollectionformofluxuryandartmarkets(astheorizedbyKarlMarx,Malinowski,Hoebel&Llewellyn, J. Butler, Nancy Fraser and Luc Boltanski). These forms of valorization can beunderstood asways of seeing and (linguistic) frameworks that constitute the backgroundwhichenablepeople’sjudgmentstoconvergeandinformtheirreasonsforacting,becomingintegrated into other cognitive resources available to them as new grounds helping themorientthemselvesinmarket-drivenreality.Theymakeitpossibletoconnectobjectstotheperspectivesfromwhichtheycanbeviewedinordertobevalued,andassuchhaveaneffectontheorganizationofcommodities.

However,thisisthecaseonlyinsofarastheycombinewaysofseeingandspeakingthatcanconfigurethediscourseonobjectsconsideredascommodities(i.e.inassociationwithaprice).“Itisprecisely,however,becausetheyaffectnotthethingsthemselves,butthediscourses”and the fantasies or imaginaries “surrounding them that they are structured –as is everyargumentativeprocedurebasedontheuseoflanguage”.Inthecaseofcommoditiesthatgiverisetofrequenttransactionsinoursocietiesthese(symbolic)formsofvalorizationrelatetoeachotherinawaythatcanbearticulatedasasetoftransformations,inClaudeLévi-Strauss’ssenseoftheterm–thatis,differentialandtemporal.“Anadvantageofthistypeofmodel,asLévi-Straussshowed, is that itcanbetranslated intomathematical language”.Thedanger,however, lies in thinking that because geographical and temporal displacements ordifferencescanbeexpressedquantitativelytheyarepartofanecessarilycoherentnumericalseriesthatisreadableandrepeatable,andthus,asadiscerniblemetricofpriorvalue,thefirmgroundforpredictionsandprice-setting.4

Thereisathirdlogicthatradicalizesdualityassuch,likethesecondone,butpositsthiszero-value structure, the interval as such, inwhich actors recombine parts of themselveswiththings viametonymic ‘techniques of liberation’ in volatile negotiations, asDrucilla Cornellsays,whichserveastheenablingmotor forceof thewholesystemthatcomes in itswakewhileinawayremainingoutsideit.Hereroleturnsintoplay.

IV. AllAgainstLula.

ThisispreciselywhathappensintheclassicalexampleoftheoathbyscepterthatappearsinBook I of The Iliad, but also in the generic consideration of love. After all, love is aneffervescencethatsplitstheindividualandcannotberealizedindividually.Theelectricitywecalllovemaybebetterdescribedbythenotionthat‘toloveistosee,andtoseeistograntexistence’. For love isn’tmere recognition (which tends to return to self as a pre-existing

4 Luc Boltanski& Arnaud Esquerre, “Enrichment, Profit, Critique. A Rejoinder toNancy Fraser”, inNew LeftReview106,July/August2017,67-76,at68,forquotesandparaphrases;aswellasEnrichissement:Unecritiquede lamarchandise (Paris: Gallimard, 2017). See also Nancy Fraser, “A New Form of Capitalism? A Reply toBoltanskyandEsquerre”,inthesameissue,57-65.

13

whole,andinthatsensefails)butbothaffirmationofselfandatotallyriskyhandingoverofoneselftoanother.

Affirmation(Iamhere)isanindexical;ithappensthroughadeicticandanaphoricplayinwhichIspeakofmyselffromtheviewpointoftheloverhighlightingthosedifferencesthatgiveitanadvantageoverotherobjectsoflovethatmightbeabletosubstituteforit:Iamhere,Iseeyou.Iamhere,Iloveyou.Iloveyou,Iseeyou.Iseeyou,yougrantmeexistence.

Anotherexampleofaffirmation,onewhichtakeslovefromthefamilialtothesocio-politicalcontext, is present in Langston Hughes’s poem Let America Be America Again: “I am thefarmer,bondsmantothesoil/Iamtheworkersoldtothemachine/IamtheNegro,servanttoyouall/Iamthepeople,humble,hungry,mean”. Intheseverses love isaffirmingyetalsocombative.Thereisno‘speakingfortheother’inthiscaseinsofarastheother(thefarmer,theworker,thenegro)alsospeaks,ofdifferenceandcontradiction,ofbondage,ofservitude,ofbeingpricedandsold.Thisentailstheexistenceofanoptionforsomeonetosellattheexerciseprice(a‘put’inthelingooftrade)andanoptionforsomeonetobuy(alsoknownasa‘call’).Ifaffirmationisthefirstaspectthatdetermineswhatisatstakeintherelation,thesecondaspectofriskyhandingoverconcernsestimates intime.Considerthefactthattheoptions identifiedabovearethemselvescontingentclaimsthatcanbetradedatestimatedpricesevolvingintime(short-term/long-term).Thisdeterminesnotthewhatbutthewho.

Consider the farmer, the worker and the Negro in Hughes’s poem: each of them has acontingentclaimgiventothembyhistorytodemandrestitutionunderconditionsthathaveyet to occur. Fromwhom? From current beneficiaries of past injustice. The value of suchclaims, which can be valorized by presenting them in the form of a limited number ofcharacteristicswithreferencetonumericaldataortoastory,fluctuatesintime.Thisiscrucial,for it directs our attention tomomentswhen historical claimsmay be liquidated throughcompromise and moments when the contradiction interrupts the possibility of anycompromiseorbargain(“validatingtheuniversal”,asBalibarwouldsay)andthusanegotiatedsettlementoraresolutioncanbelegitimatelyforceduponbeneficiaries,inordertoovercomethecognitiveeffectsofendowments–thehabittowanttokeepwhatonehas.Hereemergestheideaofjusticeasoptional,meaningthattheliquidationvalueofanoptionforhistoricalredress rises and falls under different economic and socio-political situations but is notdeterminedbythesituation.Achangeofperspectivebetweenvictimsandbeneficiariesofpastinjusticeonrestitutionaryclaimscantakeplaceinthecontextofarevolutionaryoptionthatforcesaresolution,orevenwhenthatoption isn’texercisable, ifgrantingsuchclaimswouldreducetheuncertaintythatexistsaslongastheyremainoutstanding.

Arguably, thiswas precisely the force exercised by theWorkers Party of Brazil, especiallyduringLula’stermonoffice(government,notpower).ThecaseagainstLulaisinfactacaseagainsthistoricaljusticeandtheshiftfromsymbolstoforce,oragainstanyattempttotakerestitutionary (contingent) claims advanced by the victims of past injustice against itsbeneficiariesbyforcingaresolution(forinstance,viacashtransferssuchastheBolsaFamiliaschem,whichareofcourseincompletemeansofdoingjustice).Further,thepointofthecaseagainstLulaistomakesurethatsuchforcecanneverandwillneverbeexercisedagainbyhistorical-politicalagentstakingseriouslythecontingentclaimsofthevictimsofpastinjustice.

Furthermore,theinquisitorialsystemofjudgmentinBrazil,apeculiarmixturebetweentheremainsoftheprosecutorialsystembroughtbythecolonizer(Portugalinthiscase,whichhasitselfriditselfofsuchasystem)andthemostup-to-datetechniquesofspectacularmedia(a

14

mixdeemed“primitive”byGeoffreyRobertsonQCduringarecentbrieftotheUKParliament,whichIwaspartof)inthehandsofajudicialmovementincahootswiththeprivilegedofBrailhasadvancedthemeansoflawfareandcharacterassassinationorfeminicidetounderminethepossibilityofLula’s2018candidacyhavingdispossessedDilmaRousseffofthepresidency.Clearly,theaimistounderminethechancestheonlyexistingpoliticalpartythat,imperfectasallhumaninstitutionsare,hassofardaredtotakeseriouslytheclaimsofhistoricalvictims.Thus,thecaseagainstLula(andDilma)isreallyacaseforthebeneficiariesandagainstthevictimsofpasthistorical injustice inBrazil.Assuch, it isanew instanceof injusticeaddinginsultandfurtherinjuryuponinjury.OrasWalterBenjaminwouldsay,pilingupcatastropheuponcatastrophe.

Bymeansoflawfare,thejudicialmovementandtheprivilegedaswellastheirmediaoutletssettoundermineLula’scandidacy(whilepresentingthemselvesassuccessorsofthe“CleanHands”operationinItaly,therebyshroudingthemselvesbehindthemantleofmorality)haveadvanced false facts and events, which repeated serially, are then taken as grounds forcriminalprosecutions.Lulawasaccused,for instance,ofowninganapartmentprovidedbymeansofcorporatecorruption.AlthoughLula’slawyersmanagetodemonstrateLuladidn’towntheapartment,thejudge-mediapartnershipdidn’tallowthedefenseteamto“followthemoney”soastoprovebeyonddoubtthatLulahadn’tbenefittedatall,therebyshowingthelack of basis of any corruption charges. This is, as they put it to the meeting of the UKParliamentreferredtoabove,“anorganizedwar”.

There isnoevidence,nooffshoreaccounts,noUSDollarorReal inanyaccount;Lula livesmodestlyinanaverageapartmentoutsideofSaoPaulo;defenselawyershavehadtheirofficeswiretapped, and the results of furtherwiretapping,which are supposed tobe kept secrettogether with other potential evidence, promptly released to the media that frames aspectacularnarrativeofcorruptionwithoutanycareforthecrucialrightstopresumptionofinnocence;JudgeMoro,whohasactedasapoliticalactor,wascriticizedforthesereleasesthat broke the rules of evidentiary dealing but wasn’t removed; no “contempt of court”operatedhere,andthus,onthefaceoftheseevents,ojudiciaryactingindependently.Theaimistocreateanexpectationofguilt,aground,priortotheactualfactsandpriortoaproperevaluation of the available evidence. Once created this expectation, guilt will likely beconfirmedbytheappellatecourtjustintimetodisableLulafromrunningforofficein2018.Let’scallthislawfarebyitspropername:acoup,thesecondcouptotakeplaceinBrazilinthreeyears.Thisishowtherightisgoingaboutre-establishingitsruleoverLatinAmericaforitspowerfulclients,thebeneficiariesofpastandpresentinjustice,rippingoffapagefromtheworstpracticesofitsnemesisontheleft:byeveryandallmeansnecessary.

Nobodydenies there’s corruptionatmany levels in thedealingsandpartnershipbetweenBrazil’s political system and the corporate sector. Construction companies and othercorporationshavepaidbribes,andthesealsomadeittotheWorkersParty.Butthere’snoevidenceatpresentthatLulaisguiltyofit.Itisnonsensetosay“hemusthaveknown”,forthefactisthatthere’snoevidencethathemadepromisestobenefitothersnorhebenefittedhimself,therewasnoquidproquo,andthustheverypossibilityofhimbeingguiltyofgainingbenefitisn’tthere.Hewassentencedforsupposed“improvements”toaproperty,inspiteoftheabove.Thebehaviorofthesejudgesandtheirinquisitorialattitudetowardsthelawyersin the defense team constitute a serious pattern of unfairness and lack of judicialindependence,which theSpecialRapporteuronthe Independenceof JudgesandLawyers,

15

PeruvianDiegoGarcía-Sayán,woulddowelltoinvestigateandreporton.ThelatterwasalsobriefedinLondonbysomeofusontheparticularsofthecaseagainstLula.

V. Justice.

Ditto,theaimoflawfareagainstLulaandtheWorkersPartyofBrazilistoseriouslyundermineanypossibilityoftakingseriouslythecontingentclaimsofthevictimsofpastinjustice,andtoseesomemeasureofredistribution. Arguably,greaterdistributivejusticewouldenhancepolitical stability,andpolitical stabilitywould itselfbecomemoredesirableafterachievinggreaterdistributivejustice.However,someproponentsofliberaldemocracyandclearlythoseatthehelmofBrazilianlawfareagainstLulabelieveotherwise.Theyfeelpoliticallysafeandtend to view the role of law and judges as littlemore than the calculated application ofprecedent as a quantifiably readable past series with a precise temporal beginning andstoppingpoint.Thatiswhytheyalsotendtorejecteconomicredistributionbasedonhistoricalclaims–storiesandhistoriesofexpropriationandexploitation-aslackinganultimateground,atemporalstoppingpointtowhichwecanreturn inordertoapplythe lawandsetthingsright.

Theymightagreethatanimageoffuturejusticebuiltwiththehelpofartists,philosophersandotherspeculativemindsisnecessarytodevelopaforward-lookingconceptionthattreatsthewholeofpasthistoryasirremediablylackingandterrible,butwouldsuggestthatweplaceabanonmigrationfromalltoodistantpastsandfutureutopiastothepresentaspotentiallydisastrous,contaminant,ifnotimpossible.Liberaldemocracy,atamedversionofdemocracy,theyconclude,representsthemostwehaveprogressedandcanprogressto,oratleasttheworstframeworkforjusticeachievedinhistory,exceptforalltheothers.Havingrecognizedthemoreorlessimmediatepastashorrible,repletewithpovertyorscarcityandauthoritariandespoticorgenocidal regimes,and thepresentasproposinga setofnormative standardsembeddedinadevelopmentallysuperiorhistoricalformoflife,theyask,whatisthepointofgoingbacktryingtorightsucherrors?Tothem,thetimeforrectifyinghistoricalinjusticesisnevernow;ifso,isn’titbettertoturnthepageandtransitiontowardsliberalmodernityasthenecessaryshapeofthingstocome?

Theviewofoptionaljusticeinvolvedinretro-futuristperformancesofformsandforcesthathasbeenadvancedinthepreviousparagraphstakesaccountofthekerneloftruthwrappedwithintheliberalshell:reversinganyparticularmomentinawholehistoryofinjusticeistrickybecause,ifanyabstractsocio-metricvalorizationofremediescouldbeappliedtoanyformofinequality in the present, then there’s no obvious way to limit remediation by arbitrarilychoosingsomesingleinjusticethatmustnowbesetright.

Buttheruleoflawinliberalsocietiesentailsthatnegotiatorsandadjudicatorsarecalledupontomakejusticeinrelationtotheactualcasebeforethem,ratherthantoanycase.Further,thisdoesn’tmeanreadingthepast(precedent)asaquantitativelyrepeatableseries,orthemechanical eternal returnof someoriginal intent,or aspresentinguswithanonarbitrarybaselineforrightinghistoricalwrongs.Theabsenceofgrounddoesnotnecessarilyentailthatargumentsaboutjusticemustdisavoworeraseallpasthistory.

The ‘law as integrity’ position successfully defended by Ronald Dworkin, among others,demonstratesthetwosidesof law’sdilemma.Ontheonehand,thebodyofthe lawmustaffirmitself-itmustexerciseitsauthorityandpassjudgmenthereandnowonthebasisofcumulativehistoryasalearningprocess.Ontheother,thebodyofthelawmustcontinuallyruleagainstwhatitpreviouslyestablishedasthetruthandthusitsowngroundandauthority

16

–asinthecaseofRoev.Wade,whereJusticeBlackmunheededthecalltojusticeaswellasthedemandtonegotiatesincetheexistingconstitutionallawoftheU.S.didnotprovidehimwithaready-madeframeworktoconsiderthequestionofabortion.Thejudgeisthereforecalledtointerpret,inDworkin’ssenseoftheterm,gobacktowhatis‘right’or‘just’inthelawandaimtowardsthefullerrealizationofcertainnormativecommitments(suchasequality)thathavebecome incorporated into the legal systemasauniversalizableprinciple,and toacceptthatprogressinhistoryisn’tlinkedtoanysortofclaimaboutwhetherthehistoricalformoflifeinwhichsuchnormativecommitmentsareembeddedisdevelopmentallysuperiortosupposedlynon-modernformsoflife.Speakingmoretechnically,judgesinterpretthroughlawandnotthroughequity.Thisiswhytheyrequireaestheticideasorsymbolicformsandforcesofthepolitical imagination, likeanyothernegotiator,whichhelpthemtraveltothepast and the future, and, crucially, return to the present so as to produce effervescentconnections between historical moments –as it happens in Proust’s novels, Benjamin’scritiqueorJeanEpstein’scinema. Ifthis isthecase, ifthere isnononarbitrarybaselineforrestorative justice insofaras lawand thestate (butalso themarket)arenothingbut ‘not-necessarily true or incomplete pasts’ (and the future is open), thenwe can equally easilyconcludethatequality,assuch,isaremedyforthecumulativeinjusticesthatarethesumofpasthistory,allandincomplete.

Liberals are right in pointing out that once we start correcting singular instances ofcontradiction and historical injusticemade heard bymissing voices, incarnated in foreignbodies,orexpressed in thedebtweowetothosewhohavecomebeforeusandtothosecomingafterus–aboveall,thereturningdeadwhotragicallydisappearedinthestruggleforjustice-wewillfindnostoppingpoint.Ifso,ratherthanaskingcounterfactualquestionsabouthowwell-offwould peasant farmers, the proletariat, Africans or Amerindianswould havebeenhadtherebeennoconquests,warsandexploitation,whichwouldrequireustoimagineaworldinwhichhistoryneverhappened,wecouldconsiderwhatkindofceremonialcanlookbackintothepastforthoseexperimentsonjusticeuntimelyinterrupted,withoutrequiringastoppingpoint, and reactivate thembyunleashing forces that transcend theirmoment ofinscriptionandincreasethedeeperlegitimacyofsocialinstitutionsfromthereactivatedpastonwardsasacontinuouschainofretro-futuristcvalidations.

17

Whendueprocessoflawisn'tfollowed,democracyloses

AlvarodeAzevedoGonzaga*

Draftingandcreatinglaws,applicabletoeveryone,isoneofthemainelementsthatdefinesthetransitionfromabsolutepower,centeredonthefigureofamonarch,toasocietythatatleasthasthegoalofbeingequal.

In general and brief lines, it's the consolidation of the idea of norms and principles thateveryoneshouldfollowand,intheeventofdeviations,determinesthatallwouldbejudgedalsoaccordingtonormsandprinciplesestablishedandapplicabletoall.

Verywell.Theworldofideasisone.Theworldofrealityisanother.Unfortunately,oftenthesecondisnolessthanadistortionofthefirst.

WearetalkinghereaboutthecaseinvolvingthetrialofformerPresidentLuizInácioLuladaSilva,federaljudgeSérgioMoroandtheFederalPublicMinistry.

Therelationbetweenthesethreeelementsgainedcontours,narrativesandepisodesthatfarexceededthefieldtowhichtheyhadtolimitthemselves:dueprocessoflaw.

Concernabouttheexistenceoflaws-sodeartooursociety-hasbecomesecondary.Thereisno search for the "truth of facts," which would be achieved through the application andobservationofthelegalprocess.Wehave,onthecontrary,atruththatmustbeproved,evenif,forthat,thelawisleftaside.

Perhaps,fromaperspective,orbiasofourtime,weseeasabsurdandsenselesstheexcessivepowerandauthoritythatthemonarchsoncehad.What isthesenseofnations,countries,thousandsofpeopleblindlyobeyingonepersonwhostoodaboveallofthem?

That's the imagewehavetoday.However,a lessarrogantviewof thepresentwouldtakeaccountofthefactthatthepowerofkingswasbasedonthelegitimacythatcameoutofthedivine order, historical-family, tradition and identity, essential elements in those times.Factorssostrong,ofsuchrelevance,thatforthepeopleofthosetimes,justifiedandfoundedallpowerconcentratedonthefigureofthemonarchs.Thiswouldgiverisetothewell-beingofthenation.

Obviously,thesewerenotbettertimes.Butsocialorganizationhadtheseelementsthatgaveit cohesion. Nowadays, such cohesion should be based on the Constitution and otherprovisionsderivingfromit.Andfromtheobservationandfulfillmentofthisagreementthatwehopetoachievethecommongood.

However, it seems today, we have regressed on some issues. Brazilian society - perhapswithoutevenrealizingit-haschosentobelieveinaparticularvisionofjustice(withalowerJ),ratherthanrespectforthelaws,which,parexcellence,iswhatdefinesJustice(withcapitalJ).

*ProfessorofPhilosophyandTheoryof lawatthePontificalCatholicUniversityofSãoPauloPUC/SP.Post-DoctoratesattheLawSchooloftheClassicalUniversityofLisbonandattheUniversityofCoimbra.GraduatedinPhilosophyattheUniversityofSãoPaulo-USP.MemberoftheEuro-AmericanInstituteofConstitutionalLaw.FormerPresidentoftheInstituteforResearch,TrainingandDisseminationinPublicandSocialPolicies.Lawyer.

18

Letusmakeevenclearerwhatwedefendhereandthereasonforthebriefhistoricallossofthe formation of Modern States. Law as regulator of social life exists to guaranteeimpersonalityandtodeterminethatsocietyworks,accordingtothewillofthatsocietyitself.Okay.Ofcoursetherearedistortions,politicalreformisamust.Butitisamodel(inconstantimprovement)moreadvancedinrelationtootherformsofgovernment.

Wequestion:ifinasocietythatobservesthelawsandjudgesdeviationsaccordingtoit,therearealreadysomanydistortionsandproblems,whataboutonewheretheLaw,whichshouldbethemainparadigm,becomesanaccessory?

Willwechangethe law,which,with its imperfections, isthefruitofacollectiveandsocialeffort,bythebeliefinthegoodcharacter,inthemessianicidealthatsomecharactersavowtothemselves?Willweagainsubmittosubjectiveideas,asdidsubjectsinmonarchies?

Webelievethatthecriticismandconcernwebringhereisalreadyclear.Theobservationofthelegalprocesscannotbeseenasanobstacletothelawbeingfulfilled.It'sobservationiswhatensurescompliancewiththelaw.

Aconvictionisnoguaranteethatjusticehasbeendone.Doesjusticelieinthefactthatthereisajudgmentordoweunderstandthateverydefendantwillalwaysbeguilty?Aretherenomoreinnocents?

WecannotreplacethedefenseofLaw,whichisthedefenseoftheDemocraticStateofLaw,forcombatingcorruption,as ifcombatingthesecondwaspossiblewithoutrespectforthefirst.

Itisnotaquestionofrelativizingor,muchlessdefendingcorruption.Onthecontrary,fightingcorruptionmustbesofirmanddecisivethatwedonotallowcorrupt lawstofightagainstpoliticalcorruption.

WhenMoro and Lulamet lastMay, the eventwas treated as a confrontation, a clash, adispute.Ifitispositivetoensureemotion,newspaperpages,clicksontheinternetorevenmobilizethepoliticalgroupsinterestedinthecase,seeingthetakingofatestimonyinsuchawayisasignofasickprocess,asickdemocracy.

PresidentLulausingthemeetingasapoliticalpiece is lawful,naturalandaright.Whathecannotdoistolackwithrespect,nottomeetthedecorumrequiredinasession.Whenjudgedinalawsuit,thelawestablisheswhatitsobligationsareandallofthemhavebeenfulfilled.

Ontheotherhand,JudgeSérgioMoro,assumingthepostureofthoseontheothersideofthering,facesthedefendant,escapesfromhisdutiesand,therefore,doesnotharmonlythecase,orthedefendant,harmsandhindersallDemocracy.He'sajudge,notafighter.

Examples of a performance beyond its attribution are not lacking. Before one of thedemonstrationsofthefightersdressedint-shirtsoftheBraziliannationalteam,Moroissuedanotesayingthathefelt"touchedandmoved"bybeinghonoredbythedemonstrators.ThereisaFacebookpagecalled“Eumorocommoro”(Ilivewithhim).Worsethanthepun,justthefactthatthepageiskeptbyhiswifeandfedwithvideosstarringthejudgehimself.

Itisstillimportanttheideathat"tothejudgeitisonlypossibletoappearinsidetherecords".Does ithaveanyrelevance?Or is itobservationtotheevent,withoutmotivation,withoutreason?WillweignoretheOrganicLawoftheJudiciary?

19

Fromapolitician,noimpersonalityisexpected.Ifhewantstobeimpersonal,lethimdoit.Heisgiventhepossibilityofactingashewishes,inthelimitoftheLaw,ofcourse.However,itisnotpossibleforamagistratetodoso.

Ajudgeisnot,norcanhebeahero.ApaladinofJustice.Afighterofcorruption.Hedoesnotexistforthat.Thisisnothisassignment.ThejudgeisaservantoftheLaw,anofficial,someonewhoactsinobediencetothelaw,nevertheopposite.

Tobedirect,ifthedecisionofaprocessmeanstheadvanceofsociety,thisadvanceisaresultofthelaw,whichwasobserved.Notfromthejudge,whoonlyfulfilledit.Dowerealizehowitisandhowitshouldbe?

Itisnotamatterhereofdiminishingtheimportanceofthejudge,ofthepublicprosecutororofthedefense.However,wemustseektoseethingsastheyreallyare.

Unfortunately,JudgeSérgioMorounderstandsthisprocessdifferently.AnavowedfanofthecleanhandsoperationinItaly,Morosawtheopportunitytousehispublicfunctiontofightcorruption and moralize the country. Now in a declared way, sometimes indirectly, themagistrateactsaccordingtothismissionthathehasthrownforhimself.

Theprotagonismandthepersonalityaredangerousandactagainstdemocracy.The lawisimpersonalbecauseitisnotthevictimofinterestsanddisputes.It'sonlycommittedtoitself.

WhenMoro decides to dialogue, to be in tune with demonstrators, with communicationvehicles (who receive orders and decisions before the court and the lawyers), hiscommitment,whichshouldberestrictedtothelaw,becomeswiththesegroups,hencethingsbecomeconfusingandharmful.

For the "paneleiros", for those whowore the Brazilian national team shirt and went thestreets, President Lula is guilty. Score. Such people wish to see him imprisoned. Desire,dreams,will,whenthatislimitedtopersonalwill,okay,noproblems.Theydonothavethepowertocondemnthepresident.

We open parentheses. The problem is not it being convicted, but the desire to convict.Condemnationhasnothingtodowithdesire,ithastodowithcrime,whetherornotithasbeenpracticed.Wecloseparentheses.

When,whohasthepowertocondemnbecomesapartyorputshimself inthepositionofsymbolofthosewhohavethedesire,wehaveaproblemofdifficultsolution.Thedecisionislinkedtotheexpectationsofthosewhosupportit,thesupportwasgivenbecausethedecisionwasexpected.Whatshouldbetechnicalandimpersonal,becomespoliticalandpersonal.

Inanalyzingthefragilityoftheevidence,howmuchpoliticalactionisconfusedasanactionthatbyitsnaturewouldbecriminal...andfromthat,responsibilityandguiltareattributed.Thesituationbecomesevenmore tragic. Justice is setaside.Andwith that,a judgeandadefendantlose.Andwiththat,democracyloses.

20

Thejudge,thecollaboratorandthegapsoftheconvictionnarrative

BeatrizVargasRamos*

Whoisacquaintedwiththecriminalprocedureno.5046512-94.2016.4.04.7000/PR?This istheofficial,discreetanduninterestingregisteroftheprocessthatarosewithhullabalooandaPowerpointpresentationfromtheCuritiba“taskforce”.OnSeptember14th,2016,DeltanDallagnol,federalprosecutorinBrazil, leaderoftheBaptistChurchofBacacheriandfanofradicalsports,commandedthemediapresentationoftheaccusationraisedagainstLuizInácioLulada Silva, onaccountof corruptionandmoney laundering– the “Lava-Jato”– versionaboutatriplexapartmentinthetownofGuarujá.AccordingtoDallagnol,theformerpresidentwasthe“headofthePetrobrascorruptionscheme”.

Another formal accusation had been presented before. On March 9th, 2016, the StateprosecutorsCássioConserino,FernandoHenriqueAraújoandJoséCarlosBlat,oftheStateAttorney’s Office of São Paulo, accused the former president of the Republic of Brazil ofcommitting crimes of money laundering and false representation, and demanded hispreventivedetention.TheFederalProsecutionOffice,authorofthesecondcriminalcharge,wasdeemedtohavejurisdictiononaccountofthesubject-matter.JudgeSérgioMoroalreadyhad an interpretation of the case: “The honorable State prosecutors, authors of theaccusation,wronglyconnectedthegrantingoftheaforementionedapartment”tofraudsinthe bank employees’ cooperative (<http://www.conjur.com.br/2016-nov-30/ministro-stj-volta-aprovar-fatiamento-denuncia-lula>). Since then it was established a “allegedconnection”ofthecasewiththeobjectoftheOperationLava-Jato.

OnJuly12th,2017,SérgioMorosentencedformerpresidentLuizInácioLuladaSilvatonineyearsandsixmonthsinprison,imposedhimafineandalsoruledthe19-yearsuspensionofhiseligibilitytoholdanypublicofficeortoactas“director,boardmemberormanageroflegalpersons”, as indicated in Art. 9 of Law no. 9.613/1998. Furthermore, he determined theconfiscation of apartment 164-A of the apartment block Solaris in Guarujá, considered aproductofcorruptionandmoneylaundering,andsettledthesumof16,000,000.00(sixteenmillions) Reais for the “reparation of the damages arising out of the crimes”. The judgedecidedthattherewasnotsufficientproofofcriminalevidenceofcorruptiononthesubjectofstorage,albeit“irregular”,ofobjectsfromthepresidentialarchive.Regardingthischargehe declared that there was not “much controversy about the facts, only about theirinterpretation”(item926ofthesentence).

In order to accept the narrative of the federal prosecution in its main points, the judgesupportedhisargumentationonthestatementsofoneofthecodefendants,JoséAldemárioPinheiro Filho, also known as Leo Pinheiro, former president of the OAS Group. It is hisstatementwhichsupports theaccusatorypleading.Allotherelements–anassemblageofscatteredfragments,subjectiveimpressions,smallbitsandpiecesovererasedspots,aswellasdetailswhich,ontheirown,wouldnothavetheeffectofindicatingasingleandconclusivewayamongotherpossibleways–begintomakesenseinthelightofLeoPinheiro’struth.His“confession” is the threadwhich orients thewhole intrigue. The proof, “preexistent” andallegedly“independent”fromthecodefendant’scollaboration,a“documentalproofcollectedinpreliminaryproceedingsof searchandseizure” (item246of thesentence), isnotmuch

* Assistant professor of Criminal Law and Criminology at the Law School of the University of Brasília –UniversidadedeBrasília(UnB)

21

morethanasetofconfusedandimprecisefindingswithoutanymajorevidencingforce–wereitnotforthecodefendant’sstatements.ThetruthofLeoPinheirowasfundamentalnotonlyforconvictingformerpresidentLula,butalsoforacquittinghimofanothercorruptioncharge,namely,theonewhichthefederalprosecutionofficerelatedtothestorageofthepresidentialarchive. Twoother codefendants, employees ofOAS, the engineer Paulo RobertoValenteGordilhoandthearchitectRobertoMoreiraFerreira,werealsoacquittedofcharges,basedonPinheiro’sstatements–bothwereonlychargedofmoneylaundering.

Noothercollaborator–ordenunciator–affirmedsoclearlyandincisivelytheknowledgeandparticipationof formerpresident Lula concerning the “Petrobras corruption scheme”. It isPinheirowhosaidthattherehadbeena“corruptionagreementwhosespecificbeneficiary”wasLuizInácioLuladaSilva.Accordingtohim,thisagreementwasnotsetinmoney,butwas“materialized”inthetriplexapartmentanditsrenovations.Inwhichformthisapartmenthadbeen destined to the defendant and what exactly would have been this alleged benefit(withouttheeffectiveincorporationoftheobjectintothepatrimonyofthedefendant)areimportantquestionsfortheclassificationofthecorruptionoffensewhichwerenotconsideredbythejudgeandmuchlessansweredbythecollaborator.

Nevertheless,noneofthesequestioningshasanyutility,giventheversionthattherealestatewas “assigned” in a “surreptitious”manner and that the “formal ownership of the objectremainedwiththeOASGroup”.Thus,itisexactlythefactthattheapartmentisnotapropertyofthedefendantwhichwouldprovetheintentof“concealment”and“dissimulation”ofthecrime.Itisreallyastrangebenefitwhichconsistsinan“assignment”–nevertakenintoeffect–ofsomethingdifferent(whatwouldthatbe?)fromtheownershipofarealestatewhichwasnotevenoccupiedbythedefendant.

According to Sérgio Moro, the credit given to Pinheiro’s statements stems from theircorrespondence with the “vast documental proof” collected – that aforementionedassemblageofconfusefindings.Inthesentence,thecodefendantistreatedasacollaborator:

Consideringhismanifestintentiontocollaboratewedonotseeforwhichreasonhewouldadmitonecorruptionoffenseandwoulddenytheother.IfheaimedatgivingfalsestatementstohisownadvantageaswellastotheadvantageofformerpresidentLuizInácioLuladaSilva,hewouldhavedeniedbothcrimes.Ifhisintentionwereonlytoobtainlegalbenefitsfromthefalsestatements,hewouldhaveconfessedbothcrimes(item936).

InspiteofthefirmopinionsofjudgeMoro,thereisonlyonesurething:LuizInácioLuladaSilva is not, and never was, owner, possessor or usufructuary of any apartment of theapartmentblockSolarisinGuarujá.ThesentenceisstuffedwithexpressionsmeanttodefinetherelationshipbetweentheformerpresidentoftheRepublicofBrazilandtheGuarujárealestate,suchas“ownerinfact”,“beneficiary”,and“addressee”.Moreover,theterm“owner”isfrequentlyusedsimplylikethat,withoutanyarguments,asifthisconditionwouldexemptthejudgefromanalyzingtheadmissibleevidence.Passivecorruption,anoffensedescribedinArt.317oftheBrazilianCriminalCode,isonlyspecifiedifthepublicservant“solicits”,eventhroughmiddlemen,“receives”or“accepts”anundueadvantageforhisownbenefitorthebenefitofanotherperson,forcommittingoromittinganactinherenttohisorherfunction.Oneofthesethreehypothesesisexcluded–althoughnotexpressly–bythesentenceitself,namelythatof“receiving”.Andifitisevidentthathedidnotreceive–thereisnoproofofownership,possessionorusufructoftheapartment–,thenwhatisthedemonstrationofthefactthatformerpresidentLulawouldhave“solicited”or“accepted”?Theanswercomeswith

22

thestatementofLeoPinheiro(inallwhatwassaidandnotsaid,therealestatewouldhavebeenindirectlysolicited).So,whatwouldOAShavereceivedinturnforthissolicitedundueadvantage?AgainwehavetheanswerofPinheiro:OASpaiditbecausethiswasthe“marketrule”.Thejudge,however,foundabetterexplanation:“Since2006or2007”,thecompanybelonged to the “club” of thosewho “manipulated public bits by fraud” (item861 of thesentence).Betweenthecompany’sentryintothe“club”ofpublicbitsandthe“grant”ofarealestate for the benefit of the defendantwhich never took place, therewasmissing only abridge,alink,aconnection.Thisbridgewasconstructedbyusingelementswhichweremuchbeyondanythingtheanalysisoftheproofcouldallow:forjudgeMoro,LuizInácioLuladaSilvawas directly involved in the alleged “Petrobras corruption scheme”. And evenmore: thesentencestatesthata“misconduct”hadbeeneffectivelycommitted–andthisincreasedthecriminal sanction against the former president of the Republic of Brazil. Item 890 of thesentence isoneofthoseexcerptswhichbestexpresstheargumentationdevelopedbythefederaljudgeofCuritiba:

EvenintheperspectiveofformerpresidentLuizInácioLuladaSilva,hisactofappointmentofthePetrobrasdirectorswhowereinvolvedincorruptioncrimes,suchasPauloRobertoCostaandRenatoofSouzaDuque,aswellastheirmaintenanceintheiroffices,althoughawareoftheirinvolvementwithcollectingbribes,whichisthenaturalconclusion,duetohimbeingalsooneofthebeneficiariesofthecorruptionagreements,representsamisconduct.ItiscertainthatformerpresidentLuizInácioLuladaSilvaprobablydidnothaveknowledgeofdetailsandneitherinvolvedhimselfdirectlyintheagreementsandcollectionofamounts,giventhathehad subordinates for suchpurposes; but havingbeenmaterially benefittedbypart of thebribery [sic, error in the original formulation] derived from the corruption agreement inPetrobrascontracts,evenbytheuseofageneralaccountofbribes,itisnotpossibletodenytheknowledgeofthecriminalscheme.

Thisdecision-makingnarrativeobviouslyrevealsthattheconclusionisbuiltonasequenceofsuppositionswhichfilledinthemanygapsnotresolvedbytheevidencecorpus(“itisanaturalconclusion”, “it is certain that”, “probably”, etc.). The higher the number of gaps in theconvictingsentence,theloweristhecertaintyaboutthefacts.Thus,ifaquestioncangetmorethanoneanswerofthesamelogicorverisimilitude,noneoftheseanswerscanbeconsideredsufficient for the level of certainty which is necessary for a conviction – it is exactly thisprinciplethatorientatesthegoldenruleindubioproreo.

Finally, the version of the facts adopted in the sentence – the same contained in theaccusatorypleading–makessensewithinthecontextofahypotheticaldirectparticipationofformer president Lula in a “complex scheme” whose execution would be divided amongseveralagents.The judgemakesa lotofreferencestothishypothesis,althoughtherehadbeennoformalprosecutionreferringtoapossibleconspiracy,participationofthedefendantinan“organizedcriminalgroup”or ina“criminalassociation”.Nevertheless, thesentenceincludes the fact of this participation, and some of the judicial conclusions show a directdependenceonthispremise,asituationthatimposesonthedefensetheburdentohandleit–anexampleofthisproblemistheaforementioneditem890.

Theseareonlysomeinitialimpressionsgatheredfromthereadingoftheconvictingsentence.Thejudgegivestheimpressionthathehasacasetowin.Maybehereallybelievesthatthejudiciary system has the most expertise to fight corruption. With the support of themainstreammedia,hepresentedhimselfinthepublicspaceinamannerthatshowsthisidea.Hebecameakindofheroofthe“fightagainstcorruption”,anexpressionthatoriginatesfrom

23

thevocabularyofpenalpopulismandisapoliticalweaponofthepunishmentefficiency.HecertainlybelievesthatformerpresidentLulaisthe“headofthePetrobrascorruptionscheme”,inthewayitwasstatedinthatPowerpointpresentationof2016.Itistruethatthejudiciaryhasan important task to fulfill in the fieldof crime repression,but it is also true that thismissioncannotandmaynotbeachievedatanyprice.Oneofthemostimportantconquestsoftheoccidentalcivilizationistherationalityoftherulesandprincipleswhichorientatethedecision-makingofthejudgesandputlimitstothestate’spunitivepower.Wearewitnessinga seriousanddelicatepoliticalmoment inwhich the systemof rulesandprinciplesof thedemocraticconstitutionalstateisputtothetest,andthereforeitisdesirableandexpectedthatthejudicialauthoritiesdonotsuccumbtothetemptationtomakejusticebysacrificingthis system. From now on, it is up to the Court of Appeals to decide the appeals of theprosecutionandofthedefense.

24

ThedueprocessoflawisunderthreatinBrazil:jurisprudenceoftheInter-AmericanCourtofHumanRightsuponanalyzingthesentencethatfoundLulaandothers

guilty

CarolProner*GiseleRicobom**

Theunsurpassabledueprocessoflaw

Amyriad of normsmake sure the due process of law complieswith InternationalHumanRights. Suchnorms canbe construedas a limit to the Statewhen facedwith theneed toguaranteefairtrialasahumanright.Moreover, it isastructuringprinciple,aprerrequiredprinciplecontainingotherprinciplesequallyneededtomakesurethedefendantisgrantedfull right to defense and adversary system against legitimate state violence and punitivepower.

BeforeanalyzingthedueprocessinlightofjurisprudenceoftheInter-AmericanSystem,whichis thescopeof thisarticle, it is important tohighlightsomethingthatmustbeunderstoodpreviouslyinordertorelatethesupranationallawsystemtothesentencethathasconvictedformerPresidentLuizInácioLuladaSilvainthecaseknownasGuarujáTriplex:repeatedlynotabidingtothemostelementaryconstitutiveprinciplesofwhatcanberegardedasafairtrial.

Thelackofcompliancewiththeguaranteesofthedueprocessoflawiscross-sectionalinallthe stages of the process before reaching the verdict in the lawsuit against the formerPresident;uponreachingsuchverdict,itissurprisingtonoticethatthejudgeadmitscarryingoutproceduresinaveryparticularway,whichisjustifiedasfightingabiggerevil,“fightingagainstcorruption”,“fightingagainstsystemiccorruption”,“fightingagainstthesystemicactsofcorruptionandmoneylaunderinginPetrobrascontracts”.

Thus,aseriousissuepertainingtoourcurrentcriminaljusticesystemisunveiledindisputesinvolvinghumanrightsandcriminalityinwhichafalsedilemmabetweenthedueprocessoflawandcrimecontrolarises,ashighlightedby the former Inter-AmericanCourtofHumanRights Justice, SérgioGarcía Ramírez5.On the onehand,wedealwith the efficacy of thecriminaljusticesystem,whichisconstruedasasystemforcrimecontrol;and,ontheotherhand,proceduralguarantees,individualguarantees,thefullrighttodefense,thepresumptionofinnocence,theadversarysystem,andsomanyotherinstrumentsofguaranteeregardedasbarrierstotheinvestigatoryefficacyofinfringementsandtheirplaintiffs.

Onthesentence,thefalsepolarizationbetweenindividualrightsandsociety’srightsisclear–corruption as a systemic evil that affects us all – gives rise to the vile justification forexceptionaluseoflaw,oftentimescausingsuspensionofalawormerenoncompliancewiththelaw,andmanytimes,crossingcomprehensivelegislation,takingratherunusualmeansto

*PhDonRights,ProfessorattheNationalLawSchool,atRiodeJaneiroFederalUniversity,andLatinAmericaDirectoratInstitutoJoaquínHerreraFlores.**PhDonRights,ProfessorattheInternationalRelationsProgramattheFederalUniversityofLatinAmericanIntegration.Translatedby:RaneSouza5Mexican Justice, formerPresidentof the Inter-AmericanCourtofHumanRights.Ramírez, SergioGarcía.Eldebidoprocesso,EditoraPorrúa,Argentina,2012.p.7.

25

intendedends,or,asthejudgehimselfwouldputit,“justifyinginvestigationactionsalwaysbasedonthelaw,however,oncomprehensivelaw”(item81onthesentence).

Inotherwords,andmakingreferencetoacategoryofhumanrightsphilosophystudiedbyFranzHinkelammert,thereisanideologicalinversionofrights:violatingindividualrightsandguaranteesofthosewho–potentially–couldviolatehumanrights(onthegroundsthatthosepeopleareprobablycorrupt).Todoso,thejudgetakesamonocrat-likedecisionofwhatthebiggerevil isandwhichrightsaretobeviolatedindubioprosocietatisandoverlooksdulyfurnishedevidence,aspointedoutinotherarticlesinthisbook.Suchsituationissomekindoflawfareonbehalfofthefightagainstsystemiccorruption,asthedefendant’slawyershaveprovedcountlesstimes.

The case goes beyond the former President himself, although one could not ignore theinfluenceofhispoliticalandbiographicpersonalityonthejudgeandplaintiffsfromthePublicProsecutor’sOffices.Thecasegoesbeyondthatandrepresentsagreatdangertotheultimatefundamentofthedueprocessoflaw,theultimaratiooflegitimacyoftheruleoflawitself.TheGerman doctrine regards fair trial/faires Verfahren as the supreme principle, for thatreason, it is inseparable from the principle of the democratic state based on the rule oflaw/Rechtssaatprinczip,ofconstitutionalnatureshapingpenalprocedurallaw.6

SettinglimitstotheState,bydemandingitdutifullyconductsthedueprocessoflawisameansto control the reasonability of laws and guarantee the applicability of essential individualrights against thewill of the public power. It is some kind of defense against the acts ofauthorityuponusinglegality.Thus,itiseasytorealizethateveninthelayperceptionoflaw,that enforcing the law is not enough for the trial to be regarded as a fair one, beforeconsideringthose,itisimportanttoencompassasetofelementsandmaterialcriteria,asidefromtherequiredlegalsupportthatentailproceduralissues,thedullform,fulldefense,lawfulevidence, presumption of innocence, the adversary system, no denial of rights, qualitycharacteristicsbasedonthesenseofwhatis“fair”,and“appropriate”,ofwhatisappropriateandisclosertothecriteriaofjustice,humanity,truth,andreason.

Exceptionscannotbemadeasregardsthesetofprinciples;otherwisesuchexceptionscouldannulthetrialanddamagetheprospectsofreachingafairandvalidsentence.Theoppositeofthat,asjudgeSérgioMoroseemstoprefer,shallneverbearlegitimacy,astheendsshallneverjustifythemeans.Thejudge,whoclaimstobeimpartialanduninterested,uses20%ofthe sentence to defense himself from the impartiality accusations filed by all of thedefendants.Suchfactturnsthesentenceintoarathereccentricone.Suchamutantjudge,oftentimesresemblinganaccusingjudge,others,beingmistakenforadefendantwhofeelsguilty for poorly conducting the proceedings, should have been careful to assure thelegitimacyofthemeans,proceedings,andintegrityoftheprocessineverysingledetail,duetothepotentialrepercussionofthecaseandthesocialandpublicresponsibilitiesthatstemfromaprocessagainstagreatpopularleaderwho,aspreviouslystated,drawscrowdswhobelieveheisinnocent.

Intimesofpoliticalpolarization,economiccrisis,andtheweakeningofStateinstitutions,itisfundamentaltoreinforcevehementlytheneedtopreserveproceduralserenityincasessuchasthis,whichwillnecessarilyhaveanimpactonthepoliticalfutureofthecountryandonthejurisprudentialfateofsimilarcases,althoughinothersperhapsnotsomuch.Ifitistruethat

6BustamanteAlarcón,Reynaldo,Derechosfundamentalesyprocesojusto,Lima,ARAEditores,2001,p.183.

26

punitivism,exceptionality and selectivity are the rule for thousandsofpeople indaily life,affectingtheblackandunder-schooledyouth7,itisalsotruethattheeffectofinstitutionalizedexceptionwillnotbringabetterdestinytotheseexcludedindividuals.Itisbettertoincreasethelegalequalityofsomanydisadvantagedanddiscriminatedcitizens.

Havingpassedoverthreeyearssinceitsstart,OperationCarwashhasgraduallylostitsinitialaltruisticpurposeandhasbecomeapoliticizedjurisdictionalprovisionmarkedbyManicheandisputesandbythepoliticalandmediamanipulation,withtheprosecutionplayingastrange"messianic"role,asthecourtisdrivenbyaneedtolegitimizeandsupportactionsinfaceofthepublicopinion, inabsoluteprejudice todueprocess,ascanbeseen in theconviction,especiallywithregardtothejudge’simpartialityandthespectacle’scriminallaw.

II.JurisprudenceinSentenceAnalysis

Theanalysisof thisprinciple isbasedona significantnumberof contentiousandadvisorycasesoftheInter-AmericanCourtofHumanRights.Thedueprocessoflaw,initssubstantialsense,referstothereasonablenessandjusticeoflawsasawayofcontainingthewillofthelegislativeandexecutivepowers.Inanadjectivesense,dueprocess"thatconstitutesalimitto state activity, refers to a set of requirements thatmust be observed in the proceduralinstancessothatpeopleareabletodefendtheirrightsbeforeanyactofStatethatcanaffectthem”.8Insum,asalreadystated,ittranslatesastherighttoafairtrial.

TheAmericanConventiononHumanRightsprovidesforsuchaguaranteeinArticle8–rightsof defense, appeal, presumption of innocence, among others. More specifically for thepurposeofthisanalysis,itstatesthat"Everyonehastherighttobeheard,withdueguaranteesandwithin a reasonable time,bya competent, independent, and impartial judgeor courtpreviouslyestablishedbylaw,intheinvestigationofanycriminalchargeagainstthem".

ImpartialitywasthesubjectofadecisionoftheInter-AmericanCourtofHumanRightsinthecaseofPalamaraIribarneversusChile:

TheCourtconsidersthattherighttobetriedbyanimpartialjudgeorcourtisafundamentalguaranteeofdueprocess.Thatis,itmustbeguaranteedthatthejudgeorcourtintheexerciseoftheirfunctionhavetheutmostobjectivitytorulethetrial.Likewise,theindependenceofthejudiciaryinfaceofotherStatepowersisessentialfortheexerciseofthejudicialfunction196.

Theimpartialityofthecourtimpliesthatitsmembersdonothaveadirectinterest,position,orpreferenceforoneofthepartiesandthattheyarenotinvolvedincontroversy.

Thejudgeorcourtmustbeseparatedfromacasesubmittedtotheirknowledgewhenthereisanyreasonordoubtthatgoestothedetrimentoftheintegrityofthecourtasanimpartialbody.Inordertosafeguardtheadministrationofjustice,itshouldbeensuredthatthejudge

740%ofBraziliandetaineesareservingprovisionalarrest,inabsolutenon-compliancewiththebasicprinciplesofdueprocessoflaw.AccordingtodatafromtheNationalSurveyofPenitentiaryInformation(Infopen),55%arebetween18and29yearsold,61.6%areblackand75.08%haveonlycompletedelementaryeducation.Availableat <http://www.justica.gov.br/noticias/mj-divulgara-novo-relatorio-do-infopen-nesta-terca-feira/relatorio-depen-versao-web.pdf>Accessed18July2017.8 Also known as duematerial or substantial process and formal or procedural, respectively. Ibid., p.22. AstranslatedintoBrazilianPortuguesebytheauthors.

27

isfreefromallprejudiceandthattherearenosignsthatcouldcastdoubtontheexerciseofjurisdictionalfunctions.9

Alongthesamelines,inthecaseofApitzBarberaetal.(FirstAdministrativeLitigationCourt)versus Venezuela, the Court considered that "impartiality requires that the judge whointervenes in a particular dispute approaches the facts of the case without subjectiveprejudices, inadditiontoofferingsufficientguaranteesofanobjectivenaturetoallowthedismissalofanydoubtthattheindividualorthecommunitymayhaveinrespecttolackofimpartiality”.10

Moreover, the European Court of Human Rights considers that personal and subjectiveimpartialityispresumed,unlessthereisevidencetothecontrary.Forthecourt,"theso-calledobjectivetestistodeterminewhetherthequestionedjudgeprovidedconvincingevidencetoeliminatelegitimatefearsorwell-foundedsuspicionsofbiasinhis/herperson.Thisisbecausethe judgemustappearasactingwithoutbeingsubjectto influence, inducement,pressure,threatorinterference,directorindirect,butonlyandexclusivelyaccordingto-andmovedby-theLaw."11

Whatisevidentfromthereadingofthecondemnatorysentenceunderanalysisisapreviouslydefensive narrative about the judge's partiality. The rhetorical construction aimed atdisqualifyingthebehaviorof thedefense,bytheallegedattacksat the judge,even ifsuchattackshadinfactoccurred,shouldhavebeenmoreobjectivelydevelopedattrial,whichwasnotthecase.Thereiterateddiversionargumentisdisrespectfulanddoesnotcorrespondtothequalityoftheexpecteddecision,ascanbeseenintheexamplebelow(withnumericalreferencetothesentenceitems):

Item 57. Doubts about this judge’s impartiality are mere diversions and althoughunderstandableasadefensestrategy,suchquestionsaredeplorablesincetheyfindnofactualbasis and do not present any minimally consistent arguments, as already found by theHonorableFederalRegionalCourt–4thRegion.

Furthermore,therehasbeenahabitofpointingouttheDefense’slackofcivility,aswellasitsalleged attack at the judge. It should be noted that chapter II of the sentence is entirelydesigned toexpressivelypresent theso-calledoffensiveanddisrespectfulmomentsof thedefendant'slawyers.Thus,ifitisthejudge’sdutyto"150.Decidetheaccused’sresponsibilitybasedsolelyinthelawandonevidence,renderingtheproceduralbehavioroftheaccused’sdefenders as irrelevant", as the judge himself acknowledges, the extensive behavioraldescriptionpreciselyrevealsthatthejudgeengagedinthiscontroversy,losingtheobjectiveabilityofimpartialjudgment.

Atanotherpointinthesentence,thejudge’spartialitybecomesevenmoreevidentwhenhisopinionoftheformerpresident'sgovernmentadministrationismentioned:

Item 793. The merit of former President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva’s government instrengthening controlmechanisms of corruption crimesmust be acknowledged, includingmeasuresofpreventionandrepression,andespeciallyconsideringtheinvestmentsmadeintheFederalPoliceduringhisfirstterm,aswellasthereinforcementoftheFederalInspector

9Availableat<http://www.corteidh.or.cr/docs/casos/articulos/seriec_135_esp.pdf>.Accessed18July2017.10Availableat<http://www.corteidh.or.cr/docs/casos/articulos/seriec_182_esp.pdf>Accessed18July2017.11Idem.

28

GeneralOffice,andthepreservationoftheFederalPublicProsecutionOffice’sindependence,seen in the choice ofAttorneyGeneral,whichwasmade according to a list voted amongmembersoftheinstitution.

Item794.Itistruethatthisinitiativeisnotexclusivelypresidential,sincefacingcorruptionisa consequence of democracy maturation; nevertheless, the merit of political leadershipcannotbeignored.

Item795.Somecrucialmeasures,however,havebeenleftaside,suchasthenecessarychangeintherequirementofafinalandbindingcriminalconvictionforsentencecommencement,which is fundamental for the effectiveness of criminal justice, and which only came toexistence as per jurisprudence of the Honorable Federal Supreme Court (in HC 126,292,adjudicatedon02/17/2016,andinappeals43and44,adjudicatedon05/10/2016).12

Moreover:

Item959.Combiningthisbehaviorwiththecasesofguidingthirdpartiestodestroyevidence,onemightevenconsiderissuingapreventivearrestwarrantforformerPresidentLuizInácioLuladaSilva.

Item960.However,consideringthattheprecautionarycustodyofaformerPresidentoftheRepublic involves certain traumas, it is prudently recommended to await for the Court ofAppeal’s judgmentbeforeactingon theconsequencesparticular to theconviction.Hence,formerPresidentLuizInácioLuladaSilvawillbeabletofilehisappealinfreedom.

Inthesepassages,itisclear,onceagain,thatthejudge’sobjectivenaturewasnotpreserved.Whatisthepurposeofgivinganopiniononpublicpoliciesinthecourseofacriminalprocess,policiesthatdonotcontributetoclarifyingthecase,inadditiontoappointingextrameasuresthatcouldhavebeenobjectofconstitutionalamendment?

Similarly, the motivation for the precautionary arrest based on prudence and the vagueconceptionof"certaintraumas"issymptomaticofadecisionthatwasnotbasedexclusivelyonthelaw,asindicatedinthejurisprudenceoftheInter-AmericanCourt.

Finally, thenumerouspublicmanifestations in themediareveala truepartisanshiponthejudge’s part in regards to matters of national politics, which can be seen in severalpronouncements and interviews outside the records of the criminal process, in a truejurisdictional spectacle that reinforces, amplifies and fosters all the fears and the justifiedsuspicionsofhisbias.Indeed,inanoperationofthismagnitude,whichhasalteredthecourseofthepoliticalandjuridicalhistoryofthecountry,thejudge’sprotagonismiscrucial.

PerhapsonedaythisandothercasesinwhichtheformerPresidentisadefendantwillcometorelyon jurisprudenceconsolidated inthe inter-Americansystem,sothat justice istobedone.Wehope,however, that it isnotnecessaryand that thedulyatonementsbemadeshortly,inacourtoflaw,acquittingthedefendantandrestoringthejudiciarypowerintheroleofadministratoranddistributorofjusticewithintheparametersofdemocracyandtheruleoflaw.

12Availableat<http://conteudo.imguol.com.br/c/noticias/pdf/sentenca_lula.pdf>Accessed18July2017

29

Thecriminallawofthe(Political)Enemy

CharlotthBack*

TheverdictbyJudgeSérgioMoro,whosentencedformerPresidentLulatonineyearsandsixmonthsinprisonforalleged(andunproven)illicitenrichment,becauseofallegedcorruptionpractice,isaclearexampleofuseoftheEnemyCriminalLawdoctrine-withthepurposeof"fightingcorruption inBrazil".Thisdoctrinewascreated inthe1980sbytheGermanjuristGuntherJakobs,butacquiredpoliticalinfluenceunderGeorgeW.Bush'sadministrationaftertheSeptember11attacksandespeciallyduringUSinvasionsofAfghanistanandIraq.

Underargumentsofnationalsecurity,self-defense,orcounter-terrorism-theproclaimedevilofthetwenty-firstcentury-certainpeople,fromthemomenttheyareregardedasenemiesof the society or the State, would not hold guarantees and criminal protections that areassured to all individuals. In the nameof the “defense of society”, theminimum criminalguaranteesestablishedbytheconstitutionsandinternationalinstrumentsfortheprotectionofhumanrights,suchasthepresumptionofinnocence,theprohibitionofconvictionwithoutevidence,theprincipleoflegality,theneutralityofthejudge,theprohibitionoftorture,aswellastheimpedimentofobtainingevidencethroughillicitmeans,arenotappliedtothoseproclaimed"enemiesofsociety".

JakobsproposestodistinguishbetweentheCitizenCriminalLaw,whichischaracterizedbythemaintenanceofnorms,criminalguarantees,andlimitstothepowerofpunishmentandinvestigationoftheState,andtheEnemyCriminalLaw,totallyorientedtocombatthesocial"dangers",whichallowsanyavailablemeans, licitornot, tobeused topunish thosenon-citizens.AccordingtoJakobs,itisnotamatterofcontrastingtwoisolatedspheresofcriminallaw,butdescribingtwopolesofoneworld,andmakingtwooppositetendenciesvisibleinasinglelegal-penalcontext.

Inthiscontext,thereistheCitizenCriminalLaw,whosetaskistoguaranteethevalidityofthenormasanexpressionofacertainsociety,andtheEnemyCriminalLaw,whichhasthemissionofeliminatingdangers. Inaddition, intheEnemyCriminalLaw,there isarealhuntfortheauthorofanallegedoffense,sincetheagentispunishedforhisidentity,hischaracteristics,andhispersonality.Here,thepunishmentisimposedupontheauthor,notuponthecriminalconductitself.Thus,thethreatposedbytheagentisreproached,nottheguiltoftheagent.Theapplicationof theEnemyCriminalLawmeanssuspending"certainnorms" for"certainpeople",whichisalwaysjustifiedbytheneedtoprotect"goodmen",thesocietyortheStateagainstcertaincollectivethreats.

IntheaftermathofSeptember11,terrorismwasprosecutedunderthelawsofwar,andthoseaccusedofterrorismwereconsideredprisonersofwar.TheguarantorandlimitingsenseofpunitivepowersoftheState,assuredbytheCriminalLaw,givesrisetoapersecution,inwhichthelawsbecomelawsofcombat,asituationsimilartothosethatoccurredinfascistregimes.Individuals criminally prosecuted areno longerprotectedby the constitutionorminimumhumanrightsprinciples.Thoseconsideredtobeoffendersorcontrarytoorderarenotsubject

* Visiting researcher at the Social Studies Center of theUniversity of Coimbra (Portugal); Legal and PoliticalScienceDoctorateStudentatUniversityPablodeOlavide(Spain).

30

tothelaw-theyareoppressedbythelaw.Lawenforcementbecomes,ratherthanprotective,combativeandusedforthepurposeofeliminating"enemyofsociety".

Althoughthisdoctrineiscontroversialandsubjecttocriticism,realityshowsthat,infact,theEnemyCriminalLawhasbeensystematicallyappliedincontextsofwar-asinthewarinIraq-, and under the justification of national security - such as in Guantanamo Bay DetentionCenter. This prison is an unequivocal example of jurisdiction for "irregular combatants" -suspectedofterrorism-whichallowsallkindsofexceptionstotheprinciplesofconstitutionalcriminalprosecution.Hence,there issuspensionofminimumhumanrights inthenameofcombatingterrorismandprotectingnationalsecurity.

In LatinAmerican states,which are not targeted by terrorism, creating the enemymeansresumingtheprocessofdemonizingtheLeftandcriminalizingsocialmovements.Thenewcoupsagainstdemocracy,nowdisguisedas legal-parliamentarycoups,areasymptomofanewoffensiveagainstsocialgains.Inbothcases,thereisanideologicalinversionoftheLawthatallowsforhumanrightstobetaintedinsteadofprotectingthem.

IntheBraziliancontext,theEnemyCriminalLawhasbeenusedintheself-proclaimedmissionoftheJudiciaryinthe"fightagainstcorruption".Lulaandotherleft-wingpoliticiansarebeingtreated as real enemies and not as citizens accused in a criminal process; that is, thedefendantsherearenotsubjectsoflaw,oreventargetsoflegalprotection.Theyare,infact,objectsofcoercion,deprivedofrightsandtheminimumlegalprotectiontowhichallhumanbeingsareentitled,eventhoseinvestigatedforcrimes.ItisimportanttokeepinmindthatusingtheEnemyCriminalLawinBrazilisnotaninnovationimplementedbyJudgeMoro,since,in police operations inside the poorest communities and in the outskirts of big cities, thecommon rule is to treat both criminals and the population at large as if theywere socialenemies.

Firstly, theplainuseof theEnemyCriminal Law in the sentenceof JudgeMoro is clear inseveralmoments.Firstofall,therearenogroundsforstartinganinvestigationagainstLula.ItseemsthatLulaisbeinginvestigatedbecauseofhispoliticalidentityandhispast.Thepurposeoftheinvestigationistopunishtheagent'spossibledanger,nothisguilt.Inthefinalpartofthesentence,inwhichMoroconsidersLula'spositiontobeanaggravatingcircumstanceand,therefore, justificationforextendinghissentenceperiod,thejudge,onceagain,appealstothepersonrepresentedbytheagent,andnottocircumstancesofconduct,inordertoenforcethe Criminal Law. It is important to highlight that it is not a feasible or even a potentialaggravatingfactorintheBrazilianCriminalLaw.

Secondly, the trial conductedbySérgioMoro ispartialand tended towardsconvicting thedefendant, regardlessofanyconcreteevidence, for reasons thatareactuallypolitical,notlegal.Thisaspect iscorroboratedbythe judge'sownconduct,whorepeatedlygoestothemedia to make statements against the defendant, attends events hosted by right-wingpoliticalpartiesandisfrequentlyandpubliclyaccompaniedbypoliticalopponentsinterestedindestroyingtheformerPresident’spoliticalimage.Inaddition,thejudgespendsasignificantpartofthesentencecriticizingLula´sdefensestrategy,whichallegessuspicionandpartialityoftheJudgment.TheformerPresidenthaseveryrighttodefendhimselfandtodenouncewhatheconsiderstobeanunjust,partial,andgroundlessprocess.Lula'sdefensecannotbecriticizedorprevented fromresorting to thiskindofcriticism, letalonebe reproached forinvokinghisdefensethesissimplybecausethejudgeconsidersthatthoseargumentsattackhismoralauthorityorhisprestigeasajudge.

31

Thirdly,althoughtheLavaJatoOperationhassomesocialappealduetotheso-called"fightagainstcorruption"mission,thelegalmethodsthathavebeenused,especiallyasregardstocriminal investigation, are extremely questionable in light of our Constitution and theminimumguaranteesofInternationalLawdueprocess.Obtainingapleabargainbymeansofharassment, considering a disqualified plea bargain (by the Federal Public Prosecutor -responsible for the prosecution) in the sentence, tapping telephones in a law offices,disclosingauditsobtainedillegally,asinthecaseoftheconversationbetweenLulaandthenPresidentDilma,andpubliclyexposingtheaccused,allofthoseconstituteaseriesofclearlyillegalconducts.Allthoseactionssupportthe"conviction"ofthejudgetocondemnformerPresidentLula.

However,noevidence, I repeat,no conclusiveevidencewas furnished in the judgment tojustifytheconviction-northepropertypublicdeed,which is inthenameofthecompanyOAS;northefiduciaryassignmentagreement,whichwassignedbetweenCaixaEconômicaand OAS, no document, no secret recording, no bank account abroad. In addition, theprosecutionwitnesseswereatnotimeabletodirectlyrelateeithertheformerPresidentorhiswifetotheobtainingillicitresourcesorpurchasingtheGuarujátriplex.

ItisclearthatthechangeinproceedingrulesrelatestotheuseoftheEnemyCriminalLaw.Oneofthepillarsofcriminallaw,andconsequentlyoneoftheguaranteesofcitizensagainstStateperversity,istheprinciplethatprosecutionshouldprovewhatwasallegedintheclaim.There is no possibility for criminally responsible people without a direct and relevantrelationshipbetweentheagentandtheaffectedjuridicalasset,thatis,withouttheexistenceofarobustandsufficientevidencetolinkthecrimetotheagent.Itmustbeestablishedthattherewasinfactunlawfulconduct,andthatsuchconductmaybeimputedtotheaccused;otherwise, there will be undue weakening of constitutional guarantees in the name ofcombatingcorruption,asifthatwasthegreatestevilinBraziliansociety.

Behinda supposedlydemocraticdiscourseanddefenseofpublicgoods isa covert judicialauthoritarianism, typical of State of Exception contexts and the application of the EnemyCriminalLaw.Inthelatter,authoritarianismbecomesmoreefficientbecauseitisdilutedanddisguisedwithinadiscursivelydemocraticproposal,which,forthisreason,cannotbeopposedtoanyotherargument,withoutbeingconsidereda"dangertogoodmen".

Accordingtothiscommon-sensediscourse,basedonthe ideologyof"socialdefense," it isfullypossibletomitigatefundamentalrightsandguarantees"forthebenefitofsociety."Thestark collaboration with the media, to create popular mobilization against Lula, and thevarious interviewsoftheprosecutorsoftheLavaJatoOperation,provethattheprocess isveryfarfromaproperlegalcriminalprocess;itisapoliticalcriminalprocessand,inthatsense,toleratesnon-compliancewithpropercriminalguarantees.

JudgeMoro'ssentenceisunequivocalindemonstratingitsmainobjective:touseallexistinglegalandillegalmeanstoconvicttheformerPresident–whoisregardedbyhimandbypartoftheJudiciaryasanenemythatmustbedefeatedandeliminated-,evenifitisnecessarytotarnishtheLaw,tomakeproceduralsafeguardsmoreflexible,andtochangeconstitutionalprinciples,thatis,toexplicitlyenforcetheEnemyCriminalLaw.

32

Lawfare(or,simply,War)

CristianeBrandão*

Theconcerns related tocriminal lawand itsprocedureshavecertainlybeenwellexploredherein, reflecting the technical contemplation provided by so many qualified specialists,academic colleagues and renowned jurists. Therefore,mydogmatic contribution,whetherrelatedtothetheoryoffinaldomainoffact,thedosimetryofpenalties,thecompetenceorthesystemofevidenceisexempt.

ThepointIwouldliketoemphasizerelatedtothecourt’sdecisionandtostimulatereflectionuponisrelatedtotherecurringuseofargumentstocounterthedefense'sclaimregardingtheobvious"lawfar".ThededicationofcountlesspagesofSérgioMoro'sdecisiondenyingsuchawarlikestate,withoutatleastproblematizingitsmeaningorexposingtheconceptofthistermadoptedbyCourtisthereforehighlighted.BasedontheFreudianpremise,negationhasmuchtotellus...(Freud,2014).

TheproposalIpresentis,therefore,tomapthefoundationsofferedbythejudge,inordertointerprettherhetoricusedthereinandtomeasurethepossibleimplicationsofthesupposedlyneutralspeechintheconstruction/conformationofapolitical-socialproject.

"Nothingequalstoalawfare"(orthesenseofdenial)

Theterm"lawfare"appearstentimesthroughoutthecourt’sdecision(items39,66,77,83,118,127,128,130,132and138).

Initially,withinthedecision’sopeningdescription:"TheDefenseofLuizInácioLuladaSilva,intheirfinalallegations(event937),sustainsthat:a)thattheformerPresidentissufferingfrompolitical persecution and is a victim of ’lawfare', 'with the support from traditionalmediasectors'"(p.7).

Inanattempttodeconstructthelawfare,SérgioMororeferstoproceduralmomentsinwhichheclaimstohaveactedinatechnicalandlegalmanner,emphasizingthat“theactsperformedby this court respected the regular exercise of its jurisdiction" (p.15). By quoting factualepisodesdeterminedbyhim - suchasbenchwarrants, searchesandseizures,breachesofconfidentiality, disclosure of audios - without even mentioning the allegations of theaccusation,hisspeechdisplaysanunconsciousembracingoftheLula-Moropolarizationsowellcarvedbythemediaandsowellassimilatedbydoxa.

At the same time as it assumes this defensive and trivial tone, the court has invoked thepleasures of "ownership of actions" for itself as an expression of its (judging) power,underlyingarepressedenjoyment.Inaprecisemanner,thedenialoflawfare:

Freuddemonstratestheimportanceofthemeaningofnegationinthepsychologicaloriginoftheintellectualfunctionofthejudgmentsince,bydenyingsomething,infact,thesubjectisaffirmingthatthereisarelationofmeaningthathewouldprefertorepress.Thisfunctionwasestablishedupontheexperienceofperception/satisfaction,andforFreudthisisnotapassiveprocess. Thus, the judgementsare constructed in theprocessof a subjective constitution,

*ProfessorofCriminalLawandCriminology-FND/UFRJ

33

originallyguidedbythepleasureprinciple,whichregulatestheinclusionornotofsomethingintheego,andalsobytheexperiencesofrepression.(Ripoll,2014,p.312).

In fact, denial and pleasure are intertwined. However, the function of judgment remainsstrongandismadepossible"bythefactthatthecreationofthesymbolofnegationallowsthethoughta firstdegreeof independence fromtheconsequencesof repressionand thusalsofromthecoercionofthepleasureprinciple"(Freud,2014,p.29)

Almostinatoneofimpatient13contempt,Mororesortstopersonalimpressionsinordertominimizethegravityofthebenchwarrant.Hedisregardsthehypothesisoflawfare14byusingtheassumptionofnormalityofthemeasuresinceitonlylastedafewhoursandthepresenceofalawyerwasguaranteed,aswellasthesafeguardtophysicalintegrityandtotherighttoremain silent (however,when is the guarantee of the presence of a Lawyer, the physicalintegrity and the right to remain silent no longer applicable to precautionary prisons ordisfigurement of lawfare?). The rhetoric around a photo legal language, from apsychoanalyticalpointofview,canonlyaimtohidethesubjectiveprocessofappropriationofscientismtoconcealtheforcefulnessofanargumentmadebyauthority:

Bydirectlyassociatingthesymbolofnegationwiththeproductionofprimarydrives,Freuddeconstructs a whole Cartesian rationality of thought and also the affirmation of anunquestioned truth secured by the parameters of classical logic. It opens a gap in thesupposedlyneutraledificeofscienceandin"well-formed"reasoning.(Ripoll,2014,312).

Thus,evenwhilerecognizingthebenchwarrantisentirelyquestionable,whileunderstandingthat the claims of those who suffer the search and apprehension, while agreeing to thepossibilityofquestioningtheauthorityofthecourt15,withoutconsideringasobjectionableorinappropriate the terms or language used by the Attorney General's Office at a pressconferenceinwhichLula's16imagewasattacked,MorofollowsonwithablindeyeofFreudiandenialtotrytoshowa"well-formed",uninjured,impartialscientificreasoning.Hehaseven

13Item66:“But,sincetheissueswereraised,somequestionsaboutthesejudicialdecisionswillbeconsidered,albeitbriefly,whichaccordingtothedefenseofformerPresidentLuizInácioLuladaSilva,representa"lawfare"againsthisclient."(P.15-myemphasis)14Item77:"Evenifonecanpossiblydisagreewiththemeasure,itmustbesaidthatconductingsomeoneforafewhours totestify,withthepresenceofa lawyer,absoluteprotectionofphysical integrityandtheright toremainsilent,isnotequivalenttopre-trialdetention,nordidittransformtheformerPresidentintoa"politicalprisoner."Nothinglike“lawfare".(P.16-myemphasis)15 Items: "82. Although the complaints of thosewho suffer the search are understandable, the fact is thathouseholdsearchesandseizuresareroutineinvestigativemeasuresinthedailyroutineofcriminalinvestigations.83.Nothingequivalenttoa"lawfare".118.Lastly,regardingthedecisionstakentocharacterizethe"lawfare"against former President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva, there is a record of lifting the secrecy on interceptionsauthorizedbythecourtdatedasof03/16/2016and03/17/2016.127.Thetelephoneinterceptionheldforlessthan30days in complex investigationsand the liftingof secrecyon thecontentof interceptions,even ifwequestiontheauthorityofthislastitem,isnothingequivalenttoa"lawfare".(Pp.17,20and23-myemphasis)16Items:"128.TheDefenceofLuizInácioLuladaSilvaalsoclaimsthatthe"lawfare"wouldbecharacterizedbythepressconferenceheldbytheAttorneysGeneralOfficeon09/14/2016,inwhichtheywouldhaveattackedtheimageoftheformerPresidentbyexplainingthecontentofthecomplaint.129.Onthisissue,thisCourthasalready rejected the exception of suspicion promoted by the Defence against the Attorneys General Officesubscribersofthecomplaintandparticipantsintheaforementionedpressconference,withacopyintheevent335. It is referred to therein. 130. Even if it is possible to criticize the form or language used in said pressconference,thishasnopracticaleffectforthepresentcriminalaction,becausewhatmattersistheproceduralpiecesproduced.131.Althoughitmaybeunderstoodthattheinterviewwasnotappropriate,itseemsfarfromcharacterizinga"lawfare"againsttheformerPresident."(P.23-myemphasis)

34

denied themostobvious support carriedoutby the traditional hegemonicmediaor theirinfluence on the news that has been published17. According to the court’s decision, in itsparagraph138,inessence,therefore,itismoreanattemptatdiversioninrelationtothemeritsoftheprosecutionandtopresenttheformerPresidentasavictimofanon-existent"lawfare".

But,afterall,whereisthewar?(ortheexceptionandthegeneralrule)

Iwillnotdedicatewordshereintoexploretheconceptsoflawfare(Werner,2010)orSLAPP(Pring andCanan, 1996), since I prefer to discuss thenotionofwar and thendrawa fewconclusions.

InthefamoustreatyOnWar,CarlvonClausewitzdemonstratesaclassicviewbasedonthedemonstrationofwarasanimpositionofviolencetoforcesomeonetodohiswill.War,then,isnotonly"apoliticalact,butatrueinstrumentofpolitics,itscontinuationbyothermeans"(apudFoucault,1999,22,no.9).Italsoaimsatacertainpeacelinkedtothevictoryofoneofthebelligerents,afterthebloodshedcausedbytheconflictofinterestsbetweentheparties(Passos,2005).

However, inHannahArendt'sperceptive insight intoOnViolence (2001),wehavealreadynoticedtheannouncementofanepistemologicalturnaround.TheauthordrawsattentiontothefactthatpeacedidnotfollowtheSecondWorldWar,theoppositewasestablishedbytheColdWarandanentirestructureofindustrial-militarywork.Thelogicofthepotentialityofthe fulfilment of war infiltrated in society’s composition supports and structures theInstitutions:

Tospeakof"thepriorityofthepotentialtomakewarasthemainstructuringforceinsociety,"toreasonthat"economicsystems,politicalphilosophiesandcorporajurisserveandenlargethewarsystem,nottheotherwayaround”todeterminethat“waritselfisthebasicsocialsysteminwhichothersecondarymannersofsocialorganizationconflictorconspire"-allthissounds farmoreplausible than theXIX century formulasof EngelsorClausewitz. (Arendt,2001,p.17)

Actually,thesocialmechanismsandinstitutionsgainconformitytoacertainmodusoperandiof constant struggle, in which power appears as a system of domination. Relations andapparatusofpowerareconstitutedbythislogicofwar-domination-subjection,inwhichthesubjectmust fit intoacertainstandardofnormality (standardwhich isconstructedbythetruthdeterminedbytheknowingpower).

WecannotavoidquotingFoucaultonthispointandoneofthemanyquestionsthatstirshis(our)concerns:"underpeace,order,wealth,authority,underthecalmorderofsubordination,undertheState,undertheapparatusoftheState,underthelaws,etc.,mustweunderstandand rediscover a kind of primitive and permanent war?"(1999, 53). Reversing, therefore,Clausewitz's proposition, Foucault goes on to say that "politics is war continued by othermeans" (1999,pp.22and55).Consequently,war is intrinsictotherelationsofpowerandconstantly used to destroy the political enemy,whether through the science of biopower

17Items:"132.Finally,evenontheso-called"lawfare",itwouldalsostemfromthe"instrumentalizationofthemedia"orwouldbeheld"withthesupportoftraditionalmediasectors."(...)135.Inanycase,thisCourtdoesnotcontrolanddoesnotintendtocontrolthepress,nordoesithaveanyinfluenceonwhatitpublishes.”(p.23)

35

(whichjustifiesracism,forexample),orthroughthe(equallytechnical)methodsofsubjectionofthepeopleconsideredascrazy,abnormal,different,delinquent.

Inagreementherewiththephilosopher,themethodicallineofanalysisofpowermustincludethedisciplinarysystem.Thus, froma triplepointofview, it isnecessary to investigate thetechniques,heterogeneityoftechniquesandtheireffectsofsubjection.TheinstrumentsofCriminalLaw,CriminalProcedure,CriminologyandCriminalPolitics,whichareintegratedwiththeapparatusesofpunitivecontrol,areshiftingtheirgaze,theirweaponsandtheircannonstothe"disorders"causedbythe"different":

It is not so much a matter of making territorial conquests, and often even of economicconquests;itisamatterofshapingtheminds,thespirits,thesouls,thesubjectivitiesofothers,oftheenemies.Ifweputreligious,artisticandsocialpracticesingeneralundertheumbrellaofthewordculture,wearefacingculturalwars.Andifweputallthepracticesofxenophobia,sexism,ethnocentrism, intoleranceofdifference,etc.underthequalificationofracism,wewillfindaconnectionwithFoucault,whenhesaysthattheexpressivemajorityofthewarsofthetwentiethcentury-andIallowmyselftoextendthemtoThe21stcentury-areracistwars.(Veiga-Neto,2014,p.3).

Andwhatifweplacealltheexerciseofactswhicharerightfullytobeperformedbythecourtsunder a legal qualification, supported (or not) by law, supported (or not) by the FederalConstitution,butinanycase,showintolerancetodifferencesandtothe"disorders"provokedbythese"different"individuals,whatwarwouldwebefacing?

Interpretingthemasactsperformedintheregularexerciseoftheirjurisdiction,thereforeasnormalacts,thereisanassumptionofnormalityistheexceptiontransformedintothegeneralrule, likeasymptomof thedefendant's treatmentasanenemy(Jakobs,2007).Thebenchwarrant, the searches and seizures, the secrecy breaches and the publicity of audiosrepresent,inthiscontext,exceptionalityofnormality.ByrelyingonBenjamin,"thetraditionoftheoppressedteachesusthatthe'stateofexception'inwhichweliveisinfactthegeneralrule"(1940,p.

Ifwehadmanymorepagestodiscuss,wewouldfollowhereAgamben'sproposalforadeepreflectiononthesuggestionsmadebyFoucaultandBenjaminregardingthe imbricationofbareandpoliticallifeinthemodernideologies.Welimitourselves,however,toreferringtothe author ofHomo Sacer in his investigations of the intersection between the juridical-institutionalmodelandthebiopoliticalmodelofpower,aswellas,specifically,theschimittianobservationsonsovereignty18.

Moro'sdecisionreflectshis statusassovereign.Thestateofexception isconfirmed in thesuspensionofthevalidityofthenorms,creatingtheapparentparadoxoftheverypossibilityofthevalidityofthejuridicalnormandratifies,withthis,theverysenseofStateauthority.Inacontinuumofdecisionsofexceptionality,thejurisdictionsaysthelegal-not-legal,fomentingthe legal-political structure of inclusion ofwhat is expelled, that is, the transformation ofexceptionalactsintoregularacts:

Theexceptionisakindofexclusion.Itisasingularcase,whichisexcludedfromthegeneralnorm.Butwhatproperlycharacterizestheexceptionisthatwhatisexcludedisnot,therefore,absolutely out of relation to thenorm;On the contrary, it remains in relation to it in the

18"Sovereignistheonewhodecidesonthestateofexception”(SchimittapudAgamben,2007,p.19)

36

suspendedform.Theruleappliestotheexceptionbydisengaging,withdrawingfromit.Thestateofexceptionisnot,therefore,thechaosthatprecedestheorder,butthesituationthatresultsfromitssuspension(Agamben,2007,p.25).

Inviewofforegoing,itispossibletoconcludethatthestateofexception,generatedbytheerraticjudicialdecisions,givesprecedencetoexclusionarymeasuresthat,whenincorporatedinto the rule of exceptionality, hide the subjection of enemies to a standardization ofsubjectivity.Moro'sdecisionisemblematicinrelationtotheroutineofwarwagedwithinthewallsoftheJudiciarysystemasanexpressionofintrojectedfruitionfromadditionalstimuli,inthelogicofanintolerantandclassistsociety.

WithBrecht,inExceptionandRule,weendthevoyageoftwotravelersandanexplorer:

ThusendsThestoryofatrip,Thatyouhaveseenandheard:Andtheysawwhatiscommon,WhatisalwayshappeningButweaskyouInthatwhichisnotsurprising,Findoutwhatispeculiar!Inwhatappearstobenormal.Findtheabnormality!Inwhatseemstobeexplained,Seehowmuchyoucannotexplain!AndwhatseemsordinarySeehowamazingitis!Inrulesseeabuse!And,whereverabuseispointingat,Trytoremedyit!!

Agamben,Giorgio.HomoSacer.SovereignPowerandBareLife.BeloHorizonte:Ed.UFMG,2007.Arendt,Hannah.OnViolence,RiodeJaneiro:RelumeDumará,2001.Benjamin, Walter. Theses on the Philosophy of History, 1940. Available on:file:///C:/Users/Dell/Downloads/Teses%20sobre%20o%20conceito%20de%20história.pdf. Accessed on07.20.2017.Bretch,Bertold.TheExceptionandtheRule.Availableonfile:///C:/Users/Dell/Downloads/a-excessc3a3o-e-a-regra.pdf.Accessedon07.23.2017.Foucault,Michel.SocietyMustBeDefendedlectureatCollègedeFrance(1975-1976),SãoPaulo:MartinsFontes,1999.Freud,Sigmund.Denial,SãoPaulo:CosacNaify,2014.Jakobs,GunthereMeliá,ManuelC.CriminalLawoftheEnemy:notionsandcriticism.PortoAlegre:LivrariadoAdvogadoEd.,2007.Passos,RodrigoDuarteFdos.ClausewitzandPolitics.Aninterpretationofthewar.SãoPaulo:USP(Teses).2005.Available on file:///C:/Users/Dell/Downloads/TESE_RODRIGO_DUARTE_FERNANDES_DOS_PASSOS.pdf.Accessedon07.20.2017.Pring,GeorgeW.eCanan,Penelope.SLAPPs.Getting sued for speakingout.Philadelphia:TempleUniversityPress,1996.Ripoll,Leila.“Freudiandenial:gapsinCartesianreasonandscientificneutrality".InRev.Eposvol.5no.2,RiodeJaneiro: Pepsic, 2014. Available on http://pepsic.bvsalud.org/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S2178-700X2014000200008.Accessedon07.21.2017.

37

ThesentenceagainstformerpresidentLuizInácioLuladaSilva:anothertragicchapterofthe2016Coup

EderBomfimRodrigues*

Brazilian history has its peculiarities. Among them, an interesting situation takes

centerstage:theimpressionthattimeinBrazilhasapparentlynotpassedandthateverything

remains the same in society and in the State. It seems as though the past has not been

outgrownandthatpeoplearealwayslivingthesamelife–oryet,thesamelife,butwithnew

characters,inasocialstructureidenticaltooldtimes.AkindofBraziliansocialdéjàvu.

Butthepastisnotentirelygone:itishereanditisleavesitstracesinthepresent.For

instance,eventoday,intheheightofthe21stcentury,Brazilhasnotbeenabletofreeitself

completelyfromtheprofoundmarksofslaveryanditsexceedinglyoutdatedelites,whohave

neverhadaplanforcountrysovereignty.Infact,Brazilianeliteshavealwaysthoughtofthe

countrysolelyfortheirprivatewhims,disconnectedfromanyideaofrealindependenceor

strongdevelopmentprocessestofacetheworld’smajorpowers.Tothisday,theinterestsof

thecountryandoftheBrazilianpeopleclashwiththoseoftheelites,especiallytheeconomic

elite,sincethisgroupwishestoperpetuateaslavery-likemodelofStateandsociety,placing

thecountrysubmissivelyinthefaceofinternationalcapitalism.

In such a scenario, it is possible to state that "there is a real, continuous and

institutionalizedlinkthatleadsanyattemptatbreakingapartourclassapartheid-however

partialand fragile, suchas thoseup tonow– tocoupsd'étatandviolent reactionsof the

vultureelites"19.ThishappenedwithGetúlioVargas,JuscelinoKubitschek,JoãoGoulartand

nowwithLula.LuizInácioLuladaSilvaispartofthis listpreciselyduetohisgovernment’s

Veiga-Neto, Alfredo.Wars, 2014. Available on file:///C:/Users/Dell/Downloads/Guerras%20-%2030nov14.pdf.Accessedon07.21.2017.Werner, Wouter G. The curious career of lawfare, 43Case W. Res. J. Int'l L.61, 2010. Available on:http://scholarlycommons.law.case.edu/jil/vol43/iss1/4.Accessedon07.20.2017.* Post-doctoral candidate inPhilosophyat theFederalUniversityofMinasGerais (UFMG),withaPhDandaMaster’sdegreeinPublicLawfromPontifíciaUniversidadeCatólicadeMinasGerais(PUCMinas).ConstitutionalLaw,Administrative LawandHumanRights lecturer.Memberof theBrazilian InstituteofConstitutional Law(IBDC).Lawyer.Translatedby:RaneSouza19SOUZA,Jessé.Aradiografiadogolpe:entendacomoeporquevocêfoienganado.RiodeJaneiro:LeYa,2016,p.42-43

38

victorioussocialinclusionprocessandimprovementinthelivesofmillionsofBrazilians,who,

leviedfromhunger,weregivendignityandachancetoexercisecitizenship,inaclearattempt

totranslatethe1988’sConstitutionrightsintoreality.However,thisseemstohaveresulted

ingreatdiscontentfortheBrazilianelitesandthemiddleclass,nowthreatenedbythesocial

ascentofmillionsofpeopleintheLulaandDilmaRousseffgovernments.

Therefore,duetochangesinthesocialstructureofthecountry,classhatredandthe

slaverymarkspreservedinBrazil’scollectiveimaginaryhavere-emerged.Similarly,abloody

andcrueldefamatorycampaignagainstLulaandtheWorkers'Party(PT),directlyresponsible

forthegreatestprocessofinclusion,developmentandincomedistributioninthehistoryof

Brazil,hastakenplaceinawiderangeofmediachannels.Thishasledtothecriminalization

ofthePT(WorkersParty),ofsocialmovementsandofLulahimself, inamedia,policeand

judicialpersecutionthatseemstohavenoend.

The manipulative media’s heavy attacks at the PT and Lulaconcatenatedwerethereforenotattacksatspecificpeopleorpoliticalparties.Theywereattacksonasuccessfulinclusionpolicydirectedatthepopularclasses,representedbyLulaandthePT.Asocialinclusionprocessthat,albeitflawed,hadahistoricalmeaningthatwillnotbeforgotten.20

WithinthislogicofBraziliansocialdéjàvu,theLulacaseisnotdifferentfromanother

instance in Brazilian history: the story about former President Juscelino Kubitschek’s

apartment,at206AvenidaVieiraSouto,inRiodeJaneiro.Atthetime,theapartmentwassaid

tobeasecretpropertyofJuscelino,acquiredasaresultofcorruption.LikeLula,JKhadhislife

turned upside down, having suffered great injustices from untrue news media. Several

newspapersofthetime(manyofwhicharedoingthesametoday)treatedJuscelino likea

criminalanduntruthfullytriedatallcoststodestroyhisimageandthatofhisgovernment.

Thiswasaclearattempttobanishhimdefinitivelyfrompubliclifeandtoputanendtoany

chanceofapossiblecandidacyforthePresidency.

ThesameishappeningwithLuizInácioLuladaSilva.Thepastisbackandtheoldstory

ofJuscelino'sapartmenthasreturned.Onlynow,itisLula’sinfamousGuarujátriplex,through

20SOUZA,Jessé.Aradiografiadogolpe:entendacomoeporquevocêfoienganado.RiodeJaneiro:LeYa,2016,p.85.

39

whichthepastisrelivedinthepresent,inaverysimilarcontext.In1964,itwastheMilitary

Coup,nowitistheLegal-Parliamentary-Media-Financial-Coupof2016.

ThemainpurposeoftheaforementionedCoupsistheperpetuationoftheelitesin

power.Inthe1964Coup,themilitarywasusedasameanstocontrolBrazilandtokeepits

wealthinthehandsofafew.In2016,withthemilitarymodelrenderedinappropriate,thelaw

andtheJudiciarypowerhavetakenitsplace,withtheJudiciarygainingaprominentposition

inlegitimatizingtheactsofthenewBrazilianorder.Hence,forceshavebeenreplaced,and

nowtheJudiciaryoccupiestheplaceonceheldbythemilitary,inaclearattempttolegitimize

thechange,togiveitandallitsactionsanairoflegalityandcompliancewiththerulesofa

Democratic State of Law. However, in both situations, Brazil has plunged into a State of

Exception,humanrightsviolationandinequality.

Transposedwithacertainappearanceoflegality,thisStateofExceptionhasledtoa

mercilesshuntforLulaviamisleadinguseoflegalinstruments,aswellasillegalitiespracticed

bytheStateitselfanditsagents,suchasconfidentialitybreaches(evenbylawyers),coercive

benchwarrants,telephoneinterceptionleaks,publicexposure,invasionofprivacy,andmany

other outrageousmeasures. In order to consolidate the legalwar against Lula, a political

persecutionwith themisuseof State and Lawapparatus is in place, in a clear attempt to

destroyhisimage,thelegacyofhisgovernmentinBrazilandhisactionsintheworld.

The lawhasbecomeaweaponused toannihilate theadversary,with the Judicial

Power acting through exceptions and melodrama, unable to promote a fair process that

observes the fundamental rights and guarantees enshrined in the Constitution and in the

internationalhumanrightstreatiestowhichBrazilisaparty.Consequently,theJuly12,2017

convictionagainstLulainFederalCourtispartofthewholeatmosphereofLawfareandState

ofExceptioncurrentlyexperiencedinBrazil.

ThesentencethatcondemnedLulaisyetanotherchapterofthe2016Coup,aspart

ofanattempttocreatealegalimpedimenttohiscandidacyinthe2018presidentialelections,

inadditiontobeinganinstrumenttoshowcasepublicandmediapersecution,culminatingin

atextthatresemblesahatredmanifestooftheBrazilianrightagainstLula.Thisisaneminent,

politicallybiaseddecision,sincethereisnotasingleproofthatLuizInacioLuladaSilvaisthe

triplex’sowner.ThereisandtherehasneverbeenanyrecordthatLulaisorhaseverbeenthe

ownerofsaidproperty.Norhasthedocumentproducedanyevidenceofsuchsituation.In

40

fact,thismatterhasbeensettled,sincethelegitimateownerofthenowinfamousproperty

onthecoastofSãoPaulohasalreadybeenestablished.

Thus, thesentencegivenbythe13thCriminalCourt judgeoftheFederalCourt in

Curitiba is a political declaration of persecution, and the result of an arbitrary criminal

procedureparticulartoStatesofException.Itisadecisiondeprivedofcompliancewiththe

Constitution’s fundamental rights and guarantees and the guiding principles of National

CriminalLaw,asentencecontaminatedbyillegalities,amongthemthejudge’spoliticalviews

and the persecution originated in the Federal AttorneyGeneral’sOffice accusations, then

offeredinaPowerPointpresentation.

A fair criminalproceedingwas thereforeneverperformed,asnumerousevidence

addedtotherecordsandacquittingLulaofallchargesweredisregardedbythefirstinstance

judge. Even the defensewitnesses’ statementswere not properly considered and valued.

Whatwehadwasacondemnationbasednotonevidence,butonconvictionsandpolitical

reasons,includingtheuseofnewsreportspublishedintheOGlobonewspaperdatedMarch

10,2010.Itisinconceivablethatajudicialsentencehasfavoredajournalisticnewspieceas

relevantproofinasubjudicecase.

One cannot be condemned without proof, based exclusively on the judge’s

conviction,onmeresuspicions,onnewsreportsorevenonafalse"pleabargaining"dealby

someonewhorecantedhisstatementspost-incarceration,onlytopleasethejudgeandthe

prosecutor,therebyseekingtoobtainbenefitsthrough"somesortofcollaborationwiththe

Justice".Thisisnothinglessthanpsychologicaltorture,anobsoletemeansofobtainingfalse

information.Incredibleasitmayseem,theOASrepresentative’sso-called"pleabargaining"

dealisdevoidofevidenceagainstLula,amereallegationwithoutanyrealpossibilityofduly

verification.Nevertheless,suchallegationhasbeenusedtoconvictLula.

Onceagain,Brazil is foundstrugglingfordemocracy, inarealbattlefor itsformer

president.TheJulysentenceisconcreteproofofthispersecution,ofafirstinstancejudge’s

aversion to Lula and to everything that he represents in Brazil and in the world, in

disagreementwiththeprovisionsofarticle93, itemIX(judicialdecisionsmustbejustified)

andarticle95,soleparagraph,itemIII(judgesareprohibitedfromexercisingpolitical-partisan

activity).

41

Finally,theDemocraticStateofLawinBrazilseemstobeliquidated,seeingthatevery

daytheBraziliansocietywitnessesastrongsteptowardsauthoritarianism,areturntothepast

andthedeconstructionofacountrythatoncepromotedinclusionandtolerance.Inasimilar

scenariotothatofJK,Lula’scasetodayhastheJudicialPowerasasubstituteforthemilitary

ofthepast.Ultimately,democracyandfreedomaredefeatedinthisprocess.

Nevertheless,even inthefaceofalldifficulties,withenormouspressurefromthe

country’s oligarchies, slave-like elites, plutocrats, and media (responsible for all defeated

attempts at democracy), the 4th Zone Regional Federal Court may be able to end such

arbitrarinessandtoredirectthischapterofthe2016Coup.Maythestrugglefordemocracy

anddueprocess remain at theheart of future decisions, seeing that he Judiciary can still

change history and enable millions of Brazilians to dream of a country that respects the

Constitution and the Law. May the Brazilian people gain sovereignty and that the 2018

elections take placewithin normality and freedom, obstacle-free, for "[...] in the age of a

completelysecularizedpolitics,theruleoflawcannotbehadormaintainedwithoutradical

democracy."21

21HABERMAS,Jürgen.Facticidadyvalidez:sobreelderechoyelEstadodemocráticodederechoentérminosdeteoríadeldiscurso.Trad.ManuelJiménezRedondo.Madrid:Trotta,2008,p.61.

42

Lula’switch-huntthroughthecriminalprocedureofexceptioninthepost-truthage

FernandoHideoI.Lacerda*

Morepersonalbeliefs,lessfacts.Themarkofourtimes,i.e.,the"post-truth"―chosenwordoftheyear2016bytheOxfordDictionary22―itdenotesthecircumstancesinwhichobjectivefactshavelessinfluentialinshapingpublicopinionthanappealstoemotionandfaith.

Itisonlyinthecontextofthispost-trueempirethatthesentencethatcondemnedtheformerPresidentLuiz InácioLuladaSilvacanbeunderstoodastheapexofthenewauthoritariancurveofthecriminalprocedureofexception,inherenttothisdecadeof2010.

Inthefirstplace,westartfromthreepremises.

Asaninitialpremise,wehavetheCriminallawwhichisatyrannicalinstrumentofcontrol,manipulatedbyaMilitaryPolicethatactsasaforceofterritorialoccupation,bytheJudiciaryPoliceandbythePublicProsecutors’Officesthatscrutinizeandselectivelybringactions;and,ontopofthat,byaJudiciaryBranchthat ignorestheLawsandtheFederalConstitutiontojudge according to its own convictions supported by the opinion published by themajormedia.

Inthissense,itisenoughtolookintherearviewmirrortorealizethattheattributionoftheconditionofthehumanbeingtotheslaveshasoccurred,sothat,thepracticeofcrimescouldbe attributed to them. "Things" do not commit crimes; therefore, it was necessary totranscend the condition of "thing owned by a Lord" to enable the application of criminalsanctions.Forthisreason,"thefirsthumanactoftheslaveisthecrime,fromtheattacktohisLordtotheescapeofthecaptivity"23.Pureandsimpledomination,sincethebeginning.

ThesecondpremiseisbasedonthefactthattheBrazilianCriminalJusticeSystemisguidedbytheinterestsofelites.Wehaveneverovercomethecultureofslavery.Ifweusedtoidentifythe“casagrande”24,theslaves’quartersandthe“capitãesdomato”25aswell-definedsocialelements;today,wemustunderstandthecamouflagedstructureinwhichlivetogethertheRuleofLaw,thepermanentStateofExceptionandtheMilitaryPolice.

The“casagrande”asthe landlord’sstrongholdgaverisetothe legal formofasupposedlydemocraticRuleofLawdestinedfortheincludedpopulation,wherethefundamentalrightsandguaranteesaresecuredaccordingtotheconvenienceofacertainthoughtdominatedbytheeconomicelite.

While,inadiametricallyoppositesituation,the“slaves’quartersevolvedintoapermanentStateofExceptiondestinedfortheexcludedones,wherethelogicoftheselectivecombat

*CriminalattorneyandProfessorofCriminalProceduralLawat"EscolaPaulistadeDireito",i.e.,thePaulistaLawSchool,MasterofLawsandDoctoralCandidateintheCriminalProceduralLawbythe"PontifíciaUniversidadeCatólicadeSãoPaulo",i.e.,thePontificalCatholicUniversityofSaoPaulo–fhilacerda@gmail.com22“Aftermuchdiscussion,debate,andresearch,theOxfordDictionariesWordoftheYear2016ispost-truth–an adjective defined as ‘relating to or denoting circumstances inwhich objective facts are less influential inshapingpublicopinionthanappealstoemotionandpersonalbelief’”.(https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/word-of-the-year/word-of-the-year-2016)23GORENDER,Jacob.Oescravismocolonial(i.e.,“Thecolonialslavery”).3.ed.SãoPaulo:Ática,1980,p.62-63.24CasaGrande,i.e.,thesameas“bighouse”anditwasthemainhouseorfamilyresidenceinafarmofBrazil.25Captainsofbush(i.e.,capitãesdomato)weretheservantsofthefarmsresponsibleforcapturingthefugitiveslavesandbeingcommissionedtorecaptureotherrunawayslaves

43

againstthepoorandmarginalizedpopulationisbasedontheimpositionoffearandterrorthroughthesevereapplicationofincriminatingnormsanddenialofrighttoalegaldefense.

So,itisnotdifficulttonoticethatthemissiononceattributedtothecaptainsofthebush,theagentsofrepressionandpunishmentoftheslaves,hasbeenentrustedtotheCriminalJusticeSystem, particularly to theMilitary Police - an institution incompatiblewith a democraticregime-whichacts,ononehand,asaprotectionforceofthedominantclassinterests(legalassets?)and,on theotherhand, it actsasa forceof territorialoccupationand repressionagainstthepoorpopulation.

ThisisthelogicofacontemporaryStateofException:tocombatanenemywithanapparentinstitutionallegality.Thus,theCriminalJusticeSystemdevelopsthefunctionofanagentofthe exception, with the intention to attribute legitimacy to the practice of essentiallyauthoritarianmeasureswithaveneeroflegality.

The final premise intends to explain for us, the phenomenon regarding on Lula’s witch-hunting,whichdoesnotonlyaffecthim,asanindividual,butashissymbolicrepresentationofafairerandlessunequalsociety.Naturally,asocietyguidedbyanenslavinglogicwouldnotbecapableofreducingitsprivilegeswithoutshowingresistance.Forsuchreason,thecriminalprocedureofexceptionisthedenominationthatIgaveforsuchmechanismutilized.

Inourcountry,contrarytotheEnemyCriminalLaw,accordingtotheconceptthattheGüntherJakobshaspropounded,wedonothavetwocriminallawsabstractlyinforceandregulateddifferently,i.e.,acriminallawofthecitizensandacriminallawoftheenemies(takethecaseofthe18U.S.CodeChapter113B-TerrorismanditsPatrioticAct).

Infact,inourlegalsystem,iscurrentinfullforcethesamecriminallaw,thesamerulesofthecriminalsystem,buttheyarebeingappliedandinterpretedinadifferentwaythroughthemechanismalreadydenouncedasacriminalprocedureofexception.

If the enemy of centuries ago was dominated in the context of an explicitly slaveringrelationship,nowadays,itistheCriminalJusticeSystemthatplaysvehementlythesamerole.AccordingtoasurveyconductedbyIDDD26,morethan90%oftheprisonersinterviewedareresponding for crimes against property (theft, robbery and reception) or drug trafficking:hence,thisisthepureandsimplecriminalizationofthepovertythathasaffectedourentireRepublic.

Initsturn,inparallelwiththetraditionalconceptoftheenemy(i.e.,thepoor:labeledasthief,trafficker,bandit),thedecadeof2010witnessedtheoutcomeofanewauthoritariancurveoftheCriminalJusticeSystemthroughitspowerextensionforthepoliticalclassportionthathasoccupiedthenationalgovernmentuntilitwasoverthrownbythecoupof2016.

ThecurrentMinisteroftheFederalSupremeCourtinBrazil,theJusticeLuisRobertoBarroso,duringhisdebateinsuchCourt,hasidentifiedthejudgmentoftheAP470aspointoutsidethecurve,accordingtohisownwords:“–Iconsiderthat“Mensalão”was,forseveralreasons,apointoutsidethecurve,butitdidnotcorrespondtoageneralhardeningfromtheSupremeregardingtosuchspecificcase”.

26IDDD-theInstituteinDefenseoftheRighttoDefense,aprojectsupportedbytheBrazilHumanRightsFundaimstoreducetheabusiveuseofprovisionaldetainment(pre-trialcustody)inthestateofSaoPaulo.

44

Conversely,ithasshown,thatwasnotjustapointoutsidethecurve,butthebeginningofanewcurve.Anewauthoritarianhistoricalcircle:thejudgmentofthe“Mensalão”wasthefirststeptothecurrentmodelofthecriminalprocedureofexception,wheretheexceptionthatprovestherule,andtheCriminalJusticeSystempassestobemanipulatedinaccordancetopoliticalinterests,selectivelyconductedbytheeconomicpowerandbythemediasystem.

TheseedplantedbytheFederalSupremeCourthasgerminatedintotoso-called“OperationCarWash”,inwhichthecriminalproceedingceasestobethefindingsinaconcretefacttomaterializeinpersecutionfocusedontargetspoliticallyselected,whichstartsthroughillegalplea-bargains;andtheyaredevelopedthroughcoerciveconditionsandarbitrarythreatsofimprisonmentwiththeintentiontohaltthedefense;and,theyarejudgedaccordingtothepressuresoftheeconomicpoweraswellasthemediasystem;and,theyimposeadvancedpunishmentsthattranscendthelegalfieldthroughillegalcautionimprisonmentsandselectiveleaksthatcontributetothespectacleofpublicexecrationbeforeanofficialjudgment.

Itischosenanofficialenemytobecalledas“corrupt”andtobeceaselesslypersecutedbythepolice,bythejudiciaryandbythemedia.Beinganabstractlabelcapableofconcealingarealand selective persecution against the political opponents, the “fight against corruption”attendstheinterestsofitseconomicpowerinBrazil,suchasthe“fightagainstterrorism”intheUSLaw.

Inthispoint,thelessonofZaffaroniisunretouchable,forwhomthat“crimeorganizedandthecorruptionarebothfunctionaltoenablethepunitivepowerandtheinterventionoftheStateinanyeconomicactivity,botheringthegovernmentinactivityoritisusefulforeliminatingorfor defaming the competitors without the limits or constitutional guarantees in suchinterventions.Moreover,thecampaignagainstcorruptionseemstobemoreconcernedonavoiding higher costs to the foreign investors from peripheral countries, instead of beingworried with the ethical principles that are stated or even, in relation to the structuraldamagesthattheycausetothelocaleconomies”27.

Thus, thecondemnationof the formerPresidentLula is theapexof thenewauthoritariancurvethataimstocombatthepoliticalenemy(thepopulargovernment:calledas"corrupt"),thetraditionalandlegitimaterepresentativeoftheeconomicenemy(poor:calledas"thief,drugdealer,bandit").

Thecriminalprocedureofexceptionisananti-suit.Itisalegalformofpoliticalandeconomicpersecution in the post-truth age. It is the violation of the fundamental rights and theindividualguaranteesofaportionofthepopulation(and,itssymbolicrepresentatives)withahypocriticalvarnishoflawfulness.ItistheresultofthemanipulationoftheCriminalJusticeSystem(thePolice,thePublicProsecutor’sOffice,theJudiciaryBranchandthemedia)tomeetthe interests of the market against their true enemies: the poor, the marginalized andoppressedones.

Accordingtothemarket’sperspective(thesovereignonthecontemporarytime),theenemycannothaveanyperspectiveofdevelopment:theairportscannotseemasbusstations,the

27ZAFFARONI,EugenioRaul.O inimigonoDireitoPenal (i.e.,“TheenemyoftheCriminalLaw”).2.ed.Trad.SérgioLamarão.Riode.Janeiro:Renavan,2007

45

universities should be the upper classes’ privilege, Mall is not the proper place for“rolezinho”28.

AswellobservedbyPedroEstevamSerrano29,thepersecutionagainstLula,isnottheattackontheindividualitself,butrepresentsthewarofthemarketagainsttothegreatersymbol(perhaps unique, in the current political scenario) of social change and elevation of theundesirableonesagainsttheprivilegeoftheelite.

But,donotdaretodoubt:thearbitraryactsagainstsomemembersoftheprivilegedclass(directedselectivelyagainstthosewhodonotrepresenttheinterestsandtheprivilegesofthemarket)willonlyintensify(and,itisalreadygivingevidenceaboutthis)thetraditionalviolenceagainstthemarginalizedclass,persecutedanddiscriminatedbytheeconomicpower.

Historywilljudgethosewhorefusetoseetheblindnessoftheirnotseeing.

28Itisunderstoodasasocialmovement,organizedviaFacebookwhichresultinamasssocialgatheringsofmostofthetimebylow-incometeenagers.29https://www.cartacapital.com.br/politica/pedro-serrano-201co-prejuizo-nao-e-so-de-lula-mas-da-sociedade201d

46

Disrespecttothepracticeoflawandbreachoftheprincipleofjudicialimpartiality

FlavioCrocceCaetano*

It is widely known that in any legal relationship, on all legal levels, including in any civil,electoral, labor or criminal other court of justice, the settlement of disputes by any legalmeansshouldfollowsomefundamentalprinciplessuchasbilateralhearing,equalitybetweenthepartiesand,aboveall,impartialityofthejudge.

Thisishowthingsaredoneinourconstitutionalandinourcourtsystem,justlikeinmostoftheworld’s legalsystemsandintheinternationalsystemofprotectionofhumanrights,aspresented, forexample, in therulesestablished in the InternationalCovenantonCivilandPoliticalRights,30ratifiedby169countries:31

Article14

1. All persons shall be equal before the courts and tribunals. In the determination of anycriminalchargeagainsthim,orofhisrightsandobligationsinasuitatlaw,everyoneshallbeentitled to a fair and public hearing by a competent, independent and impartial tribunalestablishedbylaw.(...)

Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR),32 published before theCovenant,alsostatedthat“Everyoneisentitledinfullequalitytoafairandpublichearingbyanindependentandimpartialtribunal,inthedeterminationofhisrightsandobligationsandofanycriminalchargeagainsthim.”Onaregionallevel,Article8,paragraph1,ofthe1969AmericanConventiononHumanRights(ACHR)provides,interalia,that“everypersonhastheright to a hearing, with due guarantees and within a reasonable time, by a competent,independent,and impartialtribunal,previouslyestablishedby law, inthesubstantiationofanyaccusationofacriminalnaturemadeagainsthimorforthedeterminationofhisrightsandobligationsofacivil,labor,fiscal,oranyothernature.”

In short, ina legal relationship there isnoand therecanbeno relationshipof supremacybetweenthejudge,theplaintiffandthedefendant.Allpartiesperformrolesthatareequallyessentialtothecourtsystem,yettheserolesareabsolutelydifferentandmustberespectedintheirentirety.

Fornootherreason,ourFederalConstitutiongaveabsolutely identical treatmenttothosepartieswithoutdistinguishingorassigninganyhierarchicallysuperiorpositiontothe judgecomparedtotheotheroperatorsofthejusticesystem.InitsTitleIV,ontheOrganizationofPowers,ourConstitutionassignedChapterIIItotheJudiciaryBranchandChapterIVtotheEssential Functions of Justice, namely the Prosecution, the AttorneyGeneral, theGeneralCounselandthePublicDefender.

* Lawyer,ProfessorofHumanRightsatPontifíciaUniversidadeCatólicadeSãoPaulo,National Secretary forJudicialReform(2012to2015).Translatedby:RaneSouza30Adoptedbythe21stSessionoftheGeneralAssemblyoftheUnitedNationsonDecember16,1966;approvedbytheNationalCongressthroughLegislativeDecreeNo.226ofDecember12,1991;enactedbyDecreeNo.592ofJuly6,1992.31As published on the United Nations website on July 23, 2017. Retrieved fromhttps://treaties.un.org/Pages/ViewDetails.aspx?src=IND&mtdsg_no=IV-4&chapter=4&clang=_en.32ProclaimedbytheUnitedNationsGeneralAssemblyonDecember10,1948.

47

Likewise, the Constitution also established that the Judiciary Branch should follow theprinciples governing public administration, with special emphasis on the mandatorycompliancewiththeprincipleofimpersonality.Withoutadoubt,whenitcomestothecourtlevel, theprincipleof impersonality imposedon the State turnsout tobe theprincipleofimpartiality.

To determine whether the principle of impartiality (and the principle of impersonality) isrespectedincourt,itisabsolutelyimperativetoexaminetheobservanceofboththerightsassignedtotheattorney(anddefender)andthedutiesofthejudge.

Article6ofFederalLawno.8906of July4,1994,whichcontains theRulesofProfessionalConductforLawyersandfortheBrazilianBarAssociation,setsforth:

Article6.Thereisnohierarchyorsubordinationbetweenlawyers,judgesandmembersoftheProsecution,allofwhommustbetreatedwithmutualrespectandappreciation.

Then,Article2ofthesamelawestablishes:

Article2.Lawyersareindispensabletotheadministrationofjustice.

Paragraph1.Intheprivatedomain,alawyerprovidesapublicserviceandperformsasocialfunction.

Paragraph2. Ina judicialproceeding,a lawyerhelpsa judgemakeshis/her findings, inanattempttosecureafinal judgmentthat is infavoroftheirclient,anda lawyer’sactsareapublicfunction.

Paragraph3.Inthepracticeoflaw,alawyer’sactsandperformanceareinviolable,withinthelimitsoftheseprovisions.

In short, in our legal system, the practice of law is a public function, essential to theadministrationofjusticeandfundamentaltomakeajudge’sfindings.Alogicalconclusionfromthisstatementisthatthepracticeoflawcannotbeconsideredbythejudgeasanactualhurdleinthecourtproceedings,letaloneobstructionofjustice.

Strictly according to the Brazilian legislation, it is worth quoting the UnitedNations BasicPrinciples on the Role of Lawyers.33Among the many relevant pieces of legislation, thefollowingmainonesarereproducedhere:

18. Lawyers shall not be identifiedwith their clients or their clients' causes as a result ofdischargingtheirfunctions.(...)

20.Lawyersshallenjoycivilandpenalimmunityforrelevantstatementsmadeingoodfaithinwrittenororalpleadingsor intheirprofessionalappearancesbeforeacourt,tribunalorotherlegaloradministrativeauthority.

21. It is the duty of the competent authorities to ensure lawyers access to appropriateinformation, filesanddocuments intheirpossessionorcontrol insufficienttimetoenablelawyerstoprovideeffectivelegalassistancetotheirclients.Suchaccessshouldbeprovidedattheearliestappropriatetime.

33AdoptedbytheEighthUnitedNationsCongressonthePreventionofCrimeandtheTreatmentofOffenders,Havana,Cuba27Augustto7September1990.

48

Giventheimportanceofthismatter,nowonderthat,ontheinternationallevel,theUnitedNationsappointedaSpecialRapporteurontheIndependenceofJudgesandLawyers.34NowunderthesupervisionoftheUNHumanRightsCouncil,theSpecialRapporteur’smandatehasbeenextendedthroughResolutionNo.26/7oftheHumanRightsCouncil.Manyexpertshaveaddressed this issue in the UN, having given the following important statements andrecommendations:

“Any legal provision protecting the independence of judges, lawyers orprosecutorsbecomesuselessifthereisnocommitmenttorespectandenforceit.Moreover,wheneveroneofthesegroups“forgets”thespecificrolestheyhavetoplayinademocraticsociety—roleswhichcomewithbothrightsandduties—theprerequisitesofindependencebecomedifficulttofulfill.”35

“ThethreattojudicialindependencecomesnotjustfromtheexecutivearmoftheGovernment nor from the legislature, but from organized crime, powerfulbusinessmen,corporategiantsandmultinationals.”36

“Corruptionwithinthejudiciarygoesfarbeyondeconomiccorruption.Itcould,forinstance,taketheformofbiasedparticipationintrialsandjudgmentsasaresultofthepoliticizationofthejudiciary,orpartyloyaltiesofjudges.”37

“Therehasbeenanincreasednumberofcomplaintsconcerningidentificationoflawyers with their clients’ causes. Lawyers representing accused persons inpolitically sensitive cases are often subjected to such accusations. Identifyinglawyerswiththeirclients’causescouldbeconstruedasintimidatingandharassingthe lawyers concerned. The Governments have an obligation to protect suchlawyersfromintimidationandharassment.”38

TheUnitedNationsOfficeonDrugsandCrime(Unodc)publishedtheBangalorePrinciplesofJudicial Conduct, which expressly determines unacceptable conducts of judges.39Thisdocumentwasannexed to the reportpresentedat the59th Sessionof theUnitedNationsCommissiononHumanRightsinApril2003.OnApril29,2003,theCommissionunanimouslyadoptedresolution2003/43,whichincludedtheBangalorePrinciplesofJudicialConduct.

OneoftheseBangaloreprinciplesis,again,thePrincipleofImpartiality,wordedinthesaiddocumentasfollows:

Impartialityisessentialtotheproperdischargeofthejudicialoffice.Itappliesnotonlytothedecisionitselfbutalsototheprocessbywhichthedecisionismade.

34Createdin1994byResolutionNo.1994/41oftheUnitedNationsCommissiononHumanRights.35UNdocumentA/HRC/32/34,HumanRightsCouncil,2016,paragraph39.36UNdocumentE/CN.4/1996/37,paragraph246.37UNdocumentA/HRC/35/31.38UNdocumentE/CN.4/1998/39,paragraph179.39UnitedNations(UN).UnitedNationsOfficeonDrugsandCrime(Unodc).SeealsoComentáriosaosPrincípiosdeBangaloredeCondutaJudicial/EscritórioContraDrogaseCrime;translatedbyMarlondaSilvaMalha,ArianeEmílio Kloth. – Brasília: Conselho da Justiça Federal, 2008. Retrievedfromhttp://www.unodc.org/documents/lpo-Brazil/Topics_corruption/Publicacoes/2008_Comentarios_aos_Principios_de_Bangalore.pdf.

49

TheUnitedNationsOfficeonDrugsandCrime(Unodc)haspublishedtheCommentaryontheBangalorePrinciplesofJudicialConduct.40Asexpressedinthatdocument,andaccordingtotheEuropeanCourtofHumanRights,

“... therearetwoaspectstotherequirementof impartiality.First,thetribunalmustbe subjectively impartial, i.e. nomemberof the tribunal shouldholdanypersonalprejudiceorbias.(...)Secondly,thetribunalmustalsobeimpartialfroman objective viewpoint, i.e. it must offer sufficient guarantees to exclude anylegitimatedoubtinthisrespect.Underthistest,itmustbedeterminedwhether,irrespectiveof the judge’spersonal conduct, thereareascertainable facts thatmay raise doubts as to his impartiality. In this respect, even appearances areimportant.Whatisatstakeistheconfidencewhichthecourts inademocraticsocietymustinspireinthepublic,includinganaccusedperson.Accordingly,anyjudgeinrespectofwhomthereisalegitimatereasontofearalackofimpartialitymustwithdraw.”41

The above-mentioned document goes on to elaborate on a number of sub-principles. Forexample,accordingtoPrinciple2.1,“Ajudgeshallperformhisorherjudicialdutieswithoutfavor,biasorprejudice.”Andgoeson:

“Bias may manifest itself either verbally or physically. Some examples areepithets, slurs,demeaningnicknames,negativestereotyping,attemptedhumorbased on stereotypes (related to gender, culture or race, for example),threatening,intimidatingorhostileactsthatsuggestaconnectionbetweenraceornationality and crime, and irrelevant references topersonal characteristics.Biasorprejudicemayalsomanifestthemselvesinbodylanguage,appearanceorbehaviorinoroutofcourt.Physicaldemeanormayindicatedisbeliefofawitness,therebyimproperlyinfluencingajury.Facialexpressioncanconveyanappearanceofbiastopartiesorlawyersintheproceeding,jurors,themediaandothers.Thebiasorprejudicemaybedirectedagainstaparty,witnessoradvocate.”42

Sub-principle2.2.establishesthat“ajudgeshallensurethathisorherconduct,bothinandoutofcourt,maintainsandenhancestheconfidenceofthepublic,thelegalprofessionandlitigantsintheimpartialityofthejudgeandofthejudiciary.”Putdifferently,accordingtotheaforementioneddocument,“ajudgemustbealerttoavoidbehaviorthatmaybeperceivedas an expression of bias or prejudice. Unjustified reprimands of advocates, insulting andimproper remarks about litigants andwitnesses, statements evidencingprejudgments and

40ComentáriosaosPrincípiosdeBangaloredeCondutaJudicial/EscritórioContraDrogaseCrime;translatedbyMarlon da Silva Malha, Ariane Emílio Kloth. – Brasília: Conselho da Justiça Federal, 2008. Retrievedfromhttp://www.unodc.org/documents/lpo-Brazil/Topics_corruption/Publicacoes/2008_Comentarios_aos_Principios_de_Bangalore.pdf.41CommentaryontheBangalorePrinciplesofJudicialConduct,op.cit.,paragraph53,commentingonthecaseCastilloAlgarvSpain,EuropeanCourtofHumanRights,(1998)30EHRR827.42CommentaryontheBangalorePrinciplesofJudicialConduct,op.cit.,paragraph58.

50

intemperateandimpatientbehaviormaydestroytheappearanceofimpartiality,andmustbeavoided.”

“Ajudgeisentitledtoaskquestionstoclarifyissues.Butifthejudgeconstantlyinterferesandvirtuallytakesovertheconductofacivilcaseortheroleoftheprosecutioninacriminalcaseandusestheresultsofhisorherownquestioningtoarriveataconclusioninthejudgmentinthecase,thejudgebecomesadvocate,witnessandjudgeatthesametimeandthelitigantdoesnotreceiveafairtrial.”

Finally, sub-principle 2.4provides that “a judge shall not knowingly,while a proceeding isbefore, or could come before, the judge, make any comment that might reasonably beexpected toaffect theoutcomeof suchproceedingor impair themanifest fairnessof theprocess.Norshallthejudgemakeanycommentinpublicorotherwisethatmightaffectthefairtrialofanypersonorissue.”

GoingbacktotheBrazilianlegalsystem,article35,paragraphIVoftheOrganicLawoftheNationalBench—ComplementaryLawno.35,datedMarch14,1979,setsout,asoneofthedutiesofajudge,thedutyof

IV-beingcourteouswithallthepartiestothesuit,PublicProsecutors, lawyers,witnesses,courtofficialsandclerks,andassistingthosewho,atanytime,maycometothejudgetoaskforanyactiontobetakenwheneveranemergencyarisesthatneedstobeaddressed.

IngreaterdetailandaccordingtotheFederalConstitution,theCodeofEthicsoftheNationalBench,approvedby theNationalCouncilof JusticeonAugust6,2008,determines thatalljudgesmustobservetheprincipleofimpartiality,byprovidinginarticles8and9,asfollows:

Article8.Animpartialjudgeistheonewholooksforthetruthintherecords,withobjectivityandgrounds,keepinghimself/herselfequidistantfromthepartiesthroughoutthesuit,andavoidinganykindofbehaviorthatmayreflectfavoritism,predispositionorprejudice.

Article9.Ajudge,inthedischargeofhis/herjudicialduties,mustassignequaltreatmenttotheparties,andanykindofunreasonablediscriminationisprohibited.

Therefore,whetherintheBrazilianlaworbasedoninternationalrules,itisindisputablethatthelegalpracticemustalwaysbeasbroadaspossible,asitisakeypieceinthecourtsystem,sothejudgeissupposedtoactasastateagenttogivevoicetothelawinthecaseindisputewith neutrality, impartiality and impersonality, without dwelling upon any personal,ideological or partisan preferences, showing absolute respect and courtesy to the legalpractice as a public domain. If these principles are not followed accordingly, the judge’sbehavior will be one-sided and fraught with illegalities, hence irreversibly breaching theprincipleofimpartialityandinvalidatingthecourt’sjudicialduties.

The judgment under discussion, in which former President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva wassentencedtonineandahalfyearsinprisonfortheallegedpracticeofthecrimesofsolicitationof bribe and money laundering, in addition to the absolute lack of evidence for suchconviction,asfarasweareconcerned,revealstheultimateandlegallyreprehensiblebreachoftheprincipleofimpartialityofjudgment.

Letusnowfocusontheanalysisofsomeexcerptsofthejudgmentwhich,inlinewithwhatwehavebeenarguing,isfilledwithblatantinstancesofoffensetothelegitimateexerciseoflawyeringandrevealunequivocalbreachwiththeprincipleofimpartialityofjudgment.

i)disrespectfuladjectivesusedtodescribeLula’sdefenseattorneys’practiceoflaw

51

Inparagraph57,thejudgmentreadsasfollows:

57.Theconcernsexpressedaboutmyimpartialityisamerefilibusterand,althoughtheyareunderstandableasastrategyusedbytheDefenseattorneys,theyarestillregrettable,sincethey are not groundedon facts and are not basedonminimally consistent arguments, asalreadyruledbytheRegionalFederalCourtofthe4thRegion.

Itcanbeseenthatthejudgehasprofoundlydisrespectedthepracticeoflawbyreferringtothe said concerns as “regrettable.” By doing so, he also breached the duty of civility byexposing his personal derogatory feelings towards the Defense attorneys’ practice to thedetrimentofatechnicallegalanalysiswithoutanysubjectivecharacterizations.

ii)negativecriticismregardingLula’sdefenseattorneys’exerciseoftheconstitutionalrighttoseeklegalremedyandanacknowledgedstanceofrivalry

Andthejudgmentcontinues,inparagraphs58and59:

58.AsLuizInácioLuladaSilva’sdefensestrategywasdisqualifyingmeasajudge,sincetheyapparentlyfearedanunfavorableoutcome,questionableactionsweretakenbythedefenseattorneysoutofthiscriminalprosecution.

59.Forinstance,formerPresidentLuizInácioLuladaSilva,assistedbythesameattorneys,filedacriminalcomplaintforofficialoppressionandcourt-ordereddisclosureofinformationbywire-tappingagainstthepresentjudgebeforetheRegionalFederalCourtofthe4thRegion.

The judge is not supposed to refer to the complaints filed by Lula’s defense attorney as“questionableactions,”sincethoseactionswerebasedonthelegitimateexerciseoftherighttoseeklegalremedy,aslaiddownintheBrazilianConstitution.Itshouldalsobeconsideredthatjudgmentonsuchmatterswasnotwithinhisjurisdiction,butwithinthejurisdictionofanothercourt,andtheOrganicLawoftheNationalBenchdoesnotallowhimtoissueanyopiniononthatmatter.

Besidesthis,thejudgeisnotsupposedtotakethestanceofanauthenticadversaryinthesuittomakeastatementaboutthereasonsthatledLula’sdefenseattorneystotakelegalaction,thatis,thephrase“theyapparentlyfearedanunfavorableoutcome”denotesthebehaviorofanadversary,ratherthananimpartialjudgewhoisdevoidofanyfeelingstowardstheparties.

iii)negativecriticismofPauloOkamoto’spracticeoflawasadefenseattorney

Inparagraphs150and151,thejudgmentreadsasfollows:

150. The defendants’ liability should be tried only on the basis of law and evidence. Theprofessionalbehaviorofthedefenseattorneysisirrelevant.

151.Forexample,thejudgedoesnotblamePauloTarcisoOkamoto,despitehisinappropriatebehavior.

Onceagain,thejudgeisnotsupposedtoexpresshisopinionontheattorneys’behavior.Heisonlysupposedtoenforcethelawonthecaseathand.Anyderogatorycommentstowardstheattorneys’practiceoflawbreachesthejudge’sdutyofimpartiality.

iv)expressionofthejudge’spersonalfeelingsinhisjudgmentofconvictionagainstLula

Thejudgmentcontinuesinparagraph961:961.

Finally, it should be noted that the present judgment of conviction does not giveme anypersonalsatisfaction.Theoppositeistrue.ItisregrettablethattheformerPresidentofBrazil

52

becriminallyconvicted,butwhathascausedallthiswerethecrimeshehascommitted,ratherthantheactualenforcementofthelaw.(...)

Again,no judge is supposed to statewhetherheor shehasany “personal satisfaction” inconvictingadefendant,northathe/shebelievesthattheconvictionis“regrettable.”Ajudgeis supposed to try the case, rather than express feelings that reveal their preferences ordifferences.Thejudge’sbehaviorisindisputablyatoddsovertheprincipleofimpartiality.

Basedonjustafewexcerptsfromthelongsentenceofconviction,itisfoundthatthejudgehasdemonstratedextremefeelingsofcontemptanddisrespecttothepracticeoflawbybothLula’s defense attorneys and Paulo Okamoto, using derogatory adjectives such as“regrettable”or“inappropriate”,inadditiontonegativelycriticizingthelegitimateexerciseoftherighttoseeklegalremedybeforeothercourts,takingablatantadversarialpositionandfailingtoadoptthenecessaryequidistantbehaviorthatisexpectedandrequiredofanyjudge,thusrevealingprofounddisrespecttotheprinciplesofimpartialityandimpersonality.

53

Thetyrannyofjustice

FranciscoCelsoCalmon*"Theweaponofcriticismcannot,ofcourse,replaceguncriticism,materialpowerhastobeoverturnedbymaterialpower,buttheoryalsobecomesmaterialforcewhenitseizesthemasses".

KarlMarx(CritiqueofHegel’sPhilosophyofLaw)

Icarrymarksofcombattothedictatorshipof1964toresisttheterrorofthecopswasanarduoustask.Politicalpersecution,kidnapping,torture,disappearancesanddeathsweretheproductsofthatregime.NowIseemyselfinthefightagainstthearbitrarinessofthecoupof2016.Phonetappingandillegalcoerciveconducts,espionage,extortion,prisonsasameansof torture, accusations and condemnations in absentia are the fruits of a police Statecharacterizedbyaregimeofexception,inwhichstateapparatuscontrolssociety,whileinthedemocraticStatesocietycontrolstheState.

As in every regime of exception, law is always the first victim, by subverting the right,democracycollapses.AsintheInquisition,inwhichthebarbarictorturesendedinthefire,whichslowlyburnedthebodyofthecondemned,thefireoftheLavaJato43burnsandtearsthedignityoftheaccused.Withanintermittentbutconstantmethodofhumiliation,physicalandpsychologicalembarrassment,sadlyassumingtheriskofcausingillnessandevendeath,suchasthatoftheformerPresident’swife,LuizInácioLuladaSilva,Mrs.MarisaLetícia.

Likeanillusionistforcedtopresentconstantsurprisestokeeptheeyesoftheaudiencefixedonhim,thejudge-inquisitor,SérgioMoro,andhisminionscarryoutanewblowtolawanddemocracyeveryday,reachingtheworkersandthehomeland.

"Inthepresentday,whenirrationalityitselfhasbecomereason,itsonlymodeofbeingisthereasonfordomination,anditcontinuestobethereasonforexploitationandrepression,evenwhenthedominatedcollaboratewithit.Everywhere,therearestillthosewhoprotest,whorebel,whofight”(HerbertMarcuse-Commentaryon"18Brumaire..."byKarlMarx).

TheconvictionofformerpresidentLuizInácioLuladaSilva,pronouncedbyJudgeSérgioMoro,of the 13th Federal Court of Curitiba, PR, is a piece thatwill bemarked in history by theantiexampleoflegaltechnique.Inthefutureitmaybringforththeatricalpiecesofcomedy,drama and terror. Thus, as in the course of the trial, the judge behaved like a capriciousinquisitor,theoutcomeisfraughtwitharbitrariness,justifiedonlybythedesiretoshineinthelightofthespotlight,asthehunterexposeshishuntingawaitingthetrophy,ashehasdefinedby the dean of the state of Espírito Santo, João Baptista Herkenhoff: "The judge, whoabandonsimpartialitytogetthetributetothespotlightandnewspaperheadlines,betrayshisoffice. Even if the general public clap hands for him, well-informed citizens about theconstitutionalcostumescondemnhisprocedure."(AGazetaNewspaper,July19,2017).

Theprocedurallawprovidesthatthecriminalsentencemustcontainabriefstatementoftheprosecutionandthedefense;theindicationofthereasonsandfactsonwhichthedecisionis

*FranciscoCelsoCalmon-LawyerandAdministrator,CoordinatoroftheMemory,TruthandJusticeForumoftheStateofEspíritoSanto–Brazil.43LavaJato=OperationCarWash(Portuguese:OperaçãoLavaJato)isanongoingcriminalinvestigationbeingcarriedoutbytheFederalPoliceofBrazil,CuritibaBranch,andjudiciallycommandedbyJudgeSérgioMorosinceMarch17,2014.

54

basedandtheapplicationofthelawaccordingtothecorrespondingcriminaltype(Article381CPP). However, it is strange that in the sentence of former president Lula, Judge Moroallocatesabout50pagesofthetotalof238ofthedecisiontotalkabouthimselfanddefendhimself,akindofself-defeatingsentence.

Suchistheweightofhisguiltthatafterspreadingthesentence,hesethisheadonthebibleinademonstrationofexhaustion,forchasingtires,coupd`etat,tiresmore,andlethimselfbephotographed.

Intheanalysisoftheobjectofthecriminalactionthejudgerevealedhispartiality.Thereisnoevidencethattheaccusedhadorhaseverhadthepossessionorownershipofthe"triplex"(apartment)thatisassignedtohimbytheFederalPublicMinistryandreceivedbythejudge.Hegoessofarastocreateconceptsthatareextremelyexogenoustodoctrineandlaw,suchasthatof"formalownership",contrarytothelegalconceptsofownershipandpossession.Ifsuchinventionsthrive,whatwillbethestudentoftodayandtomorrowwhoislearningtherightconcepts?Willevidenceandfactsgivewaytoassumptionsandmadeupstories?

Therefore, there isnoproofof thecrimesofcorruptionandmoney laundering.UnliketheillegitimatepresidentMichelTemer,thecandidatedefeatedbyDilmaRousseff,AécioNevesand the former president of the Chamber of Deputies, Eduardo Cunha, who opened theprocessofimpeachmentagainstthelegitimatelyelectedPresident,whoseabundanceoffactsandevidenceoftheircrimesandresultingproductsareintheirassetsandbankaccountsinBrazilandabroad.

Thesententialpiececonsidersaccusationsasevidence,notasmereindicationsandwaystoprospectevidence.Besidesthisveryseriousmetamorphosisonehastoconsiderthequestionoftheaccusations.

Therewardingaccusationistheexchangeofbetrayalforaprize;itisnotarepentance,itisnot a collaboration, but an exchange, a barter, a moral mercantilism. Repented withoutrepentance,collaboratorswithoutcollaboration.Howlongwillitbeinthenameofopinionwithoutbeing?

Culturallytheawardingawardisacountvalue.Itshouldnotbecultivated.Itisnotanexamplefortheeducationofthenewgenerations.Wedonotwantchildrenpreachingfalseideasabouttheircolleagues,teenagersgivingtheirpartners,youngprofessionalspointingtocompanions,becausenobodywantsasocietyofinformers,likelivinganaccusationworld.

"Among the fierce beasts, the most dangerous bite is the delator; among the domesticanimals,theflatterer"(DiogenesinancientGreece)

Thejudge-inquisitor,aswellastheFederalPublicMinistry,cannot,andcannotbecausetheydonotexist,toshowandtoprovetheproductsoftheallegedcrimesattributedtoformerPresidentLula.

ThereareindicationsthatJudgeMoroisintheserviceofUSAinterests,butwhenjudgedatanytimeofthehistory,therewillhavetohaveevidence.Thecourses,trainingsandconstantvisitstothatcountry,aswellastheircorrespondencewithUSAagents,areindicativeenoughinthepolicytoaccuseofbeingco-optedandintheinterestsofgeopoliticalobjectivesofthatcountry,however,fromthepointofviewoflaw,itisnotsufficienttocondemnhim,unlessthey applied the same criteria and parameters invented by Judge Sérgio Moro and theAttorneys,alliedinthiscrusadeofdismantlingtheStateofRight

55

Infixingthepenalty,thejudgecontinuesdeliriouswhenapplyingcondemnantsentence.Says:

"Theguiltishigh.Theconvictedpersonreceivedanundueadvantageasaresultoftheofficeof President of the Republic, that is, of a major representative." The responsibility of aPresidentoftheRepublicisenormousand,consequently,hisguiltwhenhecommitscrimes"(JudgmentCaseNo.5046512-94.2016.4.04.700013thFederalCourtofCuritiba/PR)

Therefore,itsetsthebasicpenaltyoffiveyearsinthecrimeofcorruptionandfouryearsinthemoneylaundering.Followingonthistrail,thejudgecouldalsoweighthepenaltywiththeresults of the Lula administration, such as the 52 (fifty two) million Brazilians benefitedthroughpublicpolicies:therealincreaseoftheminimumsalaryof72%;GDPpercapitajumpfromUS$2,800toUS$11,700,placingBrazilasthefifthworldeconomyandinternationalprotagonist;Inclusionof1.5millionyoungpeopleintheUniversitythroughProuni(UniversityProgramforall),whilecountriessuchasSpain,PortugalandGreecewerestiflingacrisisthatgeneratedaround24millionunemployedineachofthesecountries,andintheUnitedStatesofAmericauntilsoupwasdistributedinNewYorkduringthecrisisthatbeganin2008.

Attheendoftheverdict,therestrictionoffreedomwasestablishedinnineandahalfyears.Theruthlessjudge'srepertoireofmischiefissuchthatsocialnetworkshavealreadyasked:IsitasadisticanalogytothenineandahalffingersofformerPresidentLula?

TheJudgeMoroalsodaredtosettheprohibition, inadditiontothecustodialsentence,offormerpresidentLulatoholdanyofficeorpublicfunction.Now,tofixthiskindofpenaltyforthosewhohavealreadybeenhonoredwithsomanytitlesofdoctorhonoriscausa,fortheexcellentpublicservicesrendered,isthesameasforacivilengineerwhocanworkonanythingbutnotengineering;ortothedoctor,whocannotpracticemedicine;ortothemetallurgical,who can notwork inmetallurgy. It is continued perversity,whose purpose of a sentenceceases to be, and aims at curtailing political activities, since, as a rule, public office andfunctionareofapolitical-administrativenature.

Thisimpedimentleadsustorememberthedictatorshipof64,when,bydecree477,penalizedthe student considered subversive, suspending him for up to three years of school seats,harmingnotonlytheyoung,butBrazil,sinceitwoulddelaytheentryofthefutureprofessionalinthelabormarketinthreeyears.Inthesameway,dictatorshipfighters,regardlessofwhethertheywerestudentsornot,throughindictmentsorconvictions,afterbeingreleasedbutstillunder the dictatorship, were prevented from working for years because the dictatorshipforced public and private companies To require the candidate to present the "Check orRecordsofGoodBackground"andthe"AttestationofPoliticalIdeology".

Thefirstwasprovidedbythepublicsecuritysecretariats,whichstatedwhethertheindividualwas respondingorwouldhave responded to a lawsuit filedby thedictatorship, if itwerestated,thecompaniesdidnot,asarule,admit.TheIdeologicalAttestationwasrequiredforpublic companies and it contained a questionnaire that the candidate answered in theDepartmentofPoliticalandSocialOrder-Dops(DepartamentodeOrdemPolíticaeSocial).Thisinstrumentwastoascertainwhethertherewasanysympathyfortheleftandagainstthedictatorship,thatis,inadditiontothepunishmentforthetorture,prisontime,therewasalsoalastingpersecutionthatwastheimpedimenttoentrytothelabormarketandconsequentsurvival.Again:besidestheinjurytotheindividual,therewastheinjurytothecountry.

Finally,JudgeSérgioMoro,aftertheunappealsentencing,issuedanewdecision,provokedbytheFederalPublicProsecutor'sOfficeinOctober2016,andwhichhehandledinacourtof

56

secrecy, blocking the accounts and confiscating the property of former President Lula,composing the web of paranoid persecution of hampering its political activities. In thedictatorshipof64theMilitaryJusticewaslessshamelessthanithasbeenthejudgmentofthe13thFederalCourtofCuritiba,creatorofamodelofJudgmentofexception.

ThedeanCapixabajudge,JoãoBaptistaHerkenhoff,pointsthetargetoftheMoro:

"Ifitisnotpossibletodefeataleader,whointendstoreachthePresidencyoftheRepublicbypopularvote,hemaybedefeatedbythevoteofasmallgroupofdressedtogas,withouttherighttoappealtotheFederalSupremeCourtinBrasilia"(AGazetanewspaper,July19,2017).

Thelistofconvictedinnocentsislong.TheoneofJesusChristgeneratedthegreatestreligionoftheWesternworld.SaccoandVanzetti,acquitted50yearslater,generatedareferenceofresistanceanddignitybeforethe(in)classjustice.Socrates,condemnedtodeath,drinkingthecicuta (poison) in a only sip and listening to his friends sobbing, says: "No, my friends,everythingmustendwithwordsofsomeomen:remaincalmandstrong."ThecondemnationofLulaisgeneratingtheincreaseofsupporterstohiscandidacyandaffiliationstotheWorkersParty-PT(PartidodosTrabalhadores).Andashehimselfsaid:"Iftheythoughtthatwiththissentencetheytookmeoutofthegame,moreandmoreIaminthegame"and"OnlythosewhohavetherighttodecreemyendaretheBrazilianpeople."

Brazilianswere,forthefirsttime,believingintheconstructionofademocracyofallandintheStateofRightsthattheguarantee,ifthisfeelingislost,Brazilcanmarchtoasocialchaosanddisappeartheself-esteemofbeingBrazilian.AsCharlesDarwinsaid,"Theendofhopeisthebeginningofdeath."Vitoria-ES,July21st,2017.

57

ThecrisisofthebrazilianinstitutionsreflectedintheconvictionofaformerpresidentoftheRepublicbyasinglejudge

GabrielaShizueSoaresdeAraujo*

TheEuropeanUnionsuffersuntilnowtheeffectsoftheworldeconomiccrisisthatbeganin2008, mistakenly faced through severe austerity policies that do not enable most of theaffected countries that compose the block to recover while the economic and socialinequalities increase to a very disproportionate extent to the desired discharge of publicdebts.

ThereferendumheldintheUnitedKingdomin2016,whichapproveditswithdrawalfromtheEuropeanUnion-alsoknownasBREXIT-wasoneofthemainreflectionsofthecollapseoftheEuropeaninstitutionsinfacingthecrisisandalsoitscommunicationwiththeEuropeancitizens.

Since the beginning, in the “postwar” period, as it became known, was a long term ofdevelopmenttotheEuropeanUnion.Itturnedtobethemostmodernanddemocraticmodelof regional integration in the world, based on the principles of solidarity and mutualcooperationwith a clear objective of creating a European identity that can be capable ofextending besides the national territories of theMember States, taking as a priority theeconomyofthesocialwelfare.

However,itsprojectbumpedintotheconformationoftheinstitutionsthat"rule"theUnion:whilethedecision-makingpowersareveryconcentratedintheheadsofstateofeachMemberState,emphasizingtheintergovernmentalismnotinfavorofthesupra-nationalityinrelations;theParliament,ontheotherhand,showsimpairedandfarfromitsconstituents.Inaddition,theexcessofmeasuresandproceduresadoptedamongtheEuropeaninstitutionsmakesitdifficultforordinarycitizenstounderstanditsfunctioning.

Furthermore,withtheeconomiccrisisof2008,theresultofthemeasureofforcesbetweenthedifferentMemberStatesthatarepartoftheEuropeanUnionwastheturntowardsaveryneoliberaleconomicpolicy,ofausterityandprotectionofthefinancialsystemindetrimentofspending on education, health and social welfare and suppression of previously acquiredsocialrights.Itisthepolicytocombatpublic"deficits."

Almostadecadelater,itispossibletoaffirmthatthelineadoptedwasaslip-up:thecountriesmostaffectedbythecrisisarebreathlesstorecoverytheireconomiesandarefollowingtiedupinconsequenceofhighunemploymentandmarginalizationofthelowerclasseswhichendsupspreadingthroughoutthecontinentbecauseofsuppressionoftheboundariespeculiartotheEuropeanUnion.

These factors,coupledwith the low levelofunderstandingofEuropeancitizensabout thefunctioning of the European institutions and their real possibility of interference in theconductofsuchinstitutions(i.e.,democraticdeficit),provideafavorableenvironmentforthegrowthofnationalistmovements,separatistpreachingoftheultra-rightandxenophobia.The

*DoctoralCandidateandMasterofLawsinConstitutionalLawfromthe“PontifíciaUniversidadeCatólicadeSãoPaulo (PUC-SP)”, i.e. the Pontifical Catholic University of Sao Paulo. Expert in Tax Law from the “PontifíciaUniversidadeCatólicadeSãoPaulo(PUC-SP)”.AssistantProfessorofConstitutionalLawinthegraduationcourseof the Law School from the “Pontifícia Universidade Católica de São Paulo (PUC-SP)”. Invited Professor ofConstitutionalLawinthePost-GraduationcourseatUNIFIEO–Osasco.Attorneyatlaw.

58

citizensfeeltheeffectsofbeingpartoftheEuropeanUnion,butatthesametime,theydonotfeelpartofit.

WithregardtoBrazil,althoughitdidnotfeeltheeffectsoftheeconomiccrisisbacktherein2008,duetothehighinvestmentsinsocialandinfrastructurepoliciesthatwereinfullforceduringthesecondtermofformerPresidentLuizInácioLuladaSilva,indeed,inaglobalizedworld,andgiventheprolongedrecessionEuropehasfacedinthelastdecade,itwouldnotbepossible for Brazil to go completely unharmed under the pressure of the global financialsystem.

Brazil has started succumbing to the crisis, although later,meanly because the economicconducts in Dilma Rousseff’s government, most of them ceding austerity measures thatalready have demonstrated improper in Europe. When it is mentioned herein the term“ceding” is because we cannot forget the coordinate pressure of the globalized financialsystem,eagertoprofitwiththeneoliberallogic.However,smallconcessionswerenotenoughto the financial systemand to the dominant elites, bringing countless losses to the lowerclasses,themainfinancersoftheBrazilianWorkersPartygovernments,untilthen.

Concurrenttothat,ithasstartedaninstitutionalcrisisinrelationsofthethreeBranches,i.e.,theExecutivePower,theLegislativePowerandtheJudiciaryPower,whichsupposedlyshouldbebalancedharmoniouslytoeachotherbyasystemofchecksandbalances.

In relation to the democratic deficit it can be highlighted as theNational Congress of theFederativeRepublicofBrazil’smainproblemsuchasoccurswiththeEuropeanParliament.FromthepointofviewofBrazil,itispossibletociteasfactorsofinfluencethelowlevelofunderstanding about the real functions of the parliament, lack of a previous bindingcommitment from the candidates in defense of a certain economic or social policy, theparliamentarians’ absence of transparency and accountability of their acts, no popularmechanismwhere the citizen can effectively charge the fulfillment of the sealed politicalagreementsandeventuallyawaytodestitutepublicmandateforthosewhosenotfulfillthem.

Similarly,asinEurope,whereitscitizencannotfeelrepresentedintheParliament,inBrazil,theExecutivefunctionsseemtohaveacloserdirectrelationshipwiththeirelectorsthantheLegislative functions with them. In both cases, however, the absence of a politicalconsciousnessisreflectedinpersonalistvotes,usuallyinfluencedbytheeconomicsuperiorityofeachcampaign.Avoteisnotacquiredbasedonideasandprograms,onthecontrary,itisinfluencedbythefacesshowedduringthepartyelectionbroadcast,somarketing,advertisinghaveagreatvalue.Butitisstilleasiertounderstandtheproposalsofthemajoritypositionsandtheirfunctionsbecausetheyareclearerforacommoncitizen.

The major example of the Brazilian democratic deficit is the odd voting session of theimpeachmentoftheformerPresidentDilma44,whichwasextraordinarilytransmittedlivebythetelevisionstationthatdominatessuchmediumofcommunicationandduringsuchsessionmost of the Brazilians couldwatch shocked and surprisedwith the political and personalbackgroundofthemajorityoftheparliamentarians,whosejustificationfortheirvoteswere

44In2016,democraticallyelectedPresidentDilmaRousseffunderwenttoalegallyquestionableimpeachmentproceeding,ruledbythedominantelitesandbytheconservativeclasses,whichwiththesupportofthemassmedia,thatinBrazilhasbeenmonopolizedfordecadesbyonlysixfamilies.Nocrimehasbeencommitted,onlyaninsurgencyofthedefeatedelitesintheelections,whotookadvantageoftheeconomiccrisistopressuretheParliamenttoparticipateinthisprocessofexception.

59

basedonissuesextremelyforeigntotheproceeding,suchastheirownfamilies,Godandanyothernarcissisticinvocations.

Inthismoment,itisnecessarytopunctuatethelackofdemocratizationofthemedia45,whichis concentrated in the hands of a select group representing the dominant elites that onlysharestheinformationthatsuitsthemandusuallytheonesthataredirectedtotheirinterests.ThisalsocontributestoalargepartoftheBrazilianpeoplebeingsurprisedbytheidentityoftheirownrepresentativesintheBrazilianParliament.

Thedifficultyofunderstandingoreducationtofilterwhatisdisseminatedbythemonopolizedmedia,causesthat,evenifunconsciously,publishedopinionisabsorbedasanabsolutetruth,sothatpublishedopinionandpublicopinionbecomeinthenationalcontextassynonymous.

Thisinstitutionalcrisismanifestsitselfingreaterproportionwhenapublicopinionisabletoinfluence the JudiciaryBranch, themajor interpreter of theBrazilianConstitution and theholderofthebureaucraticpowertogivethelastwordinsituationsofconflictinvolvingtheotherpowersortheiractions.

On other occasions in the world History, where the monopolized media promoted theadvancementofreactionaryforceswiththeupsurgeofclasshatredandclassdisguiseunderthe"moralandgoodmanners"discourse,theomissionoftheJudiciaryBranchintheroleofprotectingfundamentalrightsanditscowardiceorconnivanceinthefaceofthesubsequentmeasures of exception promoted in the fight against an elected "enemy," enabled theestablishmentofprolongedStatesofExceptionsuchasHitler'sNaziGermanyortherecentmilitarydictatorshipinBrazil.

Whatpermeatesthenow-known"OperaçãoLavaJato46”(i.e.,CarWashOperation),isasinglejudgepromotedbythemonopolizedmediatoafigureofsuperherointhefightagainsttheevil - representedhereinbythecorruption inthepoliticalclass thatdoesnotservetothepurposesofthefinancialsystemandalsothedominantelites.

So,insteadofusingforceormilitarypower,theestablishmentofaStateofExceptionissoughtbytherulingactionoftheJudiciaryBranchitself.Followingtheexampleofwhatwasdonein1989with Fernando Collor47, the "caçador deMarajás," (i.e.,Maharajahs’ Hunter) all theeffortsofthemediaareaimedatpromotingthefigureofthesinglejudgeSérgioMoroinorder

45ThehegemonicmediainBrazilareformedbyaprivategroupofcompanies,whichconstituteanoligopoly,andtheyarepartofapoliticalandeconomicelitethathasbeenleadingitscountryformorethan500years.Thiselite, of which the oligopoly of communication is part and spokesman, never accepted that Brazil could bepresidedbyaleft-wingmetallurgicalleader(Lula)andlaterbyawoman,ex-guerrilla(DilmaRoussef).ThemainrepresentativeofthismonopolizedmediaistheRedeGlobo,underthecommandoftheMarinho'sfamily.46InBrazil,majorinvestigation,accomplishedjointlywiththeFederalPublicProsecutor'sOffice,receivenamesthatareoftenmediatics,suchasCarWashOperation,whichinvestigatesallegedcorruptioncrimesinvolvingthenationaloilcompany, i.e., thePETROBRAS.Structuredanddeveloped inthe imageand likenessof the"manipulite"(cleanhands)operation-conductedbytheItalianJudiciaryinthe1990s-theCarWash,aswellasitsinspirer,hasthemainintransigentsupportofthemedia.InitiatedinthecityofCuritiba,capitaloftheStateofParana,theoperationendedupbeingassumedbyafederaljudgeoffirstinstance,thejudgeSérgioMoro.47 After a long period under military dictatorship, the first democratic presidential elections had as itsprotagoniststheelites'representative,FernandoCollordeMeloandtherepresentativeoftheworkingclass,LuizInácioLuladaSilva.Atthetime,therewasagreatmediacampaigntooverestimatethefigureofFernandoColloranddemoralizethefigureofLula,mainlyunderaMacarthistspeechthatcameasatraceofdicstorshiptimes.FernandoCollorwaselected,butdidnotsupporthimselfinthegovernment,beingexoneratedunderdenouncedforcorruption.

60

to avoid the return of former president Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva to the presidency of theRepublic.

Itisimportanttoclarifyhereinthattheexpressionsinglejudgeisnotbeingappliedinitslegalsense,i.e.,meaningatrialcourtrulingsareutteredbyasinglejudge,butbytheapplicationofitsownadjective:thisisararecasewithintheBrazilianMagistrature.Afterall,fleeingfromalljudge’s principles and duties, this single figure was imbued with a certain bias since thebeginning,ignoringlegitimaterights,thedefenses’evidenceandactinghimselfindetrimentalto the public prosecution service not only regarding the noncompliance with theConstitutionalandlegalprecepts,butalsoinhispromiscuousrelationshipwiththemedia.

ItcanbesaidthattheBrazilianNationalCouncilofJusticeortheFederalSupremeCourtwouldbecapableofcontrollingtheabusescommittedbythejudgeSérgioMoroinhisexerciseofthemagistracy,orevencapableofrestoringthecredibilityandseriousnesstotheinstitution.As Montesquieu warned, it is an external experience that every man who has power isimpelledtoabuseit,forsuchreason,itisnecessarytostipulatelimitsandformsofcontrollinghis performance. However, there is such great passivity in the face of the publicmisunderstandingscommitted,whichcanonlybeexplainedbythetirelesspressureofthepublished opinion, and the increasingly "sanctified" promotion of the public figure of thesinglejudgeofCuritiba48.

SérgioMorohasconducteda longanddisseminatedcasetothemedia,guidedbyhisownsolipsism.The judgehasreportedly ignoredall thehumanrights treaties towhichBrazil issignatory,besides theFederalConstitution itself, violatingbasic rightsand theprotectionsinherentintheDueProcessofLaw,suchasreasonabletimeframe,rightforanimpartialjudgeand the equal treatment in the procedure, without, however, being able to achieve hisultimategoal:evidenceofthe illicitcommittedbytheformerPresidentLuiz InácioLuladaSilva.

With respect to the extensive conviction based only on his own assumptions and in thetestimonyofasinglewitness(whichwasnotevenhomologatedasanegotiatedplea);thus,itis not appropriateherein tomake a great deal of digressionson the appliedhermeneuticprocedure:asingledecisionisexplainedbythedeviationofexistingfunctioninthepartialityofjudge’sconductwhorenderedit.Itisnotevenpossibletospeakofahermeneuticalcircle,whentheinterpretiveprocessiscutintheinterpreter'spre-comprehension.Fromthenon,hisvoluntarismledtothewholegroundsofthedecision.

It isnogreatsurprisethat,afteryearsofvaininteractionwiththemonopolizedmedia,thejudgeSérgioMorobasedonhisownconvictionhasdecidedtocondemntheformerPresidentLuizInácioLuladaSilvawithoutanyevidence.Itissomethingtypicalfromasolipsisticjudge,aspreviouslynotedbyLenioLuizStreck49.Infact,whatworries,isthegroundsofthesentencebased on elements completely foreign to the process, such as political issues and articlespublished in themedia, and especially the attacks of suchmagistrate against thedefenselawyers in their exerciseofprofession. It is perceived thedeliberate intentionnotonly tocondemn someone without evidence, but also his legitimate and constitutional right ofdefensebyrepressinghislawyers.

48CuritibaisthecapitaloftheStateofParaná,thejurisdictionofthefederaljudgeSérgioMoro.49LenioLuizStreckisajurist,professorofConstitutionalLawandPost-DoctorateinLaw,wellknowninBrazilforhisstudiesonconstitutionalhermeneutics.Hehasdevelopedatheoryaboutthejudge'ssolipsism.

61

Thedefenselawyersfromalloverthecountry,unfortunately,arealreadybeginningtofeelthedominoeffectinotherjurisdictions,i.e.,theinstitutionalbreakdownsopromotedoverthefigureofthissinglejudgeinCuritiba.ThedangeristhatsuchsingularitybecomesordinarytothepointofopeningspacefortheestablishmentofaStateofException,inthiscountrythathaslivedsolittleunderdemocracy50.

Thereisstillhope,ofcourse,thatthejudicialsystemwillrecomposeitself,withthereviewbythehigher courtsof thisexceptionalpolitical-media-legalprocessbeing facedby themainrepresentativeofthelowerclasses,theformerPresidentLuizInácioLuladaSilva.

However, it isalsonecessarytodoaradicalworkofrestructure inour institutions,andtopromoteanend-to-endreview,beginningwiththepoliticalreformandthedemocratizationofthemedia-verydifferentfromthecensorship,itshouldbenoted–inordertoavoidthatourcountryimmerseitselfinapermanentStateofException.

AsThomasPikettysaysabouttheinstitutionalcrisisintheEuropeanUnion,whichisalsotruefortheBrazilianinstitutionalcrisis,"menandwomenaregood:institutionsarebadandcanbeimproved."

50TheBrazilianFederalConstitutiondatesfrom1988,afteralongperiodofmilitarydictatorshipinBrazil(from1964to1985).

62

ThemultipleandperversemeaningsofSérgioMoro'ssentence

GiseleCittadino*

Wetendtolearn,duringthefirstclassesofphilosophyoflanguage,thatwecannotseparatespeechfromthesubjectofthespeech.Inthissense,thetextsareproducedbydeterminedpeople,carryingontheirownhistories,insertedinworldsoflifefullofvalues,towhich,suchsubjectsofspeechbindtoeachother.Therefore,thereisaninternalstructuringlinkbetweenwhoweareandwhatweproduce51.Ontheotherhand,thereader’stextdoesnotapproachit from a non-place.We receive the speech of the others from places and with peculiarcontours,internalizedcommitments,constructedidentities.

Thepolysemyorthemultiplemeaningsthatatextpossesses,arepreciselytheresultofthatdiversityofplaces, fromwhichwehavereceivedthe information, thespeeches, the texts,that,inturn,theyarealsoequallyproducedfromsodifferentplacesandfromdifferentiatedperspectives.With,thisinmind,itisimportanttomentionherein,thatthepolysemydoesnotresultintheimpossibilityofcommunication.Onthecontrary,ourabilitytocommunicateisintrinsically associated with the understanding. In this sense, we can use the legs to thepurposeofkickingaball,buttheirprimaryfunctionisallowingustowalk.Likewise,wecanuse the language to deceive, to mislead, but no society would able to keep its internalrelations,ifitwasused,inpriority,forastrategicaction,revertedtodeception,insteadof,toacommunicativeaction,aimedtotheunderstanding.

Likewise,wecanusethelanguagetodeceive,tomislead,butnosocietywouldabletokeepitsinternalrelations,ifitwasused,inpriority,forastrategicaction,revertedtodeception,insteadof, toa communicativeaction,aimed to theunderstanding.So,arewecapableofentering in a classroom, expecting to receive a false information from a teacher?Who iscapableofleavingadoctor’sappointment,takingintoconsiderationthattheseriousnessofthediagnosisprovidedbysuchdoctor,wasresultofhisbadtastejoke?Arewecapableofnotobeyingthecommandofafirefighterwhoordersustograbtheropeasawaytohelpustogetoutofthefireandwethinkthatthefirefighter’sgoodactionsarenottrue?Certainlynot.In fact, none of these above possibilities is even considered, because we are aware thatstrategicactionisparasitic,derivativeofacommunicativeaction.Or,inotherwords,weusethe language to make us be understood to the others. The deception, the lie, themanipulation,aresubsequenttotheunderstanding.

WhydoesSérgioMoro'ssentenceagainstLulacauseussomuchindignation?Itisnotdifficulttounderstand.Justimaginethejudgenexttotheteacherwhofeelspleasuretoconfusehisstudents, aswell as the doctor that feels goodwith suffering of the patient or even, thefirefighterwhohas funwith theconsequencesofa fragile rope.All the times thatwearecapableofrealizingaboutthemanipulationandthedeceitand,insuchmentionedtimes,wecannoticeaboutthestrategicaction,equally,wefindoutthebanishmentprocedureofthe

*Professorandcoordinatorofthepost-graduateprograminLawatPUC-RiodeJaneiro/RJ.Fellowship(IC)ofresearch productivity granted by the National Council for Scientific and Technological Development (CNPq).MemberofScientificCounciloftheInstituteJoaquinHerreraFlores.51Intheartworld–and,onlythen-wearedelightedwiththeabilityofthosewhocanspeakfromplacesthatarenottheirs.ChicoBuarquethrilledus,becauseheachievedauthenticitybyexpressinghimselfasawomanfromancientAthens,anexhaustedconstructionworkerorasadesperatemotherwhohadjustlostherson.

63

communicationandoftheunderstanding.Then,whydoesitcauseussomuchindignation?Becausethestrategicandmanipulativeperversity,meanstoignorethepainoftheothersinthe accomplishment of their goals and their pleasures. It is the opposite of empathy, ofunderstandingandofapproximation.

ThereisintheMoro’ssentence,asetofperversities,allofthemassuringthedeception.So,in order to achieve his goals, the judge ignores the defendant’s procedural guarantees,manipulatestheLawandthelegaltheory,andfinally,heintendstoattackanationalpoliticalproject. Sérgio Moro has elected three enemies: Lula, the Law and the popular nationalsovereignty.Itisnotsomethingthatwecansimplyignore.

A conviction is terrible for an innocent defendant. An unlawful decision represents thegreatestinjusticetoacitizenbythepartofonethePowersoftheState.WhentheStatePowerandthemonopolyofviolencefallintothecivilianbodies,thensuchdecisionmustbelegalandlegitimate.TheformerPresidentLulaoranyotherBraziliancitizencanbecondemned,losingpersonalassetsandownfreedom,onlyifthematerialityofthecasebeexpresslysupportedbyevidence,and,beobserved,therequirementsofaneffectivelegalprotection,ensuringtherightsofdefenseandtheduelegalprocess.Asamatteroffact,itisnotwhatweareseeing.Dueto,anincomprehensiblecoerciveconductionuptotheillegalleaks,passingbyalltypesofpublicconstraintsresultingfromsuchselectiveleaks,thecitizenLuizInácioLuladaSilvaisexperiencingviolentactionswhichconfirmthewitchhuntthathe isbeingsubject to,asapolitician,bythefirsttime,inourHistory.

Theconvictionequallymanipulates,distortsandmanipulatetheruleoflaw,thetheoriesoflawandtheproceduralrules,accordingtoitsownwickedpleasure.Theadjective“formal”is,unconventionally,addedtotheconceptofownership,andthen,weareintroducednow,toanewcivillawsensation:theownershipinfact.TheformerPresidentLula,wouldnothavethe“formal”ownershipofthe“triplex”(i.e.,thethree-storeyapartment),ashisdefenselawyershavelegallydemonstratedinsuchcase,andalreadyhavedisclosedthatthe“formal”ownerof it, isCaixaEconômicaFederal”, (i.e., it isoneofBrazilandLatinAmerica’smajorpublicbanks),evenso,hewasconvicted,becausehehastheownershipinfact.ThecomplaintfiledbythePublicProsecution’sOffice,ontheotherhand,pointstobriberieswhichtheformerPresident Lulawould have been received in exchange for contracts obtained byOAS, theBrazilianconglomerate,withPetrobras,thestate-ownedenergygiant.Meanwhile,thejudge,whenchallengingthedefense’sappealrequestingclarificationofthedecision,statesthathehas never considered the possibility of the former President Lula would receive undueadvantagesfromPetrobras’illegallydivertedresources,thusinauguratingaproceduralrule,which allows to convict someone, on the basis of something which is not present in thecomplaint.Finally,andwiththeintentiontonotextendtoolongwiththemattersofothers,Imention the Moro’s opinion in his sentence, stating that he may should consider theimprisonmentoftheformerPresident.However,insuchpointhearguesthatthereasonforthat,isnotbasedonpoliticalmatters,butdueto,apossibletrauma.Inthispoint,itseemsthatthefearwouldhadhadparalyzedhimand,onceagain,wecannotice,ajudgethatignoresthetechniqueanddisrespectsthefunctionthatheoccupies.

At last, the conviction aims to ban the former President Lula of the national political life,becausehewillbeineligibletoseekthepresidencyifhisconvictionisupheld.So,amongallthe perversities of this decision, which aims to prevent the free expression of popularsovereigntyis,withoutadoubt,themostseriousone,mainlyifweconsiderthesadpoliticaltrajectory of a country that suffers from frequent institutional ruptures, even when we

64

overcomethesetraumas.So,whena judgebelievesthatheamissiontobanishapoliticalleaderfromhispubliclife,becausehedoesnotagreewiththeLula’sprojectforthecountry,oreven,duethefact,thathewalksinanotherdirection;itistoimaginethatsuchindividualconsidershimself as a kindof substitute for thepopular sovereigntyor as anenlightenedvanguardoffirstinstance.TheBraziliandemocracy,whichhassuccumbedtoarecentcoupd'état, cannot be conducted by judicial leaderships wishing to silence the free popularmanifestation.

65

Moro,LulaandtheTriplexApartment:notesonaverdict.

JoãoPauloAllainTeixeira*GustavoFerreiraSantos**

MarceloLabancaCorrêadeAraújo***

On12July2017JudgeSergioFernandoMorosentencedformerpresidentLuizInácioLuladaSilvatonineandahalfyearsinprisonforcorruptionandmoney-laundering52.The238-page,962-paragraphverdictprovidesjustificationandgroundsforJudgeMoro’sconvictionofLulainrelationtotheGuarujátriplexapartmentcase.Thedocument isstrikinglyweakon legalarguments and appears, in various passages, to be more self-justification than verdict, afeaturetypicalofajudgewhohaslostimpartialityandlegitimacythroughbeingpersonallyinvolvedinthecase.

Awell-knownenthusiast for Italy’sManiPulitioperation, consideredbyMorohimself ina2004 text to be “one of the most impressive judicial crusades against political andadministrativecorruption”53, the judgecites “lossof legitimacyon thepartof thepoliticalclasses”asbeingadeciding factor in thesuccessofcorruption investigations.54Toachievethis,Morodefendsanalliancebetweenthejudiciaryandpublicopinionthroughbroadmediacoverageoftheworkofjustices.ThevideofootageofMoroaskingthepopulationtosupportcontinuationof his crusadewasno accident.As formethods adopted toobtain evidence,Moro is an enthusiastic advocate of plea bargaining, believing that “crimes against publicadministrationarecommittedinsecret,inmostcasesusingcomplexmachinations,andarethusdifficulttobringtolightwithoutthecollaborationofoneoftheparticipants”55

Judge Moro’s verdict in Penal Action nº 5046512-94.2016.4.04.7000 condemning formerpresidentLulanotonlyreflectstheseconvictionsandbeliefsbutalsorevealsthedifficultiesarisingfrompoliticizationofthelawandtheactiviststyleofjudgesinBrazil.Theverdictinitselfatteststothedangersofusingthelawforpoliticalends,asoccursincasesof“Lawfare”,inwhichthelawisconvertedintoaweaponofwar.

Thefunctionofthejudiciaryistoprovidelegalanswerstolegalproblems.Adesiretorespondpoliticallytolegalproblemscompromisestheautonomyandfunctionalityofthelaw.Clearly,

* Professor of Constitutional Law at Universidade Católica de Pernambuco and of Philosophy of Law atUniversidadeFederaldePernambuco.Master(UFPE,UniversidadInternacionaldeAndalucía)andDoctor(UFPE)ofLaw.** Professor of Constitutional Law at Universidade Católica de Pernambuco and Universidade Federal dePernambuco.Master(UFSC)andDoctor(UFPE)ofLaw,Post-doctorateatUniversityofValência.CNPqResearchProductivityFellow.***ProfessorofConstitutionalLawatUniversidadeCatólicadePernambuco.MasterandDoctorofLaw(UFPE).Post-doctorateatUniversityofPisa.Translatedby:RaneSouza52Theverdictrecommendsconviction.However,paragraph959statesthat,as“detentionofaformerPresidentoftheRepubliccannotfailtoinvolveacertaindegreeoftrauma,itisprudenttoawaittherulingoftheCourtofAppeal,beforecarryingoutthesentence.FormerPresidentSilvacanthuslodgehisappealasafreeman”.53 MORO, Sergio Fernando. Considerações Sobre a Operação Mani Puliti. p. 56 Retrieved fromhttp://s.conjur.com.br/dl/artigo-moro-mani-pulite.pdf54 MORO, Sergio Fernando. Considerações Sobre a Operação Mani Puliti. p. 57 Retrieved fromhttp://s.conjur.com.br/dl/artigo-moro-mani-pulite.pdf55 MORO, Sergio Fernando. Considerações Sobre a Operação Mani Puliti. p.58 Retrieved fromhttp://s.conjur.com.br/dl/artigo-moro-mani-pulite.pdf

66

inthecaseofajudgmentregardingaformerPresidentoftheRepublicandpotentialcandidatefor the same post in 2018, a political dimensionwill always be present. In such cases, itbehoovesthejudgetomaintainstrictobservanceofthelaw,avoidinganypoliticaluseoftheprocess,sincetheappropriateforumforpoliticsisthepublicsquare,notthecourt-house.

JudgeMoro’sreportoutlinesthechargesandthedefensein47paragraphsandhisdecisionisgroundedonthedefenseteam’squestioningoftheimpartialityofthejudge.TothisendheadducesaseriesofrulingsofTRF4thatupheldpreviousrulingsbyJudgeMoroinconnectionwith this case, including exemption from suspicion of impartiality as a result of academicarticles published by the judge, rulings regarding breach of telephone communicationconfidentiality,coercivebehavior,searchandseizure,relationswiththepressandsoforth.This argument drags on up to Paragraph 138, at which point the decision turns totranscriptions of passages of testimony inwhich the judgewas allegedly offended by thedefense.

OthernoteworthyfeaturesoftheverdictincludeworkingwithpleabargainingasaproceduralstrategyandwithsomeevaluationofevidenceonthepartofJudgeMoro:

PleabargainingemergedinBrazilwithLaw12,850of2013,ratifiedbythenpresidentDilmaRousseff. According to this legislation, the purpose of plea bargaining is to facilitateinvestigationand it thushasnoprobativevalueperse,requiringconfirmationbyconcreteevidence.Theprocedure ishedged inwithguarantees,with thepleabargainerhaving theright,accordingtoArticle5,v,“nottohavehisorheridentityrevealedbythemedianortobephotographedorfilmedwithoutpriorwrittenauthorization”.Morousespleabargainingasafundamentaltoolforsecuringhisconviction.Theproblemwithpleabargainingisthatittendstoinvolvehaggling56.Iftheinformantsayssomethingthatintereststhejudge,heorshewillberewarded;ifnot,thefullforceofthelawwillbeardownuponthem.Arrestcaneasilybeusedtoforceadenunciation,withtheprospectofreleaseasareward.

Inprovingownershipofthetriplex,theverdictcanbeseentobeanalyticallydisproportionate,sinceMororeservesfewparagraphsforexaminationofthecaseforthedefense.Bycontrast,extensivespaceisdedicatedtotheaccusation.Moroevenusesnewsreportstobackuphisconviction57. In various passages the judge transforms the suppositions of witnesses intoperemptoryaffirmations,aswhenheremarksononestatementthat"inherview,theaimofthevisitmusthavebeentocheckwhethertherenovationoftheapartmentwasgoingwell".Infact,thewitnesshadrespondedtothePublicProsecutor’squestiononthepurposeofthevisittotheapartmentbyMarisaLeticiaandherson,"Ibelieveitwastocheckonhowtherenovationwasgoing".Lateron,shesaid,"Iwasn’taroundthemthatoften.Someonesaid,'It’s goingwell', and that ledme understand that they had asked for it" (Paragraph 488).Hearsaywasalsousedasevidence.TheverdicthighlightsthestatementmadebyRosivane

56Art.4º§8oL.12850:Thejudgemayrefusetoapproveaproposalthatdoesnotmeetlegalrequirements,oradaptittothecaseinpoint.”57Paragraph376:“Itisworthnotingthat,intheyearfollowingthetransferofthereal-estatecompanytoOASEmpreendimentos, more specifically on 10/03/2010, with an updated version on 01/11/2011, O Globonewspaper published a report by journalist Tatiana Farah entitled "The Bancoop Case: presidential couple’striplexapartmentisbehindschedule";Paragraph412:“Notlongafterwards,on07/12/2014,OGlobopublishedareportbyGermanoOliveiraandCleideCarvalhoonthetriplexapartmentintheSolarisBuilding,inGuarujá,accordingtowhichtheapartmentbelongedtoLuizInácioLuladaSilvaandhiswifeMarisaLetíciaLuladaSilvahttps://oglobo.globo.com/brasil/cooperativa-entrega-triplex-de-lula-mas-tresmil-ainda-esperam-imovel-14761809.Emphasisadded.

67

Soares that it was “common knowledge” in the building and the neighborhood that theapartmentbelongedtoPresidentLula.Askedifshehadheardanyonesaywhotheapartmentbelongedto,thewitnesssaid,"Yes,mostoftheresidentsandthelocalshopkeepers.IwasactuallysurprisedwhenIstartedworkingtherethatIdidnotknowthis.IwasfirsttoldbyabusinessownerwhenIwenttoregisterthecompanytobuybuildingmaterialsandhesaid,'Ah, that’s Lula’s apartment, isn’t it', but I wasn’t told at the start, in writing. I have nodocument formally informingmeof this." (Paragraph500) It is common, in this testimonyfromworkersatthecompanyresponsiblefortherenovations,forthemtobeaskedaboutthebehavior of Marisa Leticia on her visit to the apartment. The witnesses’ feeling that herbehaviorwasthatofapurchaseroranownerisusedtogroundtheverdict.ThejudgewritesinParagraph506that"OnoneofMarisaLetíciaLuladaSilva’svisits,thewitnessstatesthatshe may have shown her the building’s facilities and that, in this witness’s opinion, shebehavedliketheownerofthepropertyandnotlikeapotentialbuyer".

Inespousingandcourtingpublicopinionfosteredbythenationalmassmedia,JudgeMorotransformedevidenceintomereproceduraldetails.Whentheevidence(orlackofit)doesnotspeakforitself,anyverdictisunpredictable,dependingonthewhimsandconvenienceofthemoment.

Thisverdict,therefore,notonlyrevealsaperilousextensionofthereachofjudicialpowerinBrazil,butalsoemploysmeasurestypicalofastateofexception.Therecanbenofairjudgmentwhentherightsofthedefendantarecurtailedandinferenceandconjectureonthepartofthejudgepredominateinarrivingataruling.

ThedecisiontoconvictPresidentLulaisnotanisolatedincident.Itispartofamoregeneralexpansionof thepowerof judges,aprocess thatwasalreadyworryingwhen found tobepresentinargumentsputforwardbyconstitutionaljustices.Thespreadofthispracticetothecriminaljusticesystemraisesallkindsofredflags.Ifthisgoesunchecked,wewillseefurtherexamplesofdecisionismandvoluntarisminthecomingyears.

Whenthoseinvestedwiththespecialpowersofthejudiciaryfeelatlibertytoreachdecisionsastheyplease,withouttheobligationtofollowrules,guidedonlybytheirownpersonalsenseofjustice,weareallthreatened.ThefoundationsoftheStateofLawareerodedandweareatleftatthemercyofthereactionofanall-powerfullimitlessauthority.

In the classicWeberian typology of legitimate forms of authority, charismatic authority ischaracterizedbybeliefintheextraordinaryqualitiesofthepersoninauthority.Thisleadstotheemergenceofdemagoguesandstrongmen.JudgeMoro’sactionsconstituteanappealtothemassestypicalofauthoritariandemocracies,whichistroublingwhenmadebytheheadoftheexecutivebranchofgovernment,butespeciallyalarmingwhentheindividualconcernedisresponsibleforupholdingtheruleoflaw.

68

Judicialjugglingandtheendofthedemocraticstateoflaw

JoãoRicardoW.Dornelles

“MorocondemnedLulawithaguiltyconscience.Whydidheneed60pagesofself-justificationbefore‘grounding’anddeliveringthesentence?”(LeonardoBoff)

PresentdayBrazilhaswitnessedthestrengtheningofpenalpracticesasameansofregulatingconflictinsociety.Thishasledtothedislocationofthepoliticaltothejudicialsphere,withpenalproceduresoccupyingacentralroleinthisprocess.TheprotagonismoftheJudiciaryinprocessesinvolvingwidespreadcriminalizationhasbeenoneofthemostimportantpointsfortheweakeningoftheconstitutionaldemocraticorderandthesignificantgrowthofspacesofexception.InBrazilthesecharacteristicshavebeendeepenedasaformofinterventioninthepoliticalstruggle,especiallytheactionsof‘OperationLavaJato’(OperationCarWashasitissometimesknowninEnglish),withtheimmediateconsequencebeingthecriminalizationofthepolitical,theincreaseofpenalselectivity,andstigmatizationthroughtheconstructionofthefigureofthe‘enemy’resultinginaprofoundweakeningofthedemocraticconstitutionalorder.

Howcanaconvictionbejustifiedwherenoproofispresented,orwhatisconsideredevidenceisrestrictedtothepleabargainingofanotheraccusedinexchangeforbenefitsinhisowntrial?How can something be considered to be a conviction when it lacksmaterial evidence ordocumentsprovingthematerialityoftheimputedcrime?

This is thecaseof thesentence issuedon12 July2017by JudgeSérgioMoro,of the13thFederalCriminalCourtofCuritiba,againstformerPresidentLuizInácioLuladaSilva.

Adecisionwhichappearsnothinglikeajudicialsentence.Itismorelikealong–asithasmorethan200pages–personalopinioninrelationtotheaccused.

AccompanyingthetrajectoryofJudgeSérgioMorosincethebeginningofOperationLavaJatowecanseealargequantityofsituationsanddecisionspracticedbyhimthatwedubiousattheveryleast.Startingwiththenumerousandexhaustiveconduçõescoercitivasofvariousaccused,includingtheformerPresidenthimself;theenormousnumberofpeopledetainedpreventively for longperiodsof time,without trial; thenumerous condemnationswithoutprooforwithfragilematerialevidence,includingthecondemnationofLula.

Inaninitialreadingwhatcallsattentionisthenumberofpages,aroundsixty,whereJudgeSérgioMorogivestheimpressionthatheismakingapoliticaldefenseofthesentencehewillannounceattheend.

Someofthemanypointswhichstandoutinclude:

- The judge assumes the position of inquisitor by simultaneously presenting himself asprosecutor and judge. At various moments, he actually becomes confused with theprosecution;

-Thepracticeoflawfareagainsttheaccused;

69

-Restrictionof theright todefense,disrespecting InternationalHumanRights lawandtheInternationalConventionssignedbyBrazil,inrelationtothetreatmentgiventotheaccusedandhislawyers;

-Selectivityof the judicialsystem,whichcondemnedformerPresidentLulawithoutproof,while there exists an enormousquantity of evidence against SenatorAécioNeves,MichelTemer;GedelVieiraLima,etc;

-Thecondemnationoftheaccusedwithanabsolutelackofevidence;

- Illegal tapping of telephone conversations between former President Lula and PresidentDilmaRousseff.

Fromthejudicialpointofview,Moro’ssentenceisapileofargumentsandinsinuationswhichprove nothing. It contradictions judicial and penal doctrine, the democratic constitutionalorder, and the basic principles of civilization, which have been pushed aside throughoutOperationLavaJato.

Moro’s sentence incorporates the worst that exists in the judicial and penal area: theinquisitorial logical of ‘penal efficiency,’ the ‘penal law of the enemy,’ the promiscuousconfusionbetweentheprosecutionandthejudge.Itisasetback,areturntoapre-modern,pre-enlightenmentpast.

In item 32, subsection P, Judge Moro’s sentence states that “there is documentary,testimonial,andexpertevidencethattheformerPresidentwastheowneroftheproperty,andthatitsrefurbishmentsweredoneforhim,withoutanypriceorvaluebeingpaidbyhim.”

Returningtothequestionthatrefusestobesilent.Whereisthe“documentary,testimonial,andexpertevidence” that JudgeMorostatesexists? It isaworthlessstatement, since theevidencedoesnotappear inthesentence itselfor inthedocumentssubmittedbyFederalProsecutionService.

Itisnotenoughtoannouncesomethingforittobecometrue.

Justforthepurposesofsupposition,letusimaginethefollowingsituation:someoneaccusesJudgeMoro of many things, various crimes and other immoral and illegal actions. Theseaccusationswillbejudgedbyanothermagistrate.However,theaccusationsremaininthefieldof deductions, suppositions, intention, or the subjective desire of those who make theaccusations, if no material, testimonial, or expert proof is presented. In other words,intention, supposition, desire, intuition, and conviction, by themselves alone, cannot betransformed intoa fact, theydonotbecometruths.Accusations,againstanyone,canonlybecometruewiththeexistenceofdocumentaryortestimonialproof,whichgivematerialitytotheaccusation,makingitconcreteandgivingitaprecisecontentinrelationtothefactsandactsimputedtotheaccused.OnlythistypeofproofisadmittedbyBrazilianlaw.

Drawing on the above example, the same occurred in relation to JudgeMoro’s sentenceconcerningtheaccusationsagainstformerPresidentLula.Everythingremainedinthefieldofsubjectivityofthejudge,aresultperhapsofhisdesirebeingconfusedwithreality.Andwhatisstillmoreserious,confusinghisdesireandsubjectivitywithhispublicrole(orwhatshouldbethepublicroleofamagistrate),withhispersonaldesiresand/orhispolitico-ideologicalpositions and convictions. However, without the proof admitted in the Brazilian judicialsystem.

70

Thecriticismmadeherereferstotheissuingofaconvictionagainstanyone,irrespectiveofwhotheyare.Aconvictionwhichrequiresmorethantwohundredpagestotrytoprove,inamerely argumentative manner, the deliberate responsibility of the accused for the actimputedtohim.Moreover,theentiresentencewassolelybasedontheargumentspresentedbytheFederalProsecutionServiceandaccompaniedbythejudge.

Andwearealwayscompelledtoreturntotheinitialquestion,whereistheproof?Attention,weareaskingabouttheproof,notaboutdesiresexpressedthrougharguments,convictions,oraffirmation.Concreteproof.Whereisit,JudgeMoro?

All of this become evenmore seriouswhenwhat is presented as conclusive evidence (orshould we have written ‘evidence’ between inverted commas?) are delações premiadas,roughlyspeakingpleabargaining.

AsProfessorAfrânioSilvaJardimwroteinhis“LegalOpinionfortheHumanRightsCommitteeoftheUnitedNations,”in2016,calledbyhim“QualifiedEvidence”:

“IamconvincedthattheformerpresidentLuizInácioLuladaSilvais‘condemnedinadvance.’Against him has been created an ‘environment’ of persecution, through police and penalinvestigationlackingapenaloffenseandtheminimumevidenceofconductofauthorshiporparticipationinfelonies.Astheysay:theychosethe‘criminal’andnowtheyarelookingforthecrime...”.

AccordingtothejuristFernandoHideoLacerda“thereisnomaterialityforthecondemnationforthecrimeofcorruption,”asthereisalso“nojudicialfoundationforthecrimeofmoneylaundering.”Accordingtohim,“thefactonwhichtheconvictionofformerpresidentLulawasbasedaccordingtothejudgewasthe‘defactoownership’ofanapartmentinGuarujá.Asaresult,hewascondemnedforcorruption(becauseheissaidtohavereceivedtherefurbishedapartmentasanunduebenefitfromGrupoOASduetocontractswithPetrobras)andmoneylaundering(becausetheyhadhiddenanddissimulatedtheownershipofthisproperty).”

Inhissentence,Morostatedthat“formerPresidentLuizInácioLuladaSilvaandhiswifewereDEFACTOOWNERSofthetriplexapartment164-A,inCondomínioSolaris,Guarujá.”HemadethisaffirmationeventhoughnowitnesshasstatedthatLulaorhiswifehadfrequentedthisproperty.

Moreover,theconceptof‘defactoownership’usedbyJudgeMoroinhissentencedoesnotexistintheBrazilianjudicialsystem.ItdoesnotexistbecauseitistheconceptofOwnershipwhichmostapproximatesthissituation. InArticle1196theBrazilianCivilCodestates“Theownerisconsideredtobetheonewhoactuallyexercises, infullor inpart,ofsomeofthepowersinherenttoownership.”InnopartofthesentencedoesJudgeMoroprovethatLulaand/orhiswifehadexercised,whetherfullyorinpart,thepowersinherenttoownership.Inotherwords,LulaandDonaMarisawerenevertheownersandneverhadpossessionofthepropertyinquestionor,asJudgeMoroprefers,neverhad“defactoownership”(sic).

Thus,inthesentencetheredoesnotappearanyproof,orevenindication,thattheformerPresidentorhiswifehadeverexercisedownershipofthistriplexapartment.Whatactuallyexistedwasavisitbythecoupletoseetheproperty.Moreover,avisitdoesnotconfigurepossession(“defactoownership,”accordingtothejudge)andmuchlessownership.

So,whatdowehave?WehaveasinglevisitbasedonwhichthejudgeconcludedthatLulaheldpossessionoftheapartment.

71

What isevenmorecurious(or is itonlynegligenceonthepartof JudgeMoro?) is thatnodocumentwaspresentedaboutpossiblenegotiationsforthepurchaseoftheproperty,nopropertydeed,noagreementofsale,promiseofdonation,nothingwhichcouldindicatethatLulaandhiswifehadobtainedatleastpossessionofthetriplexortheperspectiveofbecomingownersofthis.

HideoLacerdaalsocallsattentiontothefactthatinhissentenceJudgeMorousedatleastninetimesreportsfromOGlobonewspaperasiftheyweredocumentaryproof.WerecognizeofcoursethatOrganizaçõesGlobohasaspecialpowerinrelationtotheentireOperationLavaJato, and we also know, as we have been reminded by someone, that ‘Globo makes adifference.’ However, it is going too far to give the status of documentary proof to thejournalisticreportsoftheRiodeJaneironewspaper.Strange,ifnotlamentableorlaughable.

Are this set of reports fromOGlobo,which in a legalmagical trick are transformed into‘documentaryproof,’theproofthatLulaisthe‘defactoowner’oftheapartment?AsIsaidbefore,strange,lamentable,laughable.

But itwas importantto linkthecasetoPetrobras,afterallhowto justifythefactthatthejudgementwasundertheauspicesofOperationLavaJato?Thereisnolimittothisjudicialjuggling.Heretheroleofthereadymadepleabargainingcomesin.AformerdirectorofGrupoOAS,LéoPinheiroissaidtobethetestimonialevidencetoprovethattheownershipofthepropertyanditsrefurbishmentweretheresultofnegotiationsinvolvingPetrobras.Weshouldremember that LéoPinheirooffered twoversionsofhisdelaçãopremiada. In the first,heexempted former President Lula. Since the original version did not please the judge fromCuritiba,anotherversionwasmade,denyingwhathehadpreviouslysaid.

Andwhereisthedocumentaryproofoftheseclaims?Nodocument.Nothing.Theonlythingswhich exist are declarations obtained through the negotiation of the plea bargainingagreement. It is important to remember that those making these plea bargains are notrequired to say the truth.Theyoffer these accusationsnot in thenameof justiceor forelevatedethicalprinciplesorthenobilityoftheiracts,butrathertotrytonegotiatealighterpunishment,orperhapsbetterto‘savetheirownskins.’

Weshouldrememberotherthings:thatinhissentenceJudgeMorodidnottakeintoaccountLula’smorethanseventydefensewitnesses;thatduringthevariousOperationLavaJatotrialshewasselectiveindealingwiththedelaçõespremiadas,acceptingthosewhichcouldindicatesomething against Lula and discarding thosewhich denied his involvementwith receivingbribes or, because “this is not relevant,” as in the case of those which involved PSDBpoliticians,suchastheformerPresidentFernandoHenriqueCardoso,AécioNeves,etc.

According to the juristDalmoDallari, thecondemnationof formerPresidentLula is illegal,sinceitdoesnotpointtothepracticeofanycrime.Sinceithasnolegalbasis,itisasentencewithpoliticalmotivation,configuringunconstitutionalbehavioronthepartofJudgeSérgioMoro,forwhichhecouldbeheldresponsible,andevenpunished,bysuperiorinstitutionsofthejudiciary.

Dallarialsonotedthatthe“verylongdecision”citesfactsandpresentsargumentswhich“donotcontainanyproofofthepracticeofacrimecommittedbyLula.”Heconcludesthatthecondemnationoftheaccused lacksany legalbasis,and it is thusapoliticalcondemnation,therebyconfiguringitsunconstitutionality.

72

ThesentenceisbasedontheaffirmationthatLula,whenhewasexercisingthePresidencyoftheRepublic,receivedatriplexapartmentinGuarujáinexchangeforadvantagesforGrupoOASinPetrobrascontracts.AccordingtoDallari,“ifthisreallyhadoccurredtherewouldhavebeenajudicialbasisforaccusingLulaofcommittingacrimeandhissubsequentcorrectjudicialcondemnation.However,itoccursthatintherelevantpublicrecordsLuladoesnotappearasbeing or having been the owner of the apartment in question, nor was any documentsubmittedinwhichheappearsassuch,orevenasthecommittedpurchaser.”Sincetheacton which Lula’s condemnation was based never existed and no proof was presented toconfirmthis,theconvictionisgroundonafalsebasis,andisthusillegal.

Finally,anappealcanbemadetothe4thFederalRegionalCourt(TRF-4),basedinPortoAlegre.AccordingtoOEstadodeS.Paulonewspaper,TRF-4hasalreadyupheld38%ofappealsmadeto itagainst thedecisionsof JudgeMoro. It is thusexpected that thiscourtwillannul thesentenceagainstformerPresidentLula.Itisworthnotingthatrecently,on27June2017,TRF-4upheldtheappealofJoãoVaccariNeto,formertreasurerofthePT,condemnedbySérgioMoroto15yearsand4monthsinprison,acquittinghimofthecrimesofcorruption,moneylaundering,andcriminalassociation.TheappellatejudgesLeandroPaulsenandVictorLuizdosSantosLausvotedinfavoroftheacquittal.TheonlyjudgetodefendthemaintenanceofthecondemnationwasJoãoPedroGebranNeto.TheupholdingoftheappealwasbasedonthelackofproofinJudgeMoro’sconviction.

TherelevantnumberofJudgeSérgioMoro’ssentenceswhichhavebeenchangedintheTRF-4couldbeanindicatorofaroutinepracticeinhisdecisionswithoutanylegalbasis.

WhatisnormalisthattheappellatejudgeswillconsiderthefragilityofthematerialevidenceonwhichthesentenceisbasedandacquitLula.However,wearenotlivinginnormaltimesandweighingontheappellatejudgesisthepoliticalpressuretopreventLula’scandidacyin2018.Pressureexercisedbythesamesectorswhowereinvolvedinthe2016Coupwhich,inanunconstitutionalmanner,removedPresidentDilmaRousseff.

OnceagainDalmodeAbreuDallari’slessonisclarifying:

“Thefundamentalfact isthatthecondemnationofLulabyJudgeSérgioMorohasnolegalbasis,withtheonlyjustificationbeingpoliticalmotivation.ItisworthnotingherethatArticle95,SoleParagraph,oftheBrazilianConstitutionstipulatesthatjudgesareprohibitedfrom:“III.Beinginvolvedinpolitical-partyactivities.”Evidentially,thisactivitycanbeexercised,andisbeingexercised,when someonepracticesactsmotivatedbyapoliticalobjective,or thecreationofobstaclestomembersofapoliticalorientationcontrarytothepreferencesoftheJudge. In issuing a judgment lacking any judicial basis, aiming at creating obstacles for anoutstandingpoliticianopposedtohisconvictionsandtothecandidatesofhispreference,theJudgeisparticipatinginpoliticalpartyactivity.ThisispreciselywhatJudgeSérgioMorodid,who,aswellasissuingasentencelackinganyjudicialbasis,offendedtheexplicitstipulationsoftheConstitution.”

Inadditiontothelackofmaterialevidence,thesentencewasissuedwithoutlegalbasisandwithanevidentpoliticalmotivation.This isnotasentencebasedon law,butratheratrialbasedonexception.

73

Partialityandfetish:Freudexplains

JoaoVitorPassuelloSmaniotto*DécioFrancoDavid**

Wesayno:Werefusetoaccept

thismediocrityasdestiny(E.Galeano)

The system, defined by Eduardo Galeano as “machine”, teaches “to accept horror as ifacceptingthecoldinwinter”58.Coincidentally,inthiswinterof2017,wereceivedthereleaseof the Conviction of former President Lula, in which the federal magistrate Sérgio Morocondemnshimforpracticingthecrimesofpassivecorruptionandmoneylaundering.The218pages written by the magistrate clearly demonstrate the intent of the process and itsdeclination to a judgment value outside the conduct of a criminally typical conduct,concentratingexclusivelyonthesymbolrepresentedbythefigureoftheformerpresident.Onhere, inthisrelationshipbetweenthesubjectandtheobject is thatthe interestofthejudgebecomesunderstandable.Onhere,liesthetruematerializationofthewholeparanoidframeinstitutedandconfirmedbytheprimacyofthehypothesisaboutthefact59.

*PhDinLegalandPoliticalSciences(UniversidadPablod´Olavide–Sevilha/Espanha).MasterinHumanRights,interculturalityanddevelopment(UniversidadPablod´Olavide-Sevilha/Espanha).MasterinFundamentalRightsandDemocracy(CentroUniversitárioAutônomodoBrasil–Unibrasil).ProfessorofPoliticalScienceandStateTheory,ConstitutionalLaw,LaborLawandIntroductiontotheStudyofLaw(FaculdadesIntegradasdoValedoIguaçu–Uniguaçu).Lawyer.**PhDStudentandMasterinLegalScience(UniversidadeEstadualdoNortedoParaná–UENP/Brasil).MasterinCriminalLaw(UniversidadedeSãoPaulo–USP/Brasil).SubstituteProfessorofCriminalLaw(UniversidadeFederal do Paraná – UFPR/Brasil). Professor of Criminal Law (Faculdade de Educação Superior do Paraná –FESP/Brasil).Lawyer.58GALEANO,Eduardo.Diasenoitesdeamoredeguerra.PortoAlegre:L&PMPocket,2016,p.83.59CORDERO,Franco.Guidaallaprocedurapenale.Torino:UTET,1986,p.51.Cordero'sfindingisexplainedbythefactthatthemagistratecreatesahypothesisonwhichheseeks,throughoutthe judicial instruction,onlyfacts or signifiers confirming the accusation, dispensing with any different element.. The same reasoning ispresentinCORDERO,Franco.Procedurapenale;7.ed.Milano:Giuffré,2003,p.25.InFreud'spsychoanalysiswefindasimilarpassagewhenhedealswiththesufferingofreality:“Whilethisprocedurealreadyclearlyshowsanintention of making oneself independent of the external world by seeking sanction in internal, psychicalprocesses,thenextprocedurebringsoutthosefeaturesyetmorestrongly.Init,theconnectionwithrealityisstill further loosened; satisfaction is obtained from illusions, which are recognized as such without thediscrepancybetweenthemandrealitybeingallowedtointerferewithenjoyment.Theregionfromwhichtheseillusionsariseisthelifeoftheimagination;atthetimewhenthedevelopmentofthesenseofrealitytookplace,thisregionwasexpresslyexemptedfromthedemandsofreality-testingandwassetapartforthepurposeoffulfillingwisheswhichweredifficulttocarryout.Attheheadofthesesatisfactionsthroughphantasystandstheenjoymentofworksofart—naenjoymentwhich,bytheagencyoftheartist,ismadeaccessibleeventothosewhoarenotthemselvescreative.Peoplewhoarereceptivetotheinfluenceofartcannotsettoohighavalueonitasasourceofpleasureandconsolationinlife.Neverthelessthemildnarcosisinducedinusbyartcandonomorethanbringaboutatransientwithdrawalfromthepressureofvitalneeds,anditisnotstrongenoughtomakeus forget realmiseryAnotherprocedureoperatesmoreenergetically andmore thoroughly. It regardsrealityasthesoleenemyandasthesourceofallsuffering,withwhichitisimpossibletolive,sothatonemustbreakoffallrelationswithitifoneistobeinanywayhappy.Thehermitturnshisbackontheworldandwillhavenotruckwithit.Butonecandomorethanthat;onecantrytore-createtheworld,tobuildupinitssteadanotherworldinwhichitsmostunbearablefeaturesareeliminatedandreplacedbyothersthatareinconformitywithone’sownwishes.Butwhoever,indesperatedefiance,setsoutuponthispathtohappinesswillasaruleattainnothing.Realityistoostrongforhim.Hebecomesamadman,whoforthemostpartfindsnoonetohelphimincarryingthroughhisdelusion.Itisasserted,however,thateachoneofusbehavesinsomeonerespect

74

Initially,itcanbeverifiedthatinagoodpartofthedecision,thereisasincereconcern(ornot!)ofthemagistrateinjustifyinghisacts,tryingtodispelhispersonalvaluesandopinionsinaclearattempttoassert“havingnochoicebuttocondemn”.However,fromtheFreudianstudies,itisknownthateverybody“usuallysaysmorethanintendtosay”60.Afterall,ineveryspeech, the subject talks about what has consciousness, but, at the same time, theunconscious is alsomanifested in discourse, either by choice ofwords, in associations, inlapsesoflanguage,intheinsistenceofsomesignifiers61.

Sincenow, Thispsychoanalytic interpretationof thedecisionallowsus tounderstandandconcludethatwearefacingapunitivefetishandthattheconstructionofthedecisioncontentreinforces a retributive matrix62, very close to what Nietzsche63 identifies as the spirit ofrevengeandthat,differentitsdecision,theJudgeisheavilyinfluencedbythemediaandisdirectedatpoliticalpersecutionor,underthetermsofthedecision,directata“legalwar”64.

Therefore, knowing that the unconscious is not so hidden65, The conviction of the formerpresidentclearlydemonstratesthelackofimpartialityofthejudge.Ademocraticproceduralsystemcentralizesitsactionintheinertiaandimpartialityofthemagistrate66.AsstatedbyRubens Casara, this pillar of the structure of the jurisdictional function corresponds to asubjective public right, fundamental right of the citizen materialized by the access to anindependentandimpartialjudge67.LuigiFerrajollistatesthatimpartialityisexpressedbythreeinherentprofilesofthejurisdictionalaction:1)Equidistance:Correspondingtotheremovalofthejudgefromtheinterestsoftheparties;2)Independence:Representedbytheexternalityofthemagistratetothepoliticalsystem;3)Naturalness:Representedbythedeterminationof its designation and its competences68. The decision demonstrates the infraction to thethree profiles identified by Ferrajoli. Thenaturalness was the subject of reflection by themagistratewhentryingtojustifyhiscompetencetoanalyzetheprocess(chapterII.1oftheconviction)and,independentlyofnotagreeingwiththepleasputforwardbythemagistrate,there is,also,grotesqueaggressiontothetwootherprofiles. It iseasilyobservedthatthemagistrate's independence is non-existent. If the judge should remainoutside thepolitical

likeaparanoic,correctssomeaspectoftheworldwhichisunbearabletohimbytheconstructionofawishandintroducesthisdelusionintoreality.Aspecialimportanceattachestothecaseinwhichthisattempttoprocureacertaintyofhappinessandaprotectionagainstsufferingthroughadelusionalremouldingofrealityismadebyaconsiderablenumberofpeopleincommon”(FREUD,Sigmund.ObrasCompletas,volume18:Omal-estarnacivilização,novasconferênciasintrodutóriaàpsicanáliseeoutrostextos(1930-1936).SãoPaulo:CompanhiadasLetras,2010,p.37-38).60CASARA,Rubens.MitologiaProcessualPenal.SãoPaulo:Saraiva,2015,p.100.61AsinFREUD,Sigmund.ObrasCompletas,volume16:Oeueoid,“autobiografia”eoutrostextos(1923-1925).SãoPaulo:CompanhiadasLetras,2011,p.14-21.Inthesamepointofview,GOMES,Gilberto.Ateoriafreudianadaconsciência.Psicologia:TeoriaePesquisa,vol.19,n.2.[online],2003,pp.118.62 About the subject, DAVID, Décio Franco; SALOMÃO NETO, Antônio. Fetichismo e Pena: Reflexões sobrepsicanálisenoDireitoPenal.RevistaOMal-EstarnoDireito,v.2,n.2.Set./2016,p.1-17.63NIETZSCHE,Friedrich.Agenealogiadamoral.2.ed.Petrópolis:Vozes,2011,p.31ess.64Inportuguesethetermis“guerrajurídica”anditappearsintheitemsnumber39,66,77,83,118,127,128,131,132,138oftheconviction.65 “The unconscious is a concept forged in the wake of what works to construct the subject” (...) “Theunconsciousiswhatwesay”(LACAN,Jacques.Escritos.RiodeJaneiro:Zahar,1998,p.844).66AccordingLOPESJR.,Aury.DireitoProcessualPenal.11.ed.SãoPaulo:Saraiva,2014,p.169-171.67CASARA,Rubens.Op.cit.¸p.144.68FERRAJOLI,Luigi.DireitoeRazão:TeoriadoGarantismoPenal.3.ed.SãoPaulo:RevistadosTribunais,2010,p.534.

75

system (independence) hownot to questionhis partialitywhenheparticipates in politicalevent of opposition party to the ex-president? 69. Likewise, his performance as a trueinvestigator (activeproceduralpart)demonstrates the lackof respect forequidistance.Ofcourse,thedesiredimpartialityisnotconfusedwithneutrality,asJacintoNelsondeMirandaCoutinho explains70.On the contrary! It is necessary that in addition tomaintaining in anendoprocessualimpartialitybyequidistanceanddistancefromthemanagementofevidence,themagistratepresentsasubjectiveimpartiality71(maximumexpressionofhisindependence).This avoids theblurringofproceduraldemocracy,which requires thatprocedural subjectsideologicallyassumetheirpositions72.

The assumption of an ideological position must be consistent with the systematicconstitutionaldemocraticstructure.Inotherwords,ifIjudgeadefendant,letmejudgehimasthedignifiedpersonandcitizenwhoisandifthereisanyfactorthatinterfereswiththisprocess, Imustmove away from it. In otherwords, In otherwords, ifmy (un)consciencedesirespunishment,evenbeforeexaminingtheproof,thatI,magistrate,donotexercisetheactof judgment!Thisobservationavoids the formalizationofa fetishist relation topunish(subvertingthepartforthewhole)73.Thissubversion,inthecaseinthespotlight,correspondstothepunishmentofapartymemberas if itwerepunishingthewholepartybecausethejudgehasapositioncontrarytotheideologyofthecollective(party).Oralsocorrespondstoafallaciouspunishmentthatbelievesrestorethestatusquo,whetherbydeprivationoflibertyorbyblockingassets74.

However, in this procedural game, the former president was not identified as a subject(signifier)ofrightsbythemagistrate,butonlyasanobject (subversionofthepartytothedetrimentofthewhole).Forthisreason,theunderstandingofasignifier75wasabandonedandthesatisfactionoftheobjectoffetish(Whichcorrespondstothepunishment)hadbeensoughtby the judge.Fromthe famouswritingofFreud76, the fetishcanbeunderstoodascorrelatedtotheimage,symbol,etc.Theprojectiononwhatisexpectedoftheobjectbythe

69Anobservation:Theparticipationofthejudgeinthementionedeventisnotorius.TherearealotofimagesofthejugdeparticipationsinPSDB’sevents.However,justtomaintaintheacademicbenchmark,followingreportlink: http://www.gazetadopovo.com.br/blogs/certas-palavras/sergio-moro-e-o-palanque-do-pre-candidato-do-psdb/.Inaddition,itisnecessarytohighlightthecriticismtothefactthatthedecisioncontainsascondemningsubstratethenewspaper"OGlobo"report,asthebasisofitspositioning.(Item376ofthejudgment).70 COUTINHO, Jacinto Nelson deMiranda. Introdução aos princípios do Direito Processual Penal brasileiro.SeparataITEC,ano1,nº4–jan/fev/mar2000,p.12.71Cf.CASARA,Rubens.Op.cit.,p.146.72 COUTINHO, Jacinto Nelson de Miranda. O papel do novo Juiz no Processo Penal. Empório do Direito.Disponívelem:http://emporiododireito.com.br/o-papel-do-novo-juiz-no-processo-penal-por-jacinto-nelson-de-miranda-coutinho/.Acessoem21ju.2017.73 This replacement of the whole by the part, integrates the fetishistic characteristics presented by Binet(abstractionandexaggeration).Inthisway,theparticularobjectisarepresentationorprojectionofanimageofthe whole. About the subject: SAFATLE, Vladimir. Fetichismo: Colonizar o Outro. Rio de Janeiro: CivilizaçãoBrasileira,2010,p.40-41.74ViewthesameargumentationinDAVID,DécioFranco.SALOMÃONETO,Antonio.Op.cit.,p.10ess.75“Asubjectisthatwhichcanberepresentedbyasignifiertoanothersignifier”(LACAN,Jacques.OSeminário,livro16:deumoutroaooutro.RiodeJaneiro:Zahar,2008,p.21).76FREUD,Sigmund.ObrasCompletas,volume17:Inibição,sintomaeangústia,Ofuturodeumailusãoeoutrostextos(1926-1929).SãoPaulo:CompanhiadasLetras,2014,p.302-310.

76

realizationofadrive(orevenaperversion77)unleashactstoachievethedesiredobject,butthe individual forgets that often the desired object does not match the achieved object(precisely because it is a rediscovered object) 78, what, somehow, is represented by theconceptionofghostlyimage79.Inthepresentcase,itcorrespondstopunishingsomeonetoextirpate endemic corruption. In short, the ghostly imagewould be the scene of the ex-presidentgoingtoprison,satisfying,thus,thepunitivefetishism.

Thisisperceptiblebythevagueandambiguousexpressionsandargumentsthatdenoteanearly inclination to condemnatory judgment. In particular, in paragraphs 106 to 110, thedecision states that it is possible use illegal telephone wiretapping, which would notcharacterizeaninfractionbythefactthatnocontentofthisillegalitywasused,asiftherightto private life and intimacy could be relativized by the simple fact that no such illegalwiretappingwasusedintheconviction.Initem126,thejudgestatesthatthepossibilityof“reviewingjudicialdecisionsbythehighercourtsispartofthesystem”(whichiscorrect),buthisideologicalpositionisnotthis.Asisknownbyall,thejudgeopenlysupportsaproposaltoreducethenumberofproceduralappeals80

Initems242,243,244and245thedecisionaffirmsthatthereisconfirmationofthecontentpresentedinthesomepleabargaindonethroughouttheprocess;however,throughoutthetext, it isverifiedthatthereisonlymentiontothetestimoniesthemselvesanddocumentsthatcannotcorroboratetheindictment.Furthermore,inpartsofthedecision,thereisaclearattempttoreversetheburdenofproof(especiallyinitems442,447,448,449and450),when,indeed,howwelldefinesPauloRangel,theburdenofproofisexclusivetotheprosecution81.Inotherwords,insayingthattheformerpresident“didnotpresentconcreteexplanationatall”(item450),themagistratereversedtheburdenofproof,afundamentalcharacteristicof

77Lacanbelievesthatfetishismshouldbeclassifiedasaperversion(LACAN,Jacques.OSeminário,livro04:arelaçãodeobjeto.RiodeJaneiro:Zahar,1995,p.157).78LACAN,Jacques.OSeminário,livro04:arelaçãodeobjeto.Op.cit.,p.25.79“WesawearlierhowFreud, inamove thatwillbegreatly implementedbyLacan,opens thedoor to theresonanceofthemostarchaicsenseofthewordidealization. It isthesubjectionoftheobjecttothementalschemawehaveofit.Thatis,itistheapprehensionoftheobjectastheprojectionofamentalschemewhich,inthe case of fetishism, is the ghostly image. (...) This explains, for example,why the fetishist is necessarily ascenographerwho,throughakindofcontract,constructssituationsinwhichheseekstonullifyanydissonancepresentinthebodyoftheobjectbymeansofitsperfectconformationtotheimage”(SAFATLE,Vladimir.Op.cit.,p.120-121).80Abouthisideologicalpositionagainstdefensejuridicalprocedures:DAVID,DécioFranco.As"boasintenções"causam mais um terremoto no sistema jurídico-penal. Justificando. Disponível em:http://justificando.cartacapital.com.br/2015/04/13/as-boas-intencoes-causam-mais-um-terremoto-no-sistema-juridico-penal/.Acessoem:20jul.2017.81Forexample,iftheProsecutornarrates,inindictment,thefactcalled“killsomeone”withthedescriptionofthemodusoperandiandallofthecircunstancesofthecrimeandinhisinterrogationthedefendantallegesthaton the date and time of the event hewas traveling to another state or country; Itwill be up to the PublicProsecutortoprovewhathedescribedintheindicment:atypical,unlawfulandguiltyfactand,consequently,ifhisalibiisfalsebymeansofevidenceadmittedinthelegalsystem.(...)Anyway...Thedefendantalleges,buttheburdenofproof,nowadays,duetotheFederalConstitution,IsexclusivetothePublicProsecutor'soffice.Therightofthedefendanttopleadinhisdefensewhateverhepleasesisnottobeconfusedwiththeburdenofproof.ThisburdenistotallyandexclusivelyoftheProsecurtor.Theruleinsertedinthearticle5º,LVII,daCRFBshouldbeseenasthetotalinvestoroftheburdenofproofandanydoubtsthatremainregardingthenon-substantiationofthefactimputedtothedefendantbytheindictmentofProsecutormustberesolvedintheirfavor.It istheapplicationoftheprincipleindubioproreo.(RANGEL,Paulo.DireitoProcessualPenal.23.ed.SãoPaulo:Atlas,p.507).

77

thepresumptionofinnocence,assetforthinarticle5º,LVII,ofConstitutionoftheFederativeRepublicofBrazil.

Also,initems468,591,592,593,627,628,629,630,themagistrateaffirmstheexistenceofcontradictionsand–ratherthanassessingthearguments(calledevidencebyhim)underthefilterofindubioproreo–heinterpretsintheoppositedirection(“Ifthereisinconsistency,heisguilty!”-clearexpressionoffetishisticperversion).Thispre-sentencingprovisionisblatantlyexposedintheselectiveassessmentoftestimonials,asstatedinitems641,642,643and644.In these items, he only considered “true” the superficial testimony against the formerpresident,materializing,therefore,theghostlyimagerelativetotheobjectoffetish.Thesameoccurswiththeinnumerablerepetitionsregardingthecontradictionsandtheinsistenceofthemagistratetorepeatedlyaskforthesameexplanation(toconfirmthis,itisenoughtomakeaquickreadingoftheexcerptsoftheinterrogationthatweretranscribedinthesentence-item437).

Ademocraticcriminalprocedureshould focus its structuringontheScenicComprehensiondefendedbyWinfriedHassemer82,accordingtowhichthemagistrate(intheroleofspectator)watches the stories of the procedural actors – because there are no truths for previousconvictions83–sothatattheendofthedialogueprocess,themagistratecomestoajudgmenton the case produced (analysis of a fleeting object84). Scenic Comprehension, in itself,correspondstotheunderstandingoftherelationshipbetweenwhatisalreadyproducedinthe criminal enunciation (Criminal Substantive Law – case) and what will be completed(CriminalProceduralLaw)intheform(howandwhen)thatthetextregulates(acts,deadlines,etc.),allinaccordancewithdemocraticproceduralrules.Inthismodel,thedefendant“isnotonlyparticipantofthesceniccomprehension,butalsotheobject:itisthepropermeansofproof”85and,assuch,deservesallrespectandpreservationofhisproceduralandmaterialguarantees. Unfortunately, both the process and the sentence do not match this model.Therefore, it is possible to speak of an unbridled and delirious search for “happiness” bypunishment86.

Inthefaceofallthis,werefusetoacceptthethehorrorlikethecoldofwinter.Atthishistoricalmoment in which the criminal constitutional guarantees seem to evaporate before thepunitivistfury,Wecometogethertosaynotothisconviction,andsayingno,wesayyestodemocracyasGaleano87verywellwrote:

“Andinthisstateofthings,wesaynototheneutralityofthehumanword.Wesaynotothosewhoinviteustowashourhandsinthefaceofthedailycrucifixionsthattakeplacearoundus.

Totheannoyingfascinationofacold,indifferent,contemplativeartofthemirror,wepreferawarmartthatcelebratesthehumanadventureintheworldandparticipatesinit.Tothe

82HASSEMER,Winfried.IntroduçãoaosfundamentosdoDireitoPenal.PortoAlegre:SAFE,PortoAlegre,2005,p.172ess.83HASSEMER,Winfried.Op.cit.,p.186.84ThesameweightingontherelationwithobjectthatwementionedaboveismadebyHassemer:“Theobjectsdonotexistoutsideofourperceptionandoutofour statements about them, so that to verify the truthofknowledgeonemustonlycomparethestatementswiththeobjects.Thetheoryofthecorrespondenceoftruthisnaive;correctisthe‘consensustheoryoftruth’”.(HASSEMER,Winfried.Op.cit.,p.186).85HASSEMER,Winfried.Op.cit.,p.200.86Accordingtothefirstnoteofthistext.87GALEANO,Eduardo.Nósdizemosnão3.ed.RiodeJaneiro:Revan,1990,p.12-13.

78

annoying fascinationofacold, indifferent,mirrorbeholderart,wepreferawarmart thatcelebratesthehumanadventureintheworldandparticipatesinit.Anirrevocablypassionateandquarrelsomeart.Wouldbeautybebeautifulifitwerenotfair?Wouldjusticebefairifitwerenotbeautiful?Wesaynotodivorcebetweenbeautyandjustice,becausewesayyestohispowerfulandfruitfulembrace.

Itturnsoutwesayno,andsayingnowearesayingyes.

Sayingnotodictatorshipsandnotodictatorshipsdisguisedasdemocracies,wearesayingyestothefightfortruedemocracy,thatwilldenythebreadandthewordtonoone;andthatitwillbebeautifulanddangerousasapoembyNerudaorasongbyVioletaParra.”

.CASARA,Rubens.MitologiaProcessualPenal.SãoPaulo:Saraiva,2015.CORDERO,Franco.Guidaallaprocedurapenale.Torino:UTET,1986.______.Procedurapenale;7.ed.Milano:Giuffré,2003.COUTINHO,JacintoNelsondeMiranda.IntroduçãoaosprincípiosdoDireitoProcessualPenalbrasileiro.SeparataITEC,ano1,nº4–jan/fev/mar2000,p.3-57.______. O papel do novo Juiz no Processo Penal. Empório do Direito. Disponível em:http://emporiododireito.com.br/o-papel-do-novo-juiz-no-processo-penal-por-jacinto-nelson-de-miranda-coutinho/.Acessoem21ju.2017.DAVID,DécioFranco.As"boasintenções"causammaisumterremotonosistemajurídico-penal.Justificando.Disponível em: http://justificando.cartacapital.com.br/2015/04/13/as-boas-intencoes-causam-mais-um-terremoto-no-sistema-juridico-penal/.Acessoem:20jul.2017.______;SALOMÃONETO,Antônio.FetichismoePena:ReflexõessobrepsicanálisenoDireitoPenal.RevistaOMal-EstarnoDireito,v.2,n.2.Set./2016,p.1-17FREUD,Sigmund.ObrasCompletas,volume16:Oeueo id,“autobiografia”eoutrostextos(1923-1925).SãoPaulo:CompanhiadasLetras,2011.______.ObrasCompletas,volume17:Inibição,sintomaeangústia,Ofuturodeumailusãoeoutrostextos(1926-1929).SãoPaulo:CompanhiadasLetras,2014.______.ObrasCompletas,volume18:Omal-estarnacivilização,novasconferênciasintrodutóriaàpsicanáliseeoutrostextos(1930-1936).SãoPaulo:CompanhiadasLetras,2010.FERRAJOLI,Luigi.DireitoeRazão:TeoriadoGarantismoPenal.3.ed.SãoPaulo:RevistadosTribunais,2010.GALEANO,Eduardo.Diasenoitesdeamoredeguerra.PortoAlegre:L&PMPocket,2016.______.Nósdizemosnão3.ed.RiodeJaneiro:Revan,1990,p.12-13.GOMES,Gilberto.A teoria freudianadaconsciência.Psicologia:TeoriaePesquisa,vol.19,n.2. [online],2003,pp.117-125.LACAN,Jacques.Escritos.RiodeJaneiro:Zahar,1998.______.OSeminário,livro04:arelaçãodeobjeto.RiodeJaneiro:Zahar,1995.______.OSeminário,livro16:deumoutroaooutro.RiodeJaneiro:Zahar,2008.LOPESJR.,Aury.DireitoProcessualPenal.11.ed.SãoPaulo:Saraiva,2014.NIETZSCHE,Friedrich.Agenealogiadamoral.2.ed.Petrópolis:Vozes,2011.RANGEL,Paulo.DireitoProcessualPenal.23.ed.SãoPaulo:AtlasSAFATLE,Vladimir.Fetichismo:ColonizaroOutro.RiodeJaneiro:CivilizaçãoBrasileira,2010.

79

TheinvalidityofthepleabargainingunderstatecoationintheLula’sprocess

JorgeBheronRocha*PaulaSalehArbs**

AlthoughtheCriminalProcedurehasthepoliticalnatureofcounter-powervis-à-vistheStateand the typicalityof the forms is a guarantee for theparties, tobeobserved88, it isnot anoveltythatproceduralrigidityhasbeenrelativizedbythehandsofthejudgesthemselves,usingwhatithasbeencalled"instrumentalityoftheforms"toconvalidateanynullitiesarisingfromnon-observanceoftheproceduralformulasexpresslyprescribedbyregentlegislation,on the grounds that it has not been proven that the damage occurred to the party - theveneratedpasdenullitésansgrief.

Ontheotherhand,thelegalpredictionofproceduralflexibilizationmechanismshavegainedrelevanceandiscurrentlyaworldwidetrend89towardstheargument-notyetdemonstrated–thatthiswillachievetheobjectiveofstimulatingthesimplificationandaccelerationoftheprocedures,withaviewtotheallegedimprovementoftheaccesstojustice90.

In this context comes the plea bargaining, classified by the doctrine91 as a bilateral legalbusiness,ofmixednature,ofproceduralandmaterialcontent,abstractandhypotheticallypresenttherequirementsofexistence(agent,will,objectandform),validity(capacity,freewill , legalandpossibleobject,formprescribedbylaw)andeffectiveness(conditions,termandcharge),ideallyadmittingthatthepartiesfreelyexpresstheirwillingnesstoparticipateinthebusiness,usingtheirfullcapacitytoparticipateintheagreementtobeformallysignedprescribedbylaw.

Itremainstobeseeninwhatamplitudeanddepththeselegalproceedingscanbecarriedoutinthecontextofcriminalproceedingsandwhichhypotheses,assumptionsandcriteriagovernthis unusual modality, since the flexibilization of criminal procedure through agreementsbetweenprosecutionanddefense,whenadmitted,mustbecompatiblewiththeprocessviewasaconstitutionalguaranteeagainsttheauthoritarianperspectivesoftheStateholdingthejuspuniendi,withintheambitofaDemocraticStateofLaw.Thepurposeoftheguarantee

* PhD student in Constitutional Law (UNIFOR),Master in Juridical-Criminal Sciences (University of Coimbra,Portugal). Visiting scholar (Georg-August-Universität Göttingen, Germany). Public Defender (Ceará, Brazil).Professorofgraduateandpostgraduate.Email:bheronrocha@gmail.comLattes:http://lattes.cnpq.br/5464447160393013**PhDcandidate in Juridical-ProceduralSciences (UniversityofCoimbra,Portugal).Master inLegalandCivilSciences,Mention inCivil Procedural Law (UniversityofCoimbra,Portugal). Visiting scholar (UniversitàDegliStudi di Torino, Italy). Lawyer. Professor of graduate and postgraduate. Email: psaleh31@gmail.com Lattes:http://lattes.cnpq.br/366260975589937988 ROCHA, Jorge Bheron. A Importância deMoro e da Lava-jato para a Democracia e para as Garantias doProcesso Penal no Brasil. Wednesday, September 28, 2016. Capital letter. Available in:<http://justificando.cartacapital.com.br/2016/09/28/importancia-de-moro-e-da-lava-jato-para-democracia-e-para-as-garantias-do-processo-penal-no-brasil/>.Accessin:October01,2017.89ARBS,PaulaSaleh.NegóciosJurídicosPocessuais:Énecessáriaahomologaçãojudicial?In:PEIXOTO,RenataCortez,SOUSA,RosalinaFeitasMartins.ANDRADE,SabrinaDouradoFrança(Org.).Temasrelevantesdedireitoprocessualcivil:Elasescrevem.Recife:Armador,2016.90BIAVATI, Paolo. I procedimenti civili semplificati e accelerati: il quadro europeo e i riflessi italiani. RivistaTrimestralediDirittoeProceduraCivile,Milano:Giuffrè,pp.751-775,p.752andfootnote6,2002,p.752.91DIDIERJR.,Fredie;BONFIM,Daniela.Colaboraçãopremiada(Lein.12.850/2013):naturezajurídicaecontroledavalidadepordemandaautônoma–umdiálogocomoDireitoProcessualCivil.RevistadeDireitoProcessualCivil,v.7,n.2,135-189,May/August,2016,p.155.

80

procedure is to promote the protection of the person against the State's unconstrainablepower - thekältesteallerkaltenUngeheuer92 - to limit (and legitimize) the impositionofacriminalsanction,whichensuresnotonlytheimpartialapplicationoftherightbutalsothatisdonewithoutdeviationsandexcesses93.

Althoutitisamajorityinjurisprudencetheunderstandingthattheobjectofthelegalbusinessofwinningcollaborationislicitbecausethepossibilityofsuchanagreementislegallyprovidedforinvariouslegalprovisions,amongthemarts.3and4ofLaw12.850/13-Brazilianlawtocriminalorganizationscombat-adensedebateaboutthe(a)(anti)ethicalaspectofdelationmustbepromoted.ItisbecausetheState,bystimulatingbetrayalanddisloyaltybyofferingadvantagestotheaccused/investigated,callsintoquestiontheobservanceofthePrincipleofmoralitywhichpervadeseverything inanystateact,andnotonlytheadministrativeones,whichcouldevenconfigureinabdicationofitsethicalfoundationsandthelossoflegitimacytodemandappropriatebehaviorforothercitizens94.TheStatebeginstonegotiateapartofits essence, the Justice itself, avoiding to apply the criminal law, promising impunity ormitigation of criminal responsibility to the informant in exchange for statements anddocumentsthatincriminatethirdpersons95.

The plea bargaining, due to the complexities it presents, should be the last investigativeresource and not the first one, however "easy", remembering that it is traumatic to thefoundationsofademocraticcriminalprocedurethatweallowtheaccusedtoabandonhis/herrighttosilenceorworse,his/herrighttonotproduceevidenceagainsthimself-nemotenetursedetegere - committinghimself, in addition, tomake full confession inexchange for theexpectationofreceivingacertainlegalaward,providedthathe/shehasachievedtheresult.

LavaJatoOperationhasbeennotedfortheconstant,centralandindiscriminateuseoftheplea bargaining as a technique to obtain evidence, or rather, towhat is derived from thesentenceimposedonformerPresidentLula,thewordoftheinformersturnsonitselfmeansofproof96,reversingthecriminalprocedurallogicandsubvertingtheDemocraticState,sinceitcouldnotlenditselftothedirectconvictionofthejudge,orindirectlyservetoreconstructthe history of the facts97. In guarantee procedure, criminal prosecutionmust respect therights, freedomsandguaranteesofthe individual,notonly importingthe legitimacyoftheendspursuedbut,aboveall,thelegitimacyofthemeansemployed98.

92 NIETZSCHE, Friedrich. “Also sprach Zarathustra: Ein Buch für Alle und Keinen” iBooks. Epub. ProjectGutenberg,p.97.93 COSTA, Eduardo José da Fonseca.OpiniãoOprocesso como instituição de garantia.November 16, 2016.Conjur. Available in: <https://www.conjur.com.br/2016-nov-16/eduardo-jose-costa-processo-instituicao-garantia>.Accessin:October01,2017.94 PORCIÚNCULA, José Carlos. Inconstitucionalidades e inconsistências dogmáticas do instituto da delaçãopremiada(art.4ºdaLei12.850/13).EmpóriodoDireito.Availablein:http://emporiododireito.com.br/tag/jose-carlos-porciuncula/.Accessin:August28,2017.95J.J.GomesCanotilhoeNunoBrandão.Colaboraçãopremiadaeauxíliojudiciárioemmatériapenal:aordempúblicacomoobstáculoàcooperaçãocomaoperaçãoLavaJato.RevistadeLegislaçãoeJurisprudência,Sectionofdoctrine,year146º,nº4000,2016.96STF,HC127483/PR.97BADARÓ,Gustavo.ProcessoPenal.RiodeJaneiro:Campus:Elsevier,2012,p.270.98FERRAJOLI, Luigi.DireitoeRazão:TeoriadoGarantismoPenal.TranslatedbyAnaPaulaZomerSica,FauziHassanChoukr,JuarezTavareseLuisFlávioGomes.3ªed.SaoPaulo:RevistadosTribunais,2010,p.88.

81

It should be noted that prosecution and defense are not in an equal position in criminalprocedure.IntheBrazilianlegalsystem,theInstitutionresponsibleforprosecution-PublicProsecution - is much better structured and with much more powers to carry out itspersecutory mission than the conditions granted to those institutions (advocacy, PublicDefender)thatcarryoutthedefense-thereisnopredictionofdefensiveinvestigationandthedoctrineand jurisprudenceare insipientonthissubject.This inequality isundoubtedlyreflectedinthepleabargaining,withaclearimbalancebetweenthe"agreeing"parties,whichunderminesthelegitimacyofthelegalprocess.Itshouldbeemphasizedthatitisundeniablethatthewillisespeciallyvitiatedwhentheagreementoccurswiththeaccused/investigatedsubmitted is already provisionally incarcerated or has already been convicted in highpenalty99.

Suchperceptionremainscleartotheorgansofpersecution,thatwasevenrecordedintheopinionoftheFederalprosecutorManoelPastana,thattheuseofthePreventivePrisonfortheinvestigatedoftheLavaJatooperationoccursinviewofthepossibilityofthesegregationinfluencetheminthewilltocollaborateinthedeterminationofresponsibility100.Thereisajudicialdecisionundertheso-calledLavaJatoOperationofrevocationofpre-trialdetentionforthesimplefactthattheinvestigatedwouldalreadybeinnegotiationsforanagreementoflegalcollaboration101.

Specifically, Lula's defenders, sentenced to very high penalties in other cases, began tocollaboratewith theorgansofpersecution inexchange fora reduction inpunishmentandbenefits,notonlyinthecasewheretheyappearedalongsidetheformerpresident,accusedofpassivecorruptionforsupposedlygainingasanundueadvantageanapartmentandafarm.Thebenefitsofthepleabargainingalsoreachthepenaltiesoftheseothercasesinwhichtherehasalreadybeenaconviction,anditistheLavaJatojudgehimselfwhoappliesthebenefits,usurpingthejurisdictionofthecriminalenforcementcourt102,eventhoughhistrialhasbeenclosedwiththetrialandthepublicationoftherespectivesentences.

ItisclearthattheinvalidityofthepleabargainingconductedundertheState'scoercionallLula’s case. Prison is themost severe state imposition for an individual, since it removes,besides the freedom, his/her possibility of enjoyingmany other rights, violating a loss ofdignityimmanenttoCriminalLaw,evenifstillinconditionofinvestigation,beingmerelyinthetheoreticalplanhis/herpresumptionofinnocence.

Thefreewilloftheindividualsufferstheinfluxoftheunconstrainablelongingtobesubtractedfromtheprisontowhichhe/sheissubjected.Itispartofthehumannature.

Themagistrate,fornotbeingpartoftheproceduralbusiness,hascontactwithhim/heronlyaposteriori,whenhe/shemustaccuratelyreviewtheregularityandlegalityoftheagreement,syndicatingthe(un)balancebetweenthepositionsoftheAccusationandtheDefense;the

99 For theprofessor of Criminal Lawof theUSP,David Teixeira deAzevedo, the law firmhas captivatedbyaccepting illegal clauses to seek the best legal solution for its clients. He also denounced that "the publicprosecutor's office threatened to involve a wife, children and possibly partners, even though therewas noinvolvement". Programa Entre Aspas de 17 de outubro de 2017, Globonews. Available in:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ycXLlR9DpGc.Accessin:October22,2017.100Availablein:https://www.conjur.com.br/dl/lava-jato-parecer-mpf-prisao-forcar.pdf.Accessin:October22,2017.101JustiçaFederal.Pedidodebuscaeapreensãocriminalnº5004568-78.2017.4.04.7000/PR.102Availablein:http://estaticog1.globo.com/2017/07/12/sentenca_lula.pdf.Accessin:October22,2017.

82

inflows that restrictive measures - precautionary or criminal - have on the will of theinvestigated / accused; the effectiveness of technical defense; the search for narrativeconstructionoftheprosecutionbyotherinvestigativemeans;respectforthelawfulobtainingofevidence;thefailuretousetheevidenceasthesolemeansofobtainingevidence;thenon-useoftheallegationasameansofproof/groundsforprosecutionorconviction,aswellasissuesrelatedtoretractionorrevocationandtheirlegalconsequences.

InLavaJato,thisidealofimpartialityisfarfrombeingrealized,asitovercomestheroleofthejudgewhodoesnotremainequidistantanddoesnotresisttheappealtobecomeavigilanteparticipant in the fight against corruption as an instrument of public security, objectivelyexpanding its functions under the effusive look of the population that accompanies theoperationwitharepresentationofJusticethatgainscontoursofreligiousveneration103.

Thisisnothis/herroleintheDemocraticStateofLaw.

103MAUS,Ingeborg.Judiciáriocomosuperegodasociedade:opapeldaatividadejurisprudencialna“sociedadeórfã”.TranslatedbyMartônioLimaePauloAlbuquerque.NovosEstudosCEBRAP,SaoPaulo,n.58,pp.183-202,nov.2000,p.183.

83

Criminalconvictionwithoutevidencesandspecialtribunalasathreattodemocracy-amaculatobeovercome*

JoséCarlosMoreiradaSilvaFilho*

I.

The verdictpublishedon July12, 2017by the chief judgeof the13thCourtof the cityofCuritibacondemningtheBrazilianex-presidentLuizInácioLuladaSilvatonineyearsandahalf imprisonment for theoffenseofpassive corruptionandmoney launderingpresents aseriousthreattothedemocraticstategovernedbytheruleof law.It isalreadyacommonplacewithintheframeworkofcriticalthinkingovertheBrazilianjudiciarybranchthatagooddeal of the country's courts, particularly within the criminal framework, practices clearillegalities,arbitrariness,andviolationsofconstitutionalprinciplesandrulesconcerningthatmatterandthattheseviolationstargetusuallythemostvulnerablepartsofthepopulation:poorandblackyoungpeople.

Somesaythattheviolations,arbitrarinessesandabusespracticedbythejudgeofCuritibainhisverdictagainstLulaisjustanothervariationofthisregrettabletendency,nowdirectedtoasocialclassthatisnotusuallytargetedbywhatcouldbecalledatruestateofexceptionindemocracy.However,consideringthingsthiswayleadstoabigmiscalculation.LularepresentstheBrazilianworker;aprofessionallatheoperator,withnouniversitydegree,anortheasternBrazilianfaminesurvivor,andatoughunionleadersosuccessfulincommunicatingwiththecountry'smosthumblepeopleexactlyforbeingoneofthem.NoBrazilianpresidenthasevergone so far in fighting inequality and inpromoting incomedistribution.He is thegreatestleadershipofthelargestleftistpartyinLatinAmerica.

It isnotbychance that the ill-fatedverdictcondemninghimwas issuedonedayafter theBrazilianNational Congress approved a bill that devastated labor rights and the historicalachievementsrepresentedbytheLaborRelationsCodeof1943.Carriedout inaselective,discretionary way and without evidences, the criminalization of Lula corresponds to thecriminalization of all left-wingers and to the dismantlement of the welfare state and,particularly,ofminimalconditionsforademocraticcontestwithintherulesestablishedbytheConstitution. The thread to exclude Lula from the presidential elections in 2018, ifmaterialized104,willconstituteanextremeandcrudefraudstainingthedemocraticexperienceandturningtheBraziliancivilsocietymoreandmoreintoahostageofthehigh-establishedbureaucracyandthewell-connectedelites'despoticpower.Thesamehappenedduringthecoupperpetratedin2016,whichousteda legitimatepresident,electedwithmorethan54millionvotes,bymeansofafraudulentimpeachment.

Justasthematerializationofanimpeachmentwithoutthepenalclassificationofhighcrimesandmisdemeanorsunderminestheonlylegitimatesourceofpowerinademocraticruleoflaw,divestingthecitizenofapublicdecision-makingprocessandcausinganoverwhelming

* Professor at Pontifical Catholic University of Rio Grande do Sul - Law School (PUCRS - Criminal SciencesUndergraduateandGraduateProgram)104SuchsituationisenabledbythesocalledFichaLimpa(cleanrecord)complementarylawno.135/2010,whichprovides thatanypersonconvictedbyacollegialcourtbecomes ineligible,even ifappealsmaybe lodged. Ifconfirmedbythe4thRegionFederalRegionalCourtbeforethe2018presidentialcandidacyconsolidation,theguiltyverdictwillimpedeLuladaSilva'scandidacy.

84

institutionalinstability,theillegalandarbitraryjudicialimpedimentofLuladaSilva'scandidacy-clearlythefront-runnerinthenextelectionsforthehighestnationaloffice-,ifconfirmed,willconstituteanimpermissibleinterventioninthewholesociety'sdemocraticliberties.

The purpose of this short article, a chapter of this historical oeuvre, is to point out somerevealing issuesamongillegalitiesandarbitrarinessesoftheguiltyverdictproducedbythejudgeofCuritibaagainstex-presidentLuladaSilva.Itdoesnotaspiretobeexhaustive,sinceotherchaptersofthisbookwillalsoapproachthehugequantityofsuchissues.

II.

Whatisatstakeinthislegalactioninvolvingex-presidentLulaasdefendantisnotnecessarilyifthetriplexflatisornothisproperty,butwhetherornothepracticedtheoffenseofpassivecorruption,whoseevidencewouldbethissupposedpossessionofhis.Thebillofindictmentcorethesis,partiallyacceptedbythefederaljudge105,isthatLulasupposedlyreceivedbriberyinformofanupgradingfromaregularflattoatriplexflatinthesamebuilding106,boostedbyanextensiveremodelingperformedinthelaterunit107in2014.

Thisvalueallegedlyrepresentsundueadvantages,comingfromasupposed'generalaccountforbriberies'organizedbyOASGrouppresident,LéoPinheiro(alsodefendantinthisprocess),inatriangularoperationwithstateoilcompanyPetrobras,withtheallegedengagementofLula.Theex-president'sparticipationintheschemesupposedlyconsistedintheappointmentof certain names to Petrobras' administrative council formanagement positions,with theappointedpersonsallegedlyinchargeofcollectingbriberiesfrombuildersasapreconditiontosigningcontractswiththeoilcompany.

Avoidingtoomanydetailsconcerningtheexistenceornotoftheaforementionedremodeledtriplexpropertytitleinthenameofex-presidentLula,itmustbeenoughtoinformthattheflathasneverbeensubscribedtohisname,heneverhadthisrealstate'sownership,thereisnovaliddocumentprovingeventheintentionofownershippurchaseorpossession,norofhaving asked for remodeling advantages to be enjoyed in the future, and finally, the ex-presidentdefensecounselhasprovedthattheOASGroupholdsthetriplexflatownership.ThereforecomestheinevitableconclusionthatLulahasneverpracticedtheactsdescribedinthepassivecorruptionspecificcriminaloffense(PenalCodearticleno.317),whichdefines:receiveoraskforundueadvantage.Nevertheless,thefederaljudgeconcludesthatLulawouldhave received the real state "de facto ownership". It must be stressed that "de factoownership"isnocivillawexistentconcept;andevenbyeventualproximitywithpossessionitcouldnotbeapplied,sinceLulahasbeingintheflatasingletimeforavisit.

105ThejudgedismissedtherequestforanapplicationconcerningthebuilderOASpaymenttoanothercompany,Granero,inordertocoverthestorageofLula'ssouvenirsandobjectsreceivedwhileincumbentpresident.106 The building in question is a condominium named Solaris, on the shores of Guarujá beach, whoseconstructionworkwasinitiatedbyBancoop(abankclerks’unionhousingcooperative)in2005andconcludedbytheOASGroupin2009.Lula'sdeceasedwife,MarisaLetíciaLuladaSilva,contractedinstallmentpaymentsforaregularflatinthisbuildingin2005,andpaid57installments,reachingagrandtotalofBRL179,650.80(US$56,869.53-inAugust2017,withoutmonetaryadjustment).107Forillustrationpurposes,theestimatemarketvalueprovidedbytheaccusationconcerningthedifferencebetweentheregular flatandtheremodeledtriplex reachesBRL2,424,991.00 (US$767,645.31,calculatedasaforementioned).

85

Thefederaljudgeconcludesthattheflatwas"awarded"totheex-president,understandingthatthereliestheprocesscorepoint.Hereitisalreadypossibletodetectaseriousbreachpracticedbythemagistrate,inverbis:

302. That's the crucial issue in thisprocess, then, if characterized that the flatwas in factawardedbytheOASGrouptotheex-president,withoutpaymentofthecorrespondingvalue,norof its remodeling, therewillbeaconsiderable financialadvantageevidenceofanOASGroupconcessiontohim,estimatedinBRL2,424,991.00(US$767,645.31),forwhichtherewouldbenolawfulcauseorjustification.

303.Onthecontrary,ifcharacterizedthatthisdidnothappen,i.e.,thattheflatwasneverawardedtotheex-president,thebillofindictmentshallbedismissed.

Reinforcingthedistortedwaythroughwhichthejudgepresentedthequestion,wefindthefollowingparagraph,locatedatthefinalpartofthedecision,theconclusion,inverbis:

852.Oncedefinedthattheflatunit164-A,atriplex,belongedinfacttoex-presidentLula,andthattheremodelingbenefitedhim,inthealibiofdefendantLuizInácioLuladaSilvathereisno licit indicationof a cause for the concessionbyOAS Empreendimentos to himof suchmaterial benefits, remaining in the case file, as sole explanation, solely the corruptionarrangementresultinginpartfromPetrobrascontracts.

Reviewing the transcriptions above, one notices that one of the arbitrarinesses in theconstructionofthejudgethinkingistolocatetheprocess'coreinthesupposedownershipexistence-ornot-,wheninfactthecrucialpointhereistoknowandprovethatthisallegedbenefit was a payment to the ex-president for his supposed participation in Petrobrascorruptionschemes.Inotherwords,itwouldbeperfectlypossibleandprobablethattheex-presidentwasbestowedbythebuilderwithamorevaluableflatthantheoneheeffectivelypaidforandwithremodelingupgradesalreadyinplace.Asstatedabove,thereisnoevidenceof the supposed gift receiving or even that this gift existed, but for the sake of theargumentationproposedhere,letusconsiderthatitexisted.

Wouldtheonlyjustificationforthisbethecompensationforanactofcorruption?Absolutely.Moreover,wedonothavetoleavetheverdicttexttofindotherpossiblereasons.Istressandcommentthreeverdictexcerptsinthissense,inverbis:

914.WithnobetterevidencethattheexecutiveswereawarethattheundulykeepingoftheestateinOASEmpreendimentos’nameandthattheperformingoftheremodelingwithrealbeneficiaryconcealmentarisingfromacorruptionarrangement,theycannotbechargedforthecrimeofmoneylaundering.

915.Idonotconsiderpertinenthereinceptionsaroundtheintentionalblindnessdoctrineinthemoneylaunderingcrimeandaroundaccountabilityforeventualintention,fortheyalsodemand the existence of a context in order to change into high probable - at least - theawarenessaboutthecriminaloriginoftheusedresourcesinamoneylaunderingtransaction.Considering the cases' peculiarities, with compensation of undue advantage through realestatetransactions,itispossiblethattheyhaveconceivedofotherreasonableassumptionsforjustifyingtheordersreceivedfromJoséAdelmárioPinheiroFilho(a.k.a.LéoPinheiro),eventhatitwasaboutanOASGroupgifttotheex-president.

Herethefederaljudgejustifiestheabsolutionoftheprocess'otherdefendants,GroupOASemployees, with his understanding that they could have "conceived of other reasonableassumptions"toproceedthetriplexflatremodelingand,amongthese,"eventhatitwasabout

86

anOASGroupgiftfortheex-president."Therefore,onenoticesthatwhenthejudgegivesupthe belief (without evidences) over an existing corruption arrangement where the ex-president could be involved, suddenly "other reasonable assumptions" arise to justifyadvantagesconcerningafutureandsupposedownershipofaremodeledtriplexflat.

Still,itwouldbepertinenttoaskwhy,afterall,bestowinganex-presidentwithagift.Intheveryverdict text,wewill findtworeasonsthatcouldformthe listingof the judge invoked"reasonableassumptions"toabsolvesomeoftheprocess'defendants.The judgereferstoJoséAfonsoPinheiro's-someonewhowouldhaveworkedas janitor inthebuildingunderdiscussionherebetween2013and2016-testimonyintheverdict'sparagraphs502and503.Thejudges'goalwiththetranscriptionofthistestimony'spartwasusingitasevidencethatthetriplexwouldbelongtotheex-president.Icopyhereanexcerptofthistestimony'spart,mentionedattheverdictparagraph503:

Defensecounsel:Didthecondominiummemberssaytoyouthatex-presidentLulahadaflatatSolarisCondominium?

JoséAfonsoPinheiro:Therewereeven[realestate]brokersthattriedtosellflatsoftheSolarisCondominium,peopleboughtitpreciselybecausetheythoughtthattheex-presidenthadaflatthere;thebrokersthemselvesadvertisedtheflatso.

Defensecounsel:Didtheyadvertiseitbysayingthatex-presidentLulahadaflatthere?

JoséAfonsoPinheiro:Exactly,thathehad,thathehas,right.

Defensecounsel:Soitwasusedtopromotesales,isthatright?

JoséAfonsoPinheiro:Yes,becausetherewerebrokerswhosaid'Look,thisisthebuildingwherepresidentLulaownsaflat.'"

Well,accordingtothebuilding'sjanitortestimony,thebrokersmentionedLula'spresenceinthe building as an owner, aiming with this information to promote the selling of otherbuilding'sunitstopotentialbuyers.Inotherwords,itwouldbeanadvantageforthefirm'sbusiness if one of the flats built and commercialized by them were intended to such aprominentandfamousperson.Onecanaddthatthiscouldalsobetheadvertisingtosellotherventures.Somethinglike"BuyaflatbuiltbyOASGroup,justlikeex-presidentLuladid."

Finally,itispossibletoidentifyintheverdicttextyetanotherreasonablemotivationfortheallegedgift.Soreasonable,thatitconvincedthejudgetodismissthecaseagainstLulaandtheOASGrouppresident,LéoPinheiro,ofanothercrimeswherebothweredefendants in thesame process, for corruption and money laundering because of a storage and transportcontract with Granero company over the presidential souvenirs and received objects. Atverdict's paragraph 934, there is part of Léo Pinheiro's (José Adelmário Pinheiro Filho)testimonyonthisprocess.Icopyherepartofthistestimony:

Federaljudge:So,asforthesepayments,doyouthinkthattherewassomesortofillegalityorundueadvantageinvolved?

JoséAdelmárioPinheiroFilho:Ibelieveditdidnot,andIstillbelieveitdoesnot.

FederalJudge:Right.Wasthereanycompensation,anybenefitforthecompany,duetothispaymentforGranero?

José Adelmário Pinheiro Filho: No, not directly, of coursewe had an intention, because Ialreadyknewwhatthepresidentintendedtodooncehewereoutofthepresidencyandtook

87

overhisfoundation,andwehadalotofinterestinforgingthistiesevencloser,moreoverduetotheinternationalmarket."

Next,thejudgepresentshisinterpretationoversuchstatements:

935.Thedefendantstatements,aboutnothavingseenillegalityorthattherewasnodebitinthegeneralaccountforbriberies,removethecorruptioncrime.Thefinalpart,withamentionthatthepaymentpurposewasforgingcloserties isnotenoughtocharacterizecorruption,sinceitdidnotinvolvepaymentduetothepresidentialpositionortoarrangementsinvolvingpubliccontracts.

Therefore,thejudgeconsideredlegalandreasonabletheOASGroupofferingtheserviceofcontracting thepresidential souvenirs and receivedobjects storage inexchange to forgingcloserties,sincetheinternationalmarketwasthecompany'sgoal.Inotherwords,itwouldbeanadvantagefortheinternationalbusinessandexpansionplansifthecompanyhadex-president Lula among its clients and beneficiaries, particularly due to the internationalreputationheconqueredwithparticularintensityduringhistwopresidentialterms.

Well, couldn't itbeagood reason to favor theex-presidentwhile intending togivehimaremodeledtriplexinsteadofaregularflatwithoutchargingthepricedifference?Ifso,whydoesthejudgestateinhisverdictthattherewouldn'tbealegaljustificationforthissupposedadvantage?Theansweristhatthejudgehasaconviction(withoutevidences)thatthemoneyforcoveringthedifferencebetweentheremodeledtriplexandtheregularflatcamefromanOASbriberygeneralaccount,designedtoservethePartidodosTrabalhadores(PT-Worker'sParty),exclusivelymanagedbyLéoPinheiro.Andbeyondthefederaljudgeconvictions,whicharetheexistingevidencesovera)theexistenceofthisaccount,b)thatitwasfurnishedwithbriberyderivedofPetrobras'contracts108,c)thatitwasreservedforpayingthecampaignsofPTpoliticians,andd)thattheresourcestopayforthedifferencebetweenthetwoflatspriceandtheremodelingcamefromit?

ThesoleevidentialelementsinthisdirectionarethetestimoniesofLéoPinheiroandAgenorFranklinMagalhãesMedeiros, respectively OAS Group president and building director. Inshort,LéoPinheirodeclaresthathehadaconversationwithJoãoVaccariNeto,PTtreasurerthen,andthelattersaidthattheamounttocoverthedifferencebetweenaregularflatandaremodeledtriplexdestinedtoex-presidentLulacouldbedeductedfromtheaforementionedgeneralaccountforbriberies.However,heclaimedtohavenoevidenceofthisconversationbecause in a later moment, when he met Lula personally, the ex-president would haveinstructed him to destroy these evidences. Agenor Franklin, in turn, mentioned that Léo

108There isnospaceheretoenterthedebateoverthequestionableuniversalcompetenceassumedbythecurrentholderofthe13thFederalCourtinCuritibatoconducttheCarWashOperation.Yet,evenunderstandingthatsuchcompetenceshouldbeadmittedinsituationsinvolvingPetrobras,itisnecessarytonotethat,ifthereisn'tminimalcorrelationevidencebetweentheOASflat(locatedinthestateofSãoPaulo)purchase/donationandPetrobras(basedintheStateofRiodeJaneiro)corruptionschemes,thisprocessshouldhaveneverhappenorbetriedbyaCuritiba(stateofParanástate)federaljudge,evenbythecompetencecriteriapracticedbythecourt.Thesituationbecomesastonishingwhen,inthisverdict'sMotionforClarification,thejudgeofCuritibacomestothepointofaffirmingthat:"Thistrialhasneveraffirmedintheverdict,noranywhereelse,thatthefundsobtainedbyConstrutoraOASthroughcontractswithPetrobraswereusedforpayingtheex-president'sundueadvantage."Ifitwerenotenough,soonafterhealsoasserts:"Neithercorruption,normoneylaundering,asaprecursortothecrimeofcorruption,requireorwouldrequirethatthepaidorhiddenamountspecificallyoriginatedfromPetrobrascontracts."

88

PinheirowouldhavecommentedtohimoverthissupposedarrangementwithJoãoVaccari,butsincethiscommenthappenedinthemiddleofaninternationaltrip,therewasnootherwitnesstothisdialogbetweenhimself,Agenor,andLéoPinheiro.

It should be stressed that, besides the complete absence of evidence of this corruptionarrangementor of the conversationwith JoãoVaccariNeto, the testimonies in question -whichwereformulatedaftermorethanone-yearimprisonment,consideringalsothatbeforeitbothdeniedtheallegedfacts-werenotvalidatedaspartofpleabargainprogram.Itmaybepossibletospeculateonwhyitcouldnotbeprovenbyanyotherevidence.Afterall,thepleabargainlawclearlystatesthatamerewhistleblowingisnotsufficientforconvictionandthatitmustbesupportedbyotherprobativemeans,i.e.,evidences.Nevertheless,thejudgedecidedtograntasubstantialbenefittodefendantLéoPinheiro;abenefitthatcouldbecalledan "informal reward". It allowed Pinheiro to obtain downgrading incarceration conditionsafter twoyears inclosedconditions, considering the totalityof sentences related tootherprocessesatCarWashOperationwherehe is adefendant, andwithout conditioning it tocompletedamageremediationforhiscrimes,plusenablinghimtodiscountthetimehehasbeenimprisonedfromthesentences'grandtotal(whichisalmostthetotaltimerequiredfordowngradingincarcerationconditions).What justifiessuchgenerosity?IcopydirectlyfromtheverdictoperativepartreferredtoLéoPinheiro(paragraph946),inverbis:

Howeverlateandwithoutthecollaborationagreement,itisinevitabletorecognizethattheconvictedJoséAdelmárioPinheiroFilhocontributedinthis legalactiontoclarifythetruth,testifyingandprovidingdocuments.

Involvinginthecasecrimescommittedbytherepublic'shighestpublicofficer,itisnotpossibletoignoretherelevanceofJoséAdelmárioPinheiroFilho'stestimony.

Ifhistestimonywereconsistentwiththerestoftheprobativeframework,particularlywithdocumentary evidences, and if the testimony had probative relevance for the trial, thengrantinglegalbenefitswouldbelegitimate.

The fact is that, beyond the absence of some advantage evidence (since the flatwas notreceived neither as ownership, nor as possession), there is also no evidence that suchadvantagewasundue. Ithappensbecausethere isnoevidencethatLula,whileappointingnamestoPetrobras'administrativecouncil,knewthatsuchpersonswouldbeinvolvedwithcompany detrimental corruption schemes109. There is also no evidence that any paymentorder for the differences between a regular flat and a redecorated triplex, which shouldoriginatefromasupposedgeneralaccountforbriberies,andthatthisaccountwasfurnishedbyacorruptionschemederivedofPetrobras'contractswiththeex-presidentawareness.

Maybethatiswhythefederaljudgedecidedtovalidateasthetrialmainevidence,suitableforjustifyingadecisioncapabletodepriveoflibertyanex-president,theisolatedtestimonyof a crime admitted culprit that is imprisoned since more than two years, which fightsdesperatelytoregainlibertyinexchangeforaleniencyagreement,evenaninformalone.Thejustification for granting suchan importance to this testimony,whichwasobtained in thealreadydescribedcircumstances,isthatifLéoPinheirohadliedaboutthetriplexaimingto

109Beyondthealreadyinfamousandlegallyinvalidjustificationaswellusedbyfederaljudge,that"therewasnowaythatthePresidentoftheRepublicdidnotknow",thereisintherecordsatestimonybyformersenatorDelcídiodoAmaraldeclaringthatLuladidknoweverything,butthathe,Amaral,hadnevertalkedpersonallytotheex-presidentaboutit(sic).

89

compromisetheex-president,heshouldalsohaveliedtocompromisetheex-presidentonthepresidentialsouvenirsstorage,inverbis:

936.JoséAdelmárioPinheiroFilhostatementssoundtrue.Consideringhisclearintentiontocooperate,onecannotenvisionwhyheshouldadmitacorruptioncrimeanddenytheotherone.Ifhisintentionweretolieinhisownandinex-president'sLula'sinterest,hewoulddenybothcrimes.Ifhisintentionweretolieonlyforobtaininglegalbenefits,hewouldadmitbothcrimes.Consideringthathisnarrativeaboutthetriplexflatfindssupportandcorroborationinampledocumentaryevidence, it is thecaseofgivinghimalsocredit for this reportonthepresidentialsouvenirsstorage.

Whethertoclearortoconvict,LéoPinheiro'swordswerebalancepointerforthejudgeofCuritiba,maybebecausethemagistratedidnotmanageto'envision'anotherreasonforLéoPinheirotolieoncourt,whoknows?Herecomesapossiblesuggestiontobeenvisioned:alieismuchmoreconvincingwhenitcomestogetherwithafact.Onewaytoenhancealieistosurrounditwithmanyfacts.Exactlybecauseit isdifficulttoknowifthewordofawhistle-blower(formalorinformal)mustbetakenasevidenceofacrimepracticedbyathirdpartythatthelawrequirescorroborationofotherundisputedevidences.

Aspointedout,theex-presidentincriminatingtestimonywasLéoPinheiro'swinningticketforreceiving the judge's grace in compensation for his crucial "collaboration". It was notnecessary that the ex-president were convicted also in a process over the presidentialsouvenirsstorage.Toreachthenineyearsandahalfimprisonmentdecisionandopeningtheway for thesequestrationof theex-presidentsassetsandmeansofsubsistence, thereforeachievingtheCarWashtask-forceawaitedfinal-alogicalresultofitsconstructednarrative,adoptedaswell inmanyofthe judge'spartialitydemonstrationsalongthewholetrialandevenbeforeit-asingleconvictionbasedonthetriplexwoulddo.

III.

There aremany absurd, illegal and arbitrary aspects in the verdict analyzed by the otherarticlesgatheredinthepresentbook.Thespaceisshortforsomanyexceptionalsituations,soherecomesmyshortlistofsomeothers:

-The judgeunderstandsthatthetriplex"defactoownership" is"evidenced"evenwithoutdocumentationoftitletransferorpropertyandpunishestheex-president,becausewhilenothavingthetitlenorthepossession,noradmittingthesocalled"defactoownership",hewouldbehidinganundueadvantage.Andthen,ifitwerenotenoughtobeconvictedforcorruption,heisalsoconvictedformoneylaundering.Thereisnothingleft inthiscasebuttoaskhowcouldtheex-presidenthavelaunderedamoneyhehasneverownedthroughthepropertyofanapartmentthatwasneverhis,norhashehaditspossession?Ifstillalive,maybeFranzKafkacouldexplainthat.

-TheconfirmationthatLulawouldnothave"howtodenyhisknowledgeofacriminalscheme"atPetrobras,asthejudgeofCuritibareasonsattheverdicts’paragraph890,isthefactthathewouldhavebeen"materiallybenefitedwithpartofthebriberyresultingfromcorruptionarrangementsinPetrobrascontracts,evenifthroughageneralaccountofbriberies".Herewehave two astonishing facts without evidence (just whistle blowing of imprisonedwhistle-blowers,andsomeofthemareinformal)thatserve,inthejudge'slogic,asevidence-onetotheother.

90

-Atparagraph958, the judgedeclares that the criminal complaintplacedbyex-presidentLula'sdefensecounselagainsthimself -duetothe judge's leakingofprivateconversationsbetweentheex-presidentandhisfamilytothepress,exposingthedefendantthereforetopublicexecration,aswellasanotherleakofanillegallyrecordedphoneconversationbetweenthe country’s incumbent president and the ex-president - represented an attempt tointimidatethejudgment.ThesameassessmenthappensinrelationtoLula'sdefensecounselproposedactionsforlibelorslander,claimingindemnityfromattorneysforthegovernment(due to their infamous and notorious PowerPoint snafu spectacle, exhibited in the mainnationaltelevisionnewsprogram)andagainstafederalpolicechief-officer.Inthisparagraphonecannoticeinfulldetailthejudge'shighlevelofpartialityandarbitrarinesstowardsthedefendant, which he relentlessly convicted without evidences, since he transforms thelegitimateexerciseoftherightofdefenseandoftherightofactionintoobjectionableacts.Increasinghislevelofarbitrariness,thejudgedeclaresinthenextparagraph(959)thatthepropositionofsuchactions,inadditiontothesupposeddestructionofevidences,whichwouldhave been ordered by the ex-president (an unproved fact), should justify his preventivedetention,butthathewouldnotdemandittoavoid"traumas"anddueto"prudence".Thequestiononeshouldaskhereiswhoisintimidatingwhom?

Fromparagraph793 to 796hedoes considerationsboth subjective andunnecessaryoverwhatex-presidentLulacorrectlydidordidnotregardingtheissueofcorruptionduringhisterm.Andonparagraph795hecomestothepointofdeclaringthatLulashouldhaveactedto"revert"theSupremeCourtcaselawregardingtheimpossibilityofimprisonmentbeforeresjudicata,thatistosay,thatheshouldhave(whoknowshow)haveinfluencedtheSupremeCourt judges todecide (as theyunfortunatelydid in February2016) to violate aneternityclauseoftheConstitutionof1988.

-ItissymptomaticthatthejudgeofCuritibaspendsagreatdealofhisverdicttryingtojustifyhimself for this abusive actions against ex-president Lula, practicedbefore andduring theprocess.Suchjustifications,however,arefarfromconvincing.Iwanttomentiononeofthem.InhisattempttojustifythecompulsoryprocesstowhichLulawassubmittedinMarch2016-despitenothavingreceivedprevioussubpoenaandduringwhichhisimagewasexposedinthisconditionbymeansofafranticmediacircus,with24htransmissiononthecountry'smainTVchannel -, themagistratewroteon theverdict thatonwiretappedconversations therewere hidden grounds for the compulsory process, namely the organization of activists toprotest against the search and seizure procedure that would be carried out in the ex-president's residence. The judge claims that the compulsory process was decided for the"protection"ofpoliceagents(sic)becauseofactivists'mobilization"threads".Curiously,thefederal judge's justificationatthetimeofthisfactwasthatthecompulsoryprocesswouldhavebeenauthorizedfortheex-president'sprotection...Itisdeplorablethatthemagistratealso considers a thread or a violence the legitimate and pacific demonstration of politicalactiviststhathappenedduringtheex-president'stestimonyinMay2017.Itisindeedsheerfearofdemocracy.

There is much more, but the space is short. It is expected that this decision will not beconfirmedbyotherinstancesoftheBrazilianjudicialsystemandthatitendsupbeingnothingbutamaculaof sadmemory inour institutionalhistory. Shall theBrazilian judicialbranchvalidate this genuine special tribunal, then we will have completely returned to theauthoritarian origins of this branch, so clearly represented by a history of conviviality,

91

sometimeslaudatory,sometimessilent,butundoubtedlyinstitutional,involvingthejudiciaryandtheBraziliancivil-militarydictatorship.

92

Pleabargain,papernewsandtheverdict:elementary,mydearWatson!

JoséFranciscoSiqueiraNeto

TheCriminalLawsuit5046512-94.2016.4.04.7000/PR,sentencedbythe13thFederalCriminalCourtofCuritibaonJuly12thwrapsuponeofthemostimportantphasesofthelongest“reallifesoapoperas”featuringtheLaweverrunbythelargesttelevisionnetworkinBrazil.

AfterthePleaBargainofaverywell-knowndoleirowithanextensivecriminalrecordwiththevery same judge that passed this sentence, a cunning plot capable of inducing aggressivebehaviors inBraziliansocietywasdeveloped,withtheso-called“InquisitorsofGood”fromCuritiba playing a leading role. This was only possible by conjoined forces of the FederalBureau,theProsecutor’sOfficeandtheCourtitselfthathasneverhappenedinthehistoryofdemocracyintheWest.

Evenwithout saying it directly, when taken into consideration everything that happened,thereisnodoubtthatevenbeforethechargeswerepressed,thetargethasalwaysbeentheformerBrazilianpresident,LuizInácioLuladaSilva,“LULA”.Itwasn’tfew–fromthestartoftheoperationuntilthepressingofcharges–thecommentscirculatinginmainstreammedia(radioandtelevision),tonsofmessagesinsocialmediasentoutbyrobotsandhumansalikethatpaintedaguiltyimageofthedefendant.

Theyoftenusedphraseslike“reachingthebottomofthis”,“acleanslateforthecountry”,“takingdownthemighty”.

This operation was carefully executed by a certain media network using all its branches(printed,radio,television),withcollaborationfromsocialmedia.

Everythingwasdesignedtomakeitseemlikeprosecutionwasanaturalconsequence,sothatitseemedonlynormalwhenthePO’sannouncedtheirintentiontopursuethiscaseinapressconferenceheldinafancyHotel,wheretheapexwasapowerpointpresentationthathadseveralaccusationsportrayedinballoonstieduptothenameofLULA.

Thisweirddocument,however,isaninfographicthatcontainsinformationobtainedbytheprosecutionandorganizedinawaythatwouldcreateanimageofthisgathering.Theresultportrays a feelingof evidenceandproofof abnormalbehaviorby thedefendant. It is theultimateresultexpectedbytheaccusation,foritinfluencespublicopiniononthematter.

Thescenerywasthenreadyforthe“hero/academic/socialactivist/judge”tostrike.

After the filing of the complaint, the Court began to assess the possibility of using theinterpretation technology presented by this very article to sentence the lawsuit 5046512-94.2016.4.04.7000/PR.

ThereareseveralcircumstancessurroundingthisepisodethatputsomelegalelementsintoquestioninregardstotheCourtandDemocracy,suchastheamountofpaperworkintheformof depositions, recordings and images produced by the accusation that were leaked tomainstreammediawithanarrativesoprecise,as iftomaintainthecoherencyofthestoryfromoneendtoanother.

Suchevidencerevealedthattheaccusationisusingaverypowerfulcomputertoarrangethedocumentsinawaythatprovidesrationalitytothestorytheprosecutionwantstotell.

93

Finally,itbecamecrystalclearthemembersoftheprosecutionwereabletocarryonwithaveryactivesociallife–reportedbythemedia–andstillproduceevidenceinanever-seen-beforepace.

Istartedcheckinginwithphysiciansandmathematiciansalikeonifitwaspossibletoanswertheaccusation’ssoftwareprogram,withtheintentofcheckingthecorrelationbetweenthecertaintiesdemonstratedbytheprosecutionwiththefacts.

Afteranextensiveroundofinformationleveling,languagecheckandexperiments,ourtoolwasreadytogo,amonthbeforetheissueofthesentenceintheLULAcase.

This technology–called legal reading– isanalgorithmofAI–calleddeep learning– thatallowsyoutointerprettextswithexclusiveIP,whichisfunctionalinover60countries,makingiteasytoauditit.

Itextractslargevolumesoftext,correlationbetweenmotive,themesfactsandpeoplewhichwould be otherwise impossible to be performed by humans, especially when taking intoconsiderationthedeadlinesimposedbythelaw.

Itwouldalsoallowyou to read thousandsof texts in thespanof secondsand tocreateahierarchical structure betweenmain and secondary subjects. Aside from organizing thesetexts, thetechnologyalsoallowsyouto identifyconnectionsbetweenpeople,entitiesandfacts,theirconnectionsandtheamountofrelevancyofsuchinformation.Intheend,itcreatesan interactivevisualmapthatallows itsusertocomprehend itsconclusions inamatterofseconds.Therefore,itallowsyoutoanalyzethethesiselaboratedbyeithertheaccusationorthedefendant,oreventheCourt,tovalidatetheassumptionthattherationaltrainofthoughtisanchoredinfact,hypothesis,ordeduction.Thechartcreatedbythisrobotofsortsissimilartoapowerpointpresentation,anditsetsapathfortheCourttosupportitsconviction.

Byapplyingthistechnologytothelong–238pages,29.567words–sentenceissuedintheCriminalLawsuit5046512-94.2016.4.04.7000/PR,wewereabletoputtogetherthefollowingchart:

94

Asyoucansee,nevermindtheexcessiveuseofpages,thesentencefailstoestablishadirectconnectionofLULAwithanythingotherthantheotherdefendantwhotookapleabargain.ThedirectconnectionwiththePresidentialCollectionanditsstoringhasbeendiscardedbytheCourtforalackofevidence.

Anotheraspectthatdeservesattentionisthepercentageofquotes.“Petrobras”wascited252times, while “Condomínio Solaris” was cited 75, LULA 395, “Leo Pinheiro” 156, and the“GRUPOOAS”367.“GRUPOOAS”and“LeoPinheiro”puttogethercorrespondsto132%ofthecitationsof LULA thatdemonstratesahigheremphasison the informants thanon thedefendantitself.

Onthematterof linksbetweendifferentgroups, thesentenceemphasizes theconnectionbetween LULA and Petrobras happens in a 3rd degree level, predominantly 4th degree,demonstratingtheunlawful rulingcarriedout in thesentenced issuedbythe13thFederalCriminalCourtofCuritiba.

WhendeterminedthatthelinkwithPetrobraswasatbesta3rddegreelevelofconnection,theonly sourceofdirect connectionbetween formerpresidentLULAand thecrimeshe isaccusedof is the informant,whichmeant that theauthoritieshadto findproof to furtherstrengththatclaim.Theiranswertothatissuewasfoundinanewsreportmentioned8(eight)times(!)inthesentence.Thatmeansthereisabsolutelynoconcreteevidence.Hereisachartthatrepresentswhatissaidabove:

95

Andanotheroneorderedbytherelevancyoftheevidence:

Therefore,thesentenceistechnicallyweak,howeverstrongitmaywanttoseem.Someofitsparticularitiesaretobehighlightedlikethesheernumberofpages(238),45ofwhichareusedto fight political and ideological views of the defendant and its lawyer, in a clear-cutdemonstrationofcompletedisregardfortheimpartialityofthejudge,whichisinitsownrightanessentialaspectofafairtrialaccordingtoeveryInternationalLawOrganization.

The numerous grounds for annulment are evident, but what sets in motion the forcescurrentlyattackingDemocracyisthemanipulationofAItechnologiesthatensuresthevictory

96

of the accusation over the real facts. Thus, with grounds solely on a news story, formerpresidentLULAwasconvicted.

97

Theoffenseofpassivecorruptionandthesentencethatviolatestheprincipleoflegality

JuarezTavares*AdemarBorges**

The correct interpretation of the content that constitutes the criminal offense of passivecorruption(Art.317,BrazilianCriminalCode), inspiteofasettledcaselawbytheBrazilianSupremeCourtandanunanimousinterpretationoflegaldoctrine,emergesagaininfaceoftherecentconvictingsentenceagainstformerpresidentLuizInácioLuladaSilva.Intheprismofitslegitimacy,thissentencecouldbediscussedaccordingtoseveraldogmaticperspectives:(i)theunconcealabledisdainforthemaximaccordingtowhichthelegitimacyofacriminalconvictiondepends,asfarastheevidenceassessmentisconcerned,onareasoneddecisionbythejudge–basedontheproofpresentedbyprosecution–regardingtheexistenceofacriminalfactbeyondareasonabledoubt,asestablishedinthecommonlaw;(ii)themultipleviolationsofthePrincipleofAccusation,resultingfromthereiteratedviolationofArt.212oftheBrazilianCodeofCriminalProcedure,duetothejudge’sexcessivelyinterventionintheproductionoftestimonialevidence110; (iii) theoutrageousaffronttotheprincipleof lawfuljudge, resulting from the undue expansion of the sentencing jurisdiction power, so oftendenouncedbythedoctrine111,amonginnumerousothers,manyofwhichwerediscussedinotherbrilliantessayscollectedinthiswork.

The subject of this short essay – the analysis of the boundaries of the offense of passivecorruptioninBrazilianlaw–waschosenbasicallyforthreereasons:(i)theunderstandingoftherequirementsoftheoffenseofpassivecorruptionasemployedintheconvictingsentenceaffrontsclearlythejudicialprecedentsoftheSupremeCourtPlenary;(ii)intheexaminedcase,the error committed by the judge completely excludes, on its own, the possibility ofestablishinganoffenseofpassivecorruption;(iii)consequently,theinexistencyofthepassivecorruption crime rules out any possibility of conviction regarding the charge of moneylaundering,astherewerenoantecedentoffense.Thecriticalerrorpresentinthesentence

* Full professorofCriminal Lawof theStateUniversityofRiode Janeiro (UniversidadedoEstadodeRiodeJaneiro).VisitingprofessorattheUniversityofFrankfurtamMain,attheUniversityofBuenosAiresandattheUniversityPabloD’Olavide(Seville).HonoraryprofessoroftheUniversityofSanMartín(Peru).PhD(Law)bytheFederalUniversityofRiodeJaneiro(UniversidadeFederaldeRiodeJaneiro)andtheStateUniversityofRiodeJaneiro (UniversidadedoEstadodeRiode Janeiro).Master (Law)by theFederalUniversityofRiode Janeiro(UniversidadeFederaldoRiodeJaneiro).DeputyAttorneyGeneraloftheRepublicofBrazil,retired.Lawyer.**DoctoralcandidateofPublicLawattheStateUniversityofRiodeJaneiro(UERJ).Master(ConstitutionalLaw)bytheFederalFluminenseUniversity (UniversidadeFederalFluminense).DistrictAttorneyoftheCityofBeloHorizonte.Lawyer.110Lawno.11.690,fromJune9th,2008,changedthetextofArt.212oftheBrazilianCodeofCriminalProcedure,thusadoptingtheUSLawProcedurecalledcross-examinationinwhichthewitnessesaredirectlyinterrogatedby the sidewhich called themand then theoppositemayexecute its inquiry (directexaminationandcross-examination),andthejudgemaydemandanyremainingexplanationsandhasthesupervisorypowerovertheprocedure.111TheissuewasdefinitivelysettledbyProf.GustavoBadaróinhisexcellentdoctrinaireessay:“Aconexãonoprocessopenal,segundooprincípiodojuiznatural,esuaaplicaçãonosprocessosdaOperaçãoLavaJato”(“Thejoinderofactionsincriminalprocedureaccordingtotheprincipleofthelawfuljudge,anditsapplicationintheprocedures of the Lava-Jato Operation”), online athttp://www.mpsp.mp.br/portal/page/portal/documentacao_e_divulgacao/doc_biblioteca/bibli_servicos_produtos/bibli_boletim/bibli_bol_2006/122.07.PDF.

98

when it interprets the boundaries of the passive corruption crime in Brazilian law can bedemonstratedwithouttheleastdifficulty,inthelightnotonlyoflegaldogmaticsbutalso–andmainly–intheviewoftheSupremeCourtlawcase.

Thesentencestatedthat“inBraziliancaselaw,theissueisstillcontroversial,butthemostrecentjudgmentsshowthetendencytorulethatthecorruptionoffensedoesnotdependonamisconductandthatthereisnoneedofitsprecisedetermination”.Thesentencecontinuesstatingthat“intheCriminalProceedings470,ruledbytheHonorableSupremeCourtPlenary(AP470/MG,Opiniondeliveredby Justice JoaquimBarbosa,majorityopinion, session fromDecember17th,2012),theissuewasdiscussed,butaccordingtotheinterpretationofthiscourt,inthereasoningofthesentencethereisnoconclusiveaffirmationtoitsregard,atleastnotexpressly”.Thesentence’sconclusionreferringtotheunderstandingoftheSupremeCourtregardingthisissueisobjectivelyandcompletelymistaken.

The Supreme Court discussed thoroughly the issue of the requirements of the passivecorruptioncrimeinAP470proceedings.Atthattime,therewasamajordiscussionaboutthenecessitytoprovethemisconductthatmotivatedtheacceptanceorsolicitationofanundueadvantageasaconditiontoconfiguretheoffenseofpassivecorruption.Thisproblem,alreadyverycomplexinthedogmaticview–wasaggravated–intheperspectiveoftheSupremeCourtcase law – by the well-known difficulty to extract the majority legal theses from singleproceedings in a context inwhich the deliberation dynamics suggests that the judgmentsdeliveredbycourtsconsistoftheaggregationofsingleopinions,withoutreachingaconsensusregarding the central controversies of the debate112. Therefore it is necessary to seek toidentifyclearlytheboundariesofthecriminalrulespecifiedinArt.317oftheCriminalCode,basedonthejudicialprecedentsoftheSupremeCourtPlenary113.Afterall,themeaningofthecriminalsanctionofatypifiedconductdependsinevitablyoftheinterpretationperformedbycourts,especiallybytheSupremeCourt,thehighestrankingcourtoftheBrazilianjudiciarybranch114.

Thepresentdebateonthenormativecontentofthepassivecorruptioncrimerequiresoftheirinterpreters the following logical steps: (i) the case law determines the rationale of thecriminal rule, since the interpretation establishes the boundaries of the relevant criminalconduct; (ii) in the AP 470 proceedings, the Supreme Court discussed exhaustively theobjectiveandsubjectiverequirementstoconfigurethepassivecorruptioncrimeinBrazilianlaw; (iii) thenormativesenseattachedtothecriminalrulebytheSupremeCourtcase lawintegratesthecontentthatconstitutesthecriminaloffenseitselfanddeterminesnormativelynot only future judgments, but also the addressee of criminal rule itself. Therefore, the

112ForaproperunderstandingoftheseriousdeliberationproblemscurrentlyfacedbytheSupremeCourtsee:V. SILVA, Virgílio Afonso da. (2006)O STF e o controle de constitucionalidade: deliberation, diálogo e razãopública.RevistadeDireitoAdministrativonº250.RiodeJaneiro:FGVDireitoRio,p.197-227.113FortheidentificationoftheSupremeCourt’sprevalentpositionwasappliedthecriterionaccordingtowhichhisorherjurisdictioncoincideswiththeorientationestablishedbythecompetentbodywiththeaimtounifythecomprehension of the court divisions, in the case of the Supreme Court, its Plenary. Occasional previousjudgmentsofthecourtdivisions(Turmas)whichwerecontrarytothejudicialorientationheldbythePlenaryofSupremeCourt,actingasunifyingbody,wheredeliberatelyexcludedfromthepresentanalysis.114Althoughitis,asamatterofprinciple,notthetaskoftheSupremeCourttounifytheinterpretationof(infra-constitutional)criminalrules,itusuallyaffirmsthelastwordregardingthesenseandtheboundariesofcriminalrulesexaminedincriminalproceedingsoforiginal jurisdiction.HierarchycriteriaapplicabletoSupremeCourtjurisdictionleadtotheprevalenceofitsjudicialprecedentsoverinfra-constitutionalcriminallaw.

99

examinationofthespecificationoftheoffenseapplicabletothechargeagainstthedefendantmustbesubjecttothepreviousmeaninggivenbythePlenaryoftheSupremeCourttoArt.317oftheCriminalCode115.Infact,inthecasewearediscussinghere,theessentialvaluesofademocraticconstitutionalstate116–suchasrationalityandlegitimacyofjudicialdecisions,legalcertaintyandisonomy–recommendtheapplicationoftherecentlegalprecedentsofthe Supreme Court Plenary regarding the meaning and boundaries of the criminal rulespecifiedinArt.317oftheCriminalCode.

Sincea long time, there is inBrazil adiscussionon theexactmeaningof thecriminal rulespecified in Art. 317 of the Criminal Code.We can summarize themain controversies asfollows: (i) Does passive corruption demand the acceptation or solicitation of an undueadvantagetobemotivatedbythebargainofthepublicfunctionheldbytheagent?(ii)Doesthe consummation of the criminal conduct demand the proof that the acceptation orsolicitationofanundueadvantagerisesfromaspecificofficialactmadeavailabletosomeoneby the public agent? (iii) Does the passive corruption demand the proof of a concretemisconductrepresentedbyanofficialactwithinthecapacityofthecorruptedpublicagent?

These issues raise at least twodifferent argumentation levels: (i) The first one consists ofdeliberatingwhethertheconsummationofthepassivecorruptioncriminalconductdemandsthedemonstrationofarelationbetweentheundueadvantage(solicitedorreceived)andtheexerciseofapublic function,whichdemands the investigation if there is a causal relationbetweenthisundueadvantageandamisconductrepresentedbyanofficialact,evenifonlypotentiallyconsidered;(ii)thesecondoneconsistsofthequestioniftheeffectivemisconduct– an action or inaction – embodied in an official act is required to configure the criminaloffense.Thefirstargumentativelevelsuggeststheproblemofthenecessitytodemonstrateacausalrelation,evenpotential,betweentheundueadvantageandanofficialact(allegedlyin his or her official capacity). The second argumentative level puts into debate the issueconcerning the requirement to demonstrate a concrete action of the public agent tosomebody’sbenefitasaconditionoftheconsummationofthepassivecorruptioncrime.

TheSupremeCourtaddressedalltheseissuesinthewell-knownAP470proceeding,whentheCourtdefinedwithmajorprecisionthespecificationoftheapplicablecriminalrule(Art.317oftheCriminalCode).Togiveanideaoftheextensionoftheproblemregardingtheattemptto find the objective element of the passive corruption crime, it is useful to recall somestatementsgiveninthewell-knownAP470proceedings,whentheCourt,inaplenarysessionof judgment onmerits, struggled to set the elements of the offense. The following chartpresentsashortsynthesisofhowtheSupremeCourtdefinedthemisconductrepresentedbyanofficialactasarequirementtothepassivecorruptionoffense:

115Thecaselawapplicabletothespecificationofthepassivecorruptionoffense,asstatedbytheplenaryoftheSupremeCourtinthejudgmentoftheAP470proceedings,mustbealsoappliedtothepresentcase.FromthefruitfulnormativedensityoftheconstitutionalprincipleofisonomyweextractprimordiallytheJudiciary’sdutyofanequaljurisdictionaltreatmenttoequalsituations(SILVA,JoséAfonsoda.CursodeDireitoConstitucionalPositivo, 16th ed., São Paulo, Malheiros Editores, 1999, p. 221; BOBBIO, Norberto. Igualdade e Liberdade,translationbyCarlosNelsonCoutinho,RiodeJaneiro,Ediouro,1996,p.25;CANOTILHO,J.J.Gomes.ConstituiçãoDirigenteeVinculaçãodoLegislador,Coimbra,CoimbraEditora,1982,p.380.116As JusticeEdsonFachin stated, “the constructionof anarrativeofpreceding caseswhichorientates thewholejudicialsystemitpartofthepublicmunusoftheConstitutionalCourt”(ADI1046,OpiniondeliveredbyJusticeEdsonFachin,Plenary,sessionfromDecember18th,2015).

100

Defendants: João Paulo Cunha andHenriquePizzolato(initialstageoftheAP470proceedings)

Defendants: otherCongressmen (final stageoftheAP470proceedings)

Justice

JoaquimBarbosa

Thus it is proved that the defendantHENRIQUEPIZZOLATOreceivedundueadvantage from DNA Propaganda,able to motivate him to commit anofficial act consisting of theanticipated transference of funds ofthe bank Banco do Brasil to DNAPropaganda, without contractualprovision and without control of theuseofthefunds.

Besidestheconsistentdoctrineandcaselaw,thespecificationofthecrimeitselfexplicatesthe formal nature of this offense – itsconsummationdoesnotevendependontheverificationof a payment; the simple act ofsoliciting/receivingsomethingintheexerciseof a public office suffices when the officialactsarepracticable.Theeffectivemisconductrepresented by the aforementioned officialact is not mandatory. The action results inhigherpenalties.

Justice

RicardoLewandowski

The passive corruption offenserequirestheevidenceofanofficialactwhich represents a transaction orbargainingwiththepublicofficeheorsheholds.TheProsecutionOfficedidnot gather any evidence, howeverminimal,ofanyunlawfulacttakenbythedefendant[JoãoPauloCunha].

Nevertheless,whenthePlenaryofthisCourtin its majority addressed the same issue inthisAP470proceedings,itexpressedamorecomprehensiveunderstanding,affirmingthatthecriminal ruleofArt.317of theCriminalCode is verified by the mere receiving ofundueadvantagebythepublicagent,beingunnecessarythepreciseidentificationoftheofficial act. And more: the indication of arelationbetweenthereceivingofadvantageby the public servant and the practice of acertain act within his or her legal duties isunnecessary. And this is because, even in acase of passive corruption offense, theconsummationofthecrimetookplaceinthemoment when the undue advantage wasaccepted and not in the moment of theamount’s withdrawal. Therefore, accordingto the judgment of the Court, the passivecorruption offense is constituted when anunduebenefit is received, and this includesalso the possibility or the perspective of anactionor inaction,not identified,presentorfuture,realorpotential,aslongasitoccursinhisorherofficialcapacity.

JusticeRosaWeber Anindicationofanofficialactisnotanelement of the legal type of passivecorruption. It is sufficient that thepublicagentwho receives theundueadvantage has the power to commitan official act which is able toconsummate the offense of Article317 of the Criminal Code. […]Whichrequires theadvantage tobeoffered

However, the majority, according to theassignee’sopinionfromJusticeIlmarGalvão,shared the viewpoint that the elementsnecessarytoestablishthecrimerequiredanunduebenefit,whethersolicitedorreceived,inreturnforanofficialact,performedbythecorruptedagentinhisorherlegalcapacity.

Inthatcase, thechargedidnot identifyanymisconduct, performed or even intended,which would motivate the payment of

101

andacceptedduetoanofficialact;theeffectiveoccurrenceisnotmandatory.

advantage to the former president of theRepublicofBrazil.

In the specific case, however, the unduebenefit was indeed paid to the corruptedcongressmen,withthepurposeofobtainingpolitical support in favor of the FederalGovernment.

JusticeLuizFux …thepracticeofsomeofficialactdueto an advantage received is notnecessary to prove the offense. It issufficientthatthebenefitisrelatedtoapublicofficeholding.[…]Theoffenseofpassivecorruptionisconstitutedbythe simple solicitation or the merereceiving of an undue advantage (orby promising it) by the public agentdue to his or her official capacity, itmeans, due to the simple possibilitythat the receiving of bribe mayinfluencetheactionofanofficialinthedischargeofhisorherpublicduties.

As already exhaustively demonstrated, theexecutionofanyofficialact in return foranadvantage received is not necessary toconstitutetheoffense.Itissufficientthatthebenefit is related to a public office holding.[…] Therefore the indication of a concreteofficial act committed in return for theoffered benefit is indeed dispensable; thepotentiality to influence the action of anofficial in the discharge of his or her publicduties is sufficient. The proof of action orinactionordelayofanofficialact isonlyanaggravating circumstance established in § 2ofArt.317oftheCriminalCode.

JusticeDiasToffoli AsalreadydecidedbythisPlenaryinaformersession – when I, by the way, delivered adissentingopinion–themainstreampositionwasformedinthesensethattheexecutionofanofficialactisnotanessentialelementforthe configuration of the passive corruptionoffense.Tothiseffect,itissufficientthattheadvantage is offered in relation to a publicoffice. Based on this premise, I accept thisorientationandIwilldecideaccordingly.

JusticeCármenLúcia …hadwithinhispowersthecontrolofpublic bidding, and among otherduties he was responsible for thenomination of the biddingcommission, the annulment orrevocation of a public bidding, theexecution of the contract with thewinner and the monitoring of thecontractperformance.

During the proceeding it was proved thatundue advantages were granted to theCongressmen Roberto Jefferson, RomeuQueiroz, representatives of the BrazilianWorkersParty,andtoEmersonEloyPalmieri,with the specific purpose of obtainingpoliticalsupportconsistingactionspertainingtotheapprovalandsupportofprojectsandactswhichwereoftheFederalGovernment’sinterest.

JusticeCezarPeluso RegardingtheofficialactswhichJoãoPauloCunhacouldhaveexecuted,theexistenceofacausalrelationbetweenthe public agent’s conduct and theexecutionofanofficialact,orthesoleintent,wouldsuffice.

102

JusticeGilmarMendes “Anunlawfulact consists in soliciting(askingfor)orreceiving(accepting)anundue advantage due to a publicoffice,ortoacceptapromiseofsuchan advantage. The act mustnecessarilyberelatedtotheexerciseof the public office that the agentholdsorwillhold(ifheorshehasnottakenup theofficeyet),because theadvantage solicited, received oracceptedinreturnforanofficialactisessential of the corruption crime.Here, the agent markets his or herpublic office. The act aiming at thecorruption conduct does notnecessarily consist in a violation ofofficeduty[...],but itmustbeanactexercised within his or her legalpowersorhavearelationwithhisorherpublicoffice[…]”.

Iinsistonthisreaffirmation,Mr.ChiefJustice,mainlyinfaceoftheobservationmadebytheeminentCo-AssigneeJusticeallegingthattheCourt revised its position and gave up therequirementofanofficialact.Thisisnotmyposition.Ithinkthatitisveryimportanttolaythe theoretic bases of this judgment, alsobecause of the effect of precedents of theCourtintheotherlevelsofjurisdiction.

Therefore,thejudicialprecedentestablishedin the AP 470 proceedings remains: apotentialofficialactisessentialtoconfigurethe passive corruption office, although aneffective action by the corrupt agent is notmandatory.

JusticeMarcoAurélio SoIdecide,Mr.ChiefJustice,asbasicidea that the official act, theimplementofanofficialact,isrelatedtotanaggravationofoneofthetypesof corruption, even because,regarding the passive corruption, itmay take place when the publicservanthasalreadyquittedhisorherfunction,andevenbeforetakingitup.

HebasicallyagreedwiththeAssigneeJusticeand did not participate in the discussionabouttheofficialact.

JusticeCelsodeMello When the agent, committing any ofthe actions specified in the criminalruleestablished inArt.317,caput,oftheCriminalCode,doesnotundertakeanofficialconductnecessarilyrelatedtotheactionorinactionofanyactinhisorherofficialcapacity–orwhenheor she at least does not act in theperspectiveofanactassignabletothesetofhisorherlegalduties–,inwhichcase the essential reference to adeterminateofficialactisabsent,thenit is impossible to charge him or herwithpassivecorruption.

Thereforeitisforciblynecessarytorecognize,asfarastheelementsrequiredtoconstitutethepassivecorruptionoffense,accordingtoArt. 317, caput, of the Criminal Code, areconcerned, the necessary existence of arelation between the fact charged to thepublicservantandtheconcreteexecutionofanofficialactundertakeninhisorherofficialcapacity.

103

The opinion of Justice Gilmar Mendes represents the consensus viewpoints in theaforementioned judgment regarding the elements required to constitute the passivecorruption offense: (i) “An unlawful action consists in soliciting (asking for) or receiving(accepting) an undue advantage due to a public office, or to accept a promise of such anadvantage”117;(ii)“Theactmustnecessarilyberelatedtotheexerciseofthepublicofficewhichtheagentholdsorwillhold(incaseheorshehasnottakenuptheofficeyet),becausetheadvantagesolicited,receivedoracceptedinreturnforanofficialactisanessentialelementofthecorruptioncrime.Here,theagentmarketshisorherpublicoffice”;(iii)“Theactaimingatthecorruptionconductdoesnotnecessarilyconsistinaviolationofofficeduty”;(iv)“Itmustbeanactexercisedwithinhisorher legalpowersorhavea relationwithhisorherpublicoffice”118;(v)“Therequirementthedeterminationoftheofficialactisrelatedtotheessentiallinkbetweentheactionandthepublicofficeandnot,inthestrictsense,toamaterializedact,sincetheeffectiveactionisnotamandatoryelementtoestablishthecrimeofbribery”.Tosumup,wecansaythatJusticeGilmarMendesstatedthatthejudicialprecedentsendorsedintheAP307proceedingsremainedunalteredinthejudgmentofAP470:apotentialofficialactisessentialtoconstitutethepassivecorruptionoffense,althoughtheeffectiveactionbythecorruptactionisnotmandatory.

Inthesamereasoningtrend,theopinionofJusticeCelsodeMellorestatedthethesis:“Whentheagent,committinganyoftheactionsspecifiedinthecriminalruleestablishedinArt.317,caput,oftheCriminalCode,doesnotundertakeanofficialconductnecessarilyrelatedtotheactionorinactionofanyactinhisorherofficialcapacity–orwhenheorsheatleastdoesnotactintheperspectiveofanactassignabletothesetofhisorherlegaldutiesandpowers–,inwhichcasetheessentialreferencetoadeterminateofficialactisabsent,thenitisimpossibletochargehimorherwithpassivecorruption”.OtherstatementsinJusticeCelsodeMello’s

117“Welearnfromthedoctrinethat‘anunlawfulactconsistsinsoliciting(askingfor)orreceiving(accepting)undueadvantageduetoapublicoffice,ortoacceptthepromiseofsuchanadvantage.Theactmustnecessarilyberelatedtothepublicofficethatagentholdsorwillhold(incaseheorshehasnottakenuptheofficeyet),becausetheadvantagesolicited,receivedoracceptedinreturnforanofficialactisessentialtothecorruptioncrime. Here, the agentmarkets his or her public office. The act aiming at the corruption conduct does notnecessarilyconsistinaviolationofofficeduty[...],butitmustbeanactexercisedwithinhisorherlegalpowersorhavearelationwithhisorherpublicoffice[…]’(RuiStocco,CódigoPenalesuainterpretaçãojurisprudencial,RT,4thed.,p.1647)”(p.2300/2301).118Asstatedbefore,theCourtdecidedthat“theactionorinactiontowhichthecorruptioncrimerefersmustbe related to theofficial capacityof thecorruptpublicagent, that is, itmustbecomprisedwithinhisorherspecific powers, since only in this case the actmay affect the regular administrative functions of the State”(NelsonHungria,ComentáriosaoCódigoPenal,p.369).

JusticeAyresBritto Itsufficestodeducewithclaritywhatarethecategoriesofactions,inreturnfor which undue advantages aresolicited or received – it means, thenatureoftheactionwhichconstitutethecorruptionobject.

[...] in corruption offenses, the official actmustnecessarilybeapartof therespectivecausal chain or public office powers. But tothe legal concept “official act” mustcorrespondthecolloquialmeaningof“officialact”within the powers of the public agent.Andofficialact,inthelegislativesense,istheactofenacting laws,supervising, judging(inthe exceptional cases established in theFederalConstitution).

104

opinionmakeevenclearerthattheSupremeCourtrequires,asfortheconsummationofthepassivecorruptionoffense,thatthepublicofficebargainsanofficialactinhisorherofficialcapacityinreturnforanundueadvantage(solicitedorreceived):

InordertofulfilltheessentialstructureofthecriminalruleofArt.317,caput,oftheCriminalCode,theremustbearelationbetweentheagentconduct–whosolicits,receivesoracceptsthepromiseofanunduebenefit–andanofficialactinhisorherofficialcapacity,whichmayoccurornot.Thisrequirementisimperative.

Itshouldbeemphasizedthat,inviewofthelegalobjectivityofthecriminalruleoftheArt.317,caput,oftheCriminalCode,andsincewerefertoanecessaryandtypicalrequirement,theremustbeevidenceofarelationcapableofassociatingthefactchargedtothepublicagent(solicit,receiveoracceptapromiseofunduebenefit)withthesimpleprospectofaction(orinaction)ofanofficialactinhisorherofficialcapacity.

Thecrimeisfullyestablishedeveniftheagenthasonlytheintenttoexecuteaspecificofficialactatalatermoment,thatmeans,regardlessofthedemonstrationofanactionorinactionofsuchnature.

If the referenceor connectionbetween theeffective conductof thepublic agent and theofficialact isabsent–that is,anofficialact inhisorherofficialcapacity(RT390/100–RT526/356 – RT 538/324) – then the lawful application of the criminal rule of the passivecorruptionoffense,asdefinedinArt.317,caput,oftheCriminalCode,isutterlyimpossible.

Thecriminallawdoctrine(MAGALHÃESNORONHA,“DireitoPenal”,vol.4/244,itemno.1.320,17thed.,1986,Saraiva)emphasizesthatbargaininganofficialact–inotherwords,tradingapublicfunction–constitutesoneoftheseveralelementsofthisoffensetype;thisobjectiverequirementmeansthat“theremustbearelationbetweenthepastorfutureactionandthethingoradvantage”thatisoffered,deliveredormerelypromisedtothepublicagent.

Inthisaspect,thelessongivenbyHELENOCLÁUDIOFRAGOSO(“LiçõesdeDireitoPenal”,vol.II/438,1980,Forense)isdefinitive.Accordingtotheauthor,thepassivecorruptionoffense,asspecifiedinthecaputofArt.317oftheCriminalCode,“lieswithintheboundariesofanofficial actwhich has to be determined by the prosecution and demonstrated during theproceedings”.

The Assignee Justice, when emphasizing this aspect which is pertinent to the official act,pointedoutitsexistenceandreferredtotherelevantofficialactionindicatedintheaccusationmadebytheProsecution,aconsiderationwhichrevealsitselfessentialfortheconstitutionofthe corruption offense as well as for the assessment of the crime against the PublicAdministrationbythemultipledefendants.AccordingtotheAssignee,thecriminalconductwasevidencedbyproperandvalidproof,subjecttotheadversaryprocedure”(p.2442/2446).

Inanotherpassageofthesamejudgment,JusticeCelsodeMelloexplainedagainwithgreatprecisionthedogmaticoutlinesofthepassivecorruptionoffense,mentioningthatthecaselawof theSupremeCourtneverexcluded thenecessity todemonstrate the relationofanundueadvantagetothelegalpowersofthepublicagent.Tothecontrary,JusticeCelsodeMelloclearlydemonstratedthattheprecedentsoftheSupremeCourtrequire,asanessentialelementtotheoffense,thatthepublicagentsolicitsorreceivesanunduebenefitinexchangeofanofficialactinhisorherofficialcapacity,inverbis:

Icouldnotoverstate,ChiefJustice,thattheSupremeCourt,inthisjudgment,doesnotreviseorchangeitsprecedentsandconceptualformulationsalreadyconsolidatedatall,neitherdoes

105

itturnconstitutionalguaranteesandrightsflexible,whichwouldbeirreconcilable,absolutelyirreconcilable as a matter of fact, with the directives applicable to the Supreme Court,whateverthedefendantsandthenatureofthechargesmaybe.

Chief Justice, as far as the consideration of the official act as an essential element of thecriminalruleofthepassivecorruptionoffense,asdefinedbyArt.317,caput,oftheCriminalCode, and in accordancewithmy opinion delivered in these same proceedings earlier onAugust29th,2012,Imusthighlightthatsuchconductismandatorytotheconfigurationoftheaforementionedcriminaloffense.

IftheagentconcludesanyoftheessentialactionsdescribedinArt.317,caput,oftheCriminalCode,butdoesnotassociatethisactiontohisorherofficialcapacity,thisnecessaryelementisabsentandthereforethepassivecorruptionoffenseisnotaverifiablefact.

ThematerializationofthetypicalstructureestablishedinArt.317,caput,oftheCriminalCode,requiresacompulsoryassociationbetweentheagent’sconduct–whosolicitsorreceives,orwhoacceptsthepromiseofanundueadvantage–andtheidentificationofaspecificofficialact,whichmayoccurornot.

Therefore, it is imperative to recognize that the configuration of the passive corruptionoffensespecifiedinArt.317,caput,oftheCriminalCode,dependsonthedistinguishingofanindisputablerelationbetweenthecriminalactchargeabletothepublicagent,if,andonlyifsuchactionisundertakeninhisorherofficialcapacity.

Itisopportunetostress,andinviewofthelegalobjectivityofthecriminalruleinArt.317,caput,oftheCriminalCode,thatthecorrelationbetween,ononehand,thefactchargedtothepublicagent(tosolicit,receiveoracceptapromiseofanundueadvantage)and,ontheotherhand, theaccomplishmentofanactionoromissionwithin thepowersof thepublicagent,iscriticaltotheconstitutionofthecrime.

Thefulleffectsoftheoffensetypeareattainedwhentheconductoftheagentismotivatedbytheeventualexecutionofanofficialact,regardlesstheimmediate–ornotimmediate–actionorinactionbytheagentinhisorherofficialcapacity.

[…]

ThecaselawoftheCourtsindicatesthisveryalignmenttotheconceptionthatthepassivecorruptionoffenserequiresaverifiablerelationbetweentheunlawfulconductofthepublicagentandhisorherofficialpower,sothat theofficialact isexecuted inhisorherofficialcapacity.Thislogicalstructureisessentialtotheapplicationofthecriminalrule(RT374/164–RT388/200–RT390/100–RT526/356–RT538/324).

The Assignee indicated the existence of such act and referred to the relevant official actspecified in the accusationmade by the Prosecution, a consideration which reveals itselfessentialfortheconstitutionofthecorruptionoffenseaswellasfortheassessmentofthecrimeagainstthePublicAdministrationbythemultipledefendants.

IdeemworthyofnotethatthisjudgmentisdeliveredinstrictaccordancewiththeopinionIread in the plenary session of September 6th, 2012. There is no reason to question theprecedentspertainingtothe“officialact”establishedbytheSupremeCourtintheAP307/DFproceedingsintheopinionassignedtoJusticeILMARGALVÃO.Itremainsinfullforceandhasnotbeenmodified.

106

Inacomparativeperspectiveoftheplenarydecisions,boththeAP307/DFandthepresentcase (AP 470/MG), in contrast to the “Collor case”, indicate that the Federal Prosecutor’sOfficepresentedchargeswheretheconnectionbetweentheofficialactandtheacceptanceofanundueadvantagewascorrectlydescribed.

Again,inthe“Collorcase”theformerPresidentoftheRepublicwasacquittedonlegalgroundsofArt.386, IIIof theCodeofCriminalProcedure (“the factdoesnot constitutea criminaloffense”), as the charges submitted by the Federal Prosecutor’s Officewere insubstantial“consideringthattheofficialactbargainedinhisofficialcapacitycouldbedemonstrated”.

In the present proceedings, the Prosecutor’s Office avoided this inaccuracy by clearlydescribing in the accusatory pleading the reciprocity between the official act and thebargainingofapublicofficebythedefendants.

This Court adheres to the precedent established in the AP 307/DF proceedings, as to theconceptof“officialact”.

Tosumup,ChiefJustice: incontrasttothe“Collorcase”–wheretheFederalProsecutor’sOfficefailedtoindicatetheexacttermsoftheunlawfulconductoftheformerPresidentoftheRepublic(toreceiveanunduebenefit)anditsconnectiontohisofficialpowers–intheseproceedings (AP470/MG)theFederalProsecutorsOfficesucceeded indemonstratingwithaccuracyallelementsessentialtothecriminalruleofArt.317,caput,oftheCriminalCode,that is, thecausal relationbetween theofficial actand theunduebenefit receivedby thedefendants,accordingtothechargesofpassivecorruption.

Even the Assignee, Justice Joaquim Barbosa, was assertive when he stated that theconstitution of the passive corruption offense requires the solicitation or receiving of anundue advantage to be related to the feasibility of an official act in return for it (see theAssignee’s Opinion, p. 3675). Justice Ricardo Lewandowski, then in the final stage of theproceedings, identified the majority opinion on the subject and concluded that theconfigurationofthepassivecorruptionoffenserequirestheevidenceofeitherreceivingorsoliciting undue benefits, subject to the prospect of an action or inaction, not identified,presentorfuture,realorpotential,sincethisactisundertakenwithinthepowersofthepublicagent(seeOpinionp.3729-3730).

AccordingtothemajorityoftheCourt,theCongressmenwhowereconvictedonthegroundofpassivecorruptionintheAP470proceedingsreceivedanundueadvantageinreturnfortheir favorable votes to approve government projects, which by all means implicate thebargainingofapublicoffice.Thus,theconfigurationofapassivecorruptionoffensebytheCongressmenrelieduponthedemonstrationoftheofficialact–votesonbillprocedures–whichgeneratedtheunduebenefit.TheconvictionoftheCongressmeninaccordancewiththeaccusatorypleadingwasbasedonevidencethattheyhadreceivedmoneyinreturnfortheirfavorablevotes inbillprocedures(officialact)whichwereofthecorruptors’ interest.Thisconclusionisbasedontheopinionsdeliveredinthejudgment:

107

JusticeRosaWeber

In thespecificcase,however, theunduebenefitwas indeedpaidtocorruptcongressmen,with the purpose of obtaining political support in favor of the Federal Government. Thispoliticalsupportmaybeembodiedinseveraldifferentactions,suchasthepassingofbills.

There is sufficientproof that thepolitical parties aswell as thedefendants supported thegovernmentandalsovotedfavorably inbillprocedures,namelythetaxandsocialsecurityreforms. This evidence suffices to configure an “official act” bargained in exchange of anundueadvantage,namely,thevotingdutiesoflawmakersinCongress.

+++

JusticeJoaquimBarbosa

The Congressmenwho received payments in cashwere acting as partywhips to organisemajoritiesandensurethatasmoothvotetookplace.Accordingtotheevidence,thepaymentsincashwouldinfluencetheactionofseveralRepresentativesinthedischargeoftheirpublicduties, gathering a large supporting group in favor of theWorkers Party, easily assuringmajoritiessubjecttothecorruptors’interests(p.3498).

[...]Consideringthereciprocityofbothpassiveandactivecorruption,asinthepresentcase,we can affirm that the perpetrators of the unlawful payments were fully aware of theelements required to configure the offense, in otherwords, that theywould grant undueadvantagestothecongressmeninreturnfortheirsupport,thusinfluencingtheperformanceofofficialactsbythebeneficiaries.

Thedefendantssolicitedmoneyforthemselvesandtheirparties,sincetheyknewthattheWorkers Party intended to assure their loyalty in the Congress. In exchange thereof theybargainedofficialactsthatwouldmeettheinterestsofthegovernment(p.3678).

+++

JusticeDiasToffoli

As already decided by this Plenary in a former session –when I, by theway, delivered adissentingopinion,themainstreampositionwasformedinthesensethattheexecutionofanofficialactisnotanessentialelementfortheconfigurationofthepassivecorruptionoffense.Basedonthispremise,IacceptthisorientationandIwilldecideaccordingly(p.4225).

[...]

I observe that the described conduct, according to the prevailing interpretation of theSupremeCourt(whichappliestopublicofficersandpoliticiansalike),isconsonantwiththeconductofthecongressmen,sincethesolicitationoftheundueadvantage,inthecase,derivesfromtheirofficialcapacity,constitutingthecausalrelationbetweenthepubliccapacityandthefacts.

+++

JusticeCármenLúcia

ThejudicialrecordsshowthatcongressmenJoséJanene(deceased),PedroHenryandPedroCorreareceivedtheundueamountofR$2.905.000,00(inwords:twomillions,ninehundredand five thousand Reais), in return for official acts, namely the support to the FederalGovernment.

108

LegislativeactionsareinherenttothepublicofficeofCongressmen,beittosupport,beittooppose governmental directives and actions. For the discharge of their legal duties, theyreceivesalariesandallowances,asprovidedforintheConstitution.Anyothercompensation,ofwhatevernature,effectedinreturnfortheacceptanceofanypromiseorundueadvantage,constitutesanoffense(p.1952/1953).

Duringtheproceedings,enoughevidencewasgatheredthatundueadvantagesweregrantedto the congressmen Roberto Jefferson, Romeu Queiroz, representatives of the BrazilianWorkersParty,andtoEmersonEloyPalmieri,withthespecificpurposeofobtainingpoliticalsupportconsisting inactionspertainingtotheapprovalandsupportofbillsandotheractswhichwereoftheFederalGovernment’sinterest(p.1990/1991).

TheevidenceincludedintheproceedingsprovethatRobertoJefferson,assistedbyEmersonEloyPalmieriandRomeuQueiroz,receivedR$4.545.000,00(inwords:fourmillionsandfivehundredandforty-fivethousandReais),anundueadvantagedestinedtoinfluencehisactioninCongress“inordertopassbillsoftheFederalGovernment’s interest”(p.45424,closingargumentoftheFederalProsecutor’sOffice)(p.1994).

+++

JusticeCelsodeMello

The Assignee Justice, when emphasizing this aspect which is pertinent to the official act,pointeditsexistenceoutandreferredtotherelevantofficialactionindicatedintheaccusationmadebytheProsecution,aconsiderationwhichrevealsitselfessentialfortheconstitutionofthepassivecorruptionoffenseaswellasfortheassessmentofthishigheroffenseagainstthePublicAdministrationbythemultipledefendants.

[...]

In the present proceedings, the Prosecutor’s Office avoided this inaccuracy by clearlydescribing in the accusatory pleading the reciprocity between the official act and thebargainingofapublicofficebythedefendants.

This Court adheres to the precedent established in the AP 307/DF proceedings, as to theconceptof“officialact”.

Tosumup,ChiefJustice: incontrasttothe“Collorcase”–wheretheFederalProsecutor’sOfficefailedtoindicatetheexacttermsoftheunlawfulconductoftheformerPresidentoftheRepublic(toreceiveanunduebenefit)anditsconnectiontohisofficialpowers–intheseproceedings (AP470/MG)theFederalProsecutorsOfficesucceeded indemonstratingwithaccuracyallelementsessentialtothecriminalruleofArt.317,caputoftheCriminalCode,that is, thecausal relationbetween theofficial actand theunduebenefit receivedby thedefendants,accordingtothechargesofpassivecorruption.

AsemphasizedbytheAssigneeJustice,ontheotherhand,theseveralactswhichmaygiverise to the application of the criminal rule of the passive corruption offense, in the case,comprise the voting of bills as well as any other institutional duties and powers asCongressmen.

Anyway,itisrelevanttounderlinethatthevotingpowersinCongressmostnotablyrepresentatypicalexampleofanofficialact(p.4475/4482).

+++

109

JusticeAyresBritto

[...]incorruptionoffenses,theofficialactmustnecessarilybeapartoftherespectivecausalchain or public office powers. But to the legal concept “official act”must correspond thecolloquialmeaningof“officialact”withinthepowersofthepublicagent.Andanofficialact,inthelegislativesense,istheactofenactinglawsandpassingbills,supervising,judging(intheexceptionalcasesstatedintheFederalConstitution)(p.4505).

In otherwords, the entanglement of facts verified in this criminal proceedings allows thereasoningthatPedroHenryandPedroCorrêa,assistedbyJoãoCláudioGenu,solicitedandreceivedanundueadvantageatthepretextofundertakinganofficialact(p.4516).

The Supreme Court case law consolidated the judicial precedent stating that the passivecorruption offense depends upon the verification of a causal relation between the undueadvantage (solicitedor received)andanofficialactexecuted in theofficialcapacityof thepublicagent(regardlessiftheactoccursornot119).AsJusticeCelsodeMellostatedintheAP307 criminal proceedings – a conclusion reaffirmed in the judgment of AP 470 criminalproceedings:“itshouldbeemphasizedthat,inviewofthelegalobjectivityofthecriminalruleof theArt.317, caput,of theCriminalCode,and sincewe refer toanecessaryand typicalrequirement,theremustbeevidenceofarelationcapableofassociatingthefactchargedtothepublicofficer(solicit,receiveoracceptapromiseofunduebenefit)withthesimpleprospectof action (or inaction) of an official act in his or her official capacity”. In the AP 307proceedings, the majority stated that the specification of the passive corruption offenserequirestheundueadvantage,eithersolicitedorreceived,toberelatedtoanofficialactionsubjecttothepowersofthepublicagent120.TheJusticesdeliberatedthatthejudgmentoftheAP 470 proceedings would indeed ratify the judicial precedent established in the AP 307proceedings, so that theAP 470would not differ frompreviousAP 307121. In this regard,JusticeGilmarMendesemphasized:

119Itissignificanttoremarktheeffectiveconsummationoftheofficialactisnotanessentialelementtothepassive corruption offense. Themere perspective of its future execution suffices to the specification of theoffense: “Thematerialization of the typical structure established in Art. 317, “caput”, of the Criminal Code,requiresacompulsoryassociationbetweentheagent’sconduct–whosolicitsorreceives,orwhoacceptsthepromise of an undue advantage – and the identification of a specific official act, whichmay occur or not”(SupremeCourt,AP307/DFcriminalproceedings,RTJ162/264,OpinionofJusticeCelsodeMello).120WetranscribebelowthemainargumentsoftheAssignee’sOpiniondeliveredbyJusticeIlmarGalvão,whicharepertinenttotheanalysisoftherelevantoffensetypes:“Thepassivecorruptionoffenseisconfiguredwhentheagentwhosolicits,receivesoracceptsapromiseofanundueadvantageactsinhisorherofficialcapacity,alsoifheorsheisremovedorbeforetakingupthecharge.Thecausalrelationbetweentheofficialactandthepowersofthepublicofficerismandatory.121TheAssignee,JusticeIlmarGalvãocontinues:“relyingonhistoricalinterpretation,thelegalexpertreferstoNelsonHungria,whoremarksthatthenationallawmaker,whenconsideredtherelevantoffense‘wasinspiredbytheCodePénalSuissetowhichadheredalsotheFrenchlawofFebruary8th,1945,andtheSpanishCodeof1944(ComentáriosaoCódigoPenal,2nded.,RiodeJaneiro,Forense,1959,vol.9,p.367)’,statingverbis:“AndtheCodePénalSuisseclassifiespassivecorruptionaseithersimpleoraggravated,indifferenttypes,themostaggravatedoccurswhentheagentomittedordelayedamandatoryofficialact.Hence,Art.316(«pourprocéderàunactenoncontraireàleursdevoirsetrentrantdansleursfonctions»)describestheconductofapublicofficerwho solicits or accepts anundue advantage toperformanofficial act that lies in his or her official capacity(indirectcorruption,fromwhichArt.327,caput,oftheBrazilianCriminalCodeoriginates).Art.315(«pourfaireunacteimpliquantuneviolationdesdevoirsdeleurscharges»),onitsturn,specifiestheunlawfulconductofanagentwho solicits or accepts anundueadvantage toperformanofficial act that liesbeyondhis/herofficialcapacity(directcorruption,fromwhichArt.317,§1oftheBrazilianCriminalCodeoriginates).TheCodePénal

110

“Onthissubject,ChiefJustice,IdrawyourattentiontothefactthatmanypersonsclaimthatweareoverrulingtheprecedentsstatedintheAP307proceedingsinrespectoftheofficialactdoctrine;perhapswehavedebatedthisissueoccasionally.Now,themajorityrequires–inthe case of corruption – the existence of an official act whatsoever. In short, a certainconfusion is imposing itself and we have to clarify it before this misunderstandingconsolidates”(p.2912)

JusticeCelsodeMellocalledattentiontothesameissueduringthejudgmentofAP470:

Chief Justice, Iwould liketoreaffirmthat theSupremeCourthasnotoverruled its judicialprecedents,suchasthejudgementdeliveredintheAP307/DF.

Thereisnoreasontoquestiontheprecedentspertainingtothe“officialact”establishedbytheSupremeCourt intheAP307/DFproceedings intheopinionassignedtoJustice ILMARGALVÃO.Itremainsinfullforceandhasnotbeenmodified.

Inacomparativeperspectiveoftheplenarydecisions,boththeAP307/DFandthepresentcase (AP 470/MG), in contrast to the “Collor case”, indicate that the Federal Prosecutor’sOfficepresentedchargeswheretheconnectionbetweentheofficialactandtheacceptanceofanundueadvantagewascorrectlydescribed(p;2912/2913).

Briefly,thecaselawoftheSupremeCourthassettledtheopinionthattheconfigurationofthepassivecorruptionoffenserequiresboththedemonstrationofanofficialact(potentialoreffective)andtheindicationthatthisofficialactlieswithinthepowersofthepublicagent.So,thesentenceisclearly inaccuratewhenitstatesthat“thejudgmentoftheAP470criminalproceedingsbroughtthisissueabout,indeed,butthistrialcourtdoesnotidentifyaconclusiveassessmentofthisquestion–atleastitwasnotexpresslydiscussedinthereasoningofthejudgment”.

ThesentenceofthetrialcourtsimplyignoredthejudicialprecedentandthecaselawruledbytheplenaryoftheSupremeCourt.Thisintentionaldisregardwillcertainlygiverisetomanyappeals,whichwill certainlyoriginatenewdebates.Atsometime, theSupremeCourtwillhavetoaddressthesecriticalissues:(i)willthejudicialprecedentoftheAP470regardingtherequirements to constitute the passive corruption offense bemaintained? (ii) in case thejudicialprecedentschange–forinstance,thedemonstrationoftheofficialactisnolongeranessentialrequirementtoconstitutethepassivecorruptionoffense,sothattheboundariesofthecrimetypeareconsiderablyexpanded,mightretroact?

The true observance of the principle of legality in criminal law encompasses at least therecognition of the non-retroactivity of an eventual modification of the Supreme Courtprecedents inmalampartem, if not themaintenanceof theprevailingprecedents. JusticeTeoriZavasckimadesomeremarksaboutthesubject122:

Suisse,thus,requiresforbothoffensesanessentialrelationbetweenthefactandtheofficialact’.TheAssigneeconcludesinhisOpinion:“thewell-knownauthorleadsourreasoningtoonesinglepossibleconclusion:iftheCodePénalSuisseinspiredtheBrazilianlawmakerstospecifythedifferentpassivecorruptionoffenses,theninBrazilthecausalrelationbetweenthefactandtheofficialactexecutedbyapublicofficerismandatory,evenintheprovisionofArt.317oftheBrazilianCriminalCode”.122 See HC 123971, AssigneeOpinion by Justice Teori Zavaski; Opinionwritten by Justice Roberto Barroso,PlenarySession,judgmentfromFebruary25th,2016.

111

Theconstitutionalguaranteeresultingintheprincipleofthelegalityofcriminallaw,andthepreventionagainstitsretroactivityshowlittleuse,unlessthedefendantsareabletoproperlyidentifytheapplicablenormsidentifiedinthelegaltexts.Bytheway,theSupremeCourtoftenaddressestheproblemofthereceptionoflawinthelegalsystemoftheConstitutionof1988,andwhenthisreceptionisnotpossible,thejudgmentsconsiderthebestsolutiontomindertheireffects:INQ687/SP,OpinionAssignedtoJusticeSydneySanches,PlenarySession,Courtregister of November 9th, 2001; CC 7.204/MG, Opinion Assigned to Justice Ayres Britto,PlenarySession,CourtregisterofDecember9th,2005;MS26.604/DF(OpinionAssignedtoJusticeCármenLúcia,PlenarySession,Court registerofOctober3rd, 2008;RE560.626/RS,OpinionAssignedtoJusticeGilmarMendes,PlenarySession,CourtregisterofDecember5th,2008; RE 637.485/RJ Opinion Assigned to Justice Gilmar Mendes, Plenary Session, CourtregisterofMay21st,2013;RE630.733/DF,OpinionAssignedtoJusticeGilmarMendes,CourtregisterofNovember20th,2013.

[...]

Sincethedefendant’slegalconditionisaggravatedinsuchsituation,aneventualrulingthatdeniesthereceptionoftheoriginaltextofArt.255oftheCriminalCodeintheconstitutionalsystemof1988shouldreceiveonlyprospectiveeffects.

JusticeEdsonFachindeliveredasimilaropinioninthesamejudgment(HC123.971):

Correspondingly, Iacknowledgethedoctrinestudieswhich,basedontheprincipleof legalcertainty, justify that the modification of pro-defendant precedents should have onlyprospectiveeffect.

Nevertheless,thisrationaleaimstoassurethattheStateisentitledtomodifythesanctionapplicable to a certain act consideredas lawfulby judicial precedents. It occurswhen theprecedentisoverruledbyareforminpejus.

Insuchcases,itmakessensetoimposethenon-retroactivityofinpejuschanges.Afterall,thepersonmaycomplywithjudicialprecedentsheorshebelievestoberulingatacertaintime.

Conclusively,thejudicialprecedentsoftheSupremeCourtrulethattheconfigurationofthepassive corruption offense requires the evidence of an official act (either potential oreffective). As a further matter, Justice Edson Fachin, Opinion Assignee of the Lava-JatoOperation,hasrecentlydecidedthattheoverrulingofpro-defendantprecedentscannothaveretroactiveeffect–asinthecasewhenalawfulconductisdeemedunlawful.So,eveniftheSupremeCourtoverrules itsprecedents,suchmodificationsdonothaveretroactiveeffect,otherwisetheprincipleoflegalitywouldbeviolated.

112

Captureofpopularsovereignty,stateofexceptionandjuridicism

JulianaNeuenschwander*MarcusGiraldes**

On12thJuly,2017,thecitizenLuizInácioLuladaSilvawassentencedtonineandahalfyearsin prison for the alleged practice of crimes of passive corruption andmoney laundering.Meanwhile,widelypublishedpollspointtothepoliticianLula,whohastwicebeenPresidentoftheRepublic,asafavouriteinthepresidentialelectionthatisscheduledtotakeplacein2018. The verdict handed down by federal judge Sérgio Moro suffers from innumerableproceduralandmaterialdefects:incompetenceofjudgment,lackofprobativevalueoftheso-called"pleabargains",thefactthatLulahasneitherthepropertytitlenorthepossessionofthefamousGuarujátriplex,thatthereisnocausallinkbetweentheactsofofficepractisedbyLulaasPresidentoftheRepublicandthecontractsenteredintobetweenPetrobrasandthecontractorOAS.Finally,theconvictionformoneylaunderingisabsolutelyabsurdwithouttheindicationofwhatmoneywouldhavebeenlaundered.Duetoallthis,butalsobecauseitisneitherconsistentnorcoherent,thedecisionagainstLulaisnotcorrect,itisnotfair,itisnotjust.Therearecurves,misrepresentations,deviations.Onecanevensaythatitiscircularandtautological.

Atautologyiseasilyobservable,forexample, intheuseofnewspaperarticlesasevidence,whichisonlyjustified,initsartificiality,bythefactthatLula'sconvictionisdevoidofevidence.Itisstrikingthenumberofstoriespublishedinrecentyearsinmajornewspapersandweeklymagazines that directly attack the former President, the number ofmagazine covers thatmakeextremelynegativeassociationsofhis image,thebrazenmediamanipulationaroundhisname,especiallyifcontrastedwiththealmostcompletedisregardofsimilarorevenworsedenunciationsmade about his political opponents. This type ofmediamanipulation,withartificialanddistortedtreatmentofinformation,hasservedthefunctionof(de)formingpublicopinion,which, in regimes thatdescribe themselvesasdemocracies, is thebroth inwhichcollectively binding decisions are produced. As has been verified, this clearly politicallymanipulativefunctionofthecorporatemassmediaspillsoverfromtheso-calleddemocraticprocessesofchoiceofpoliticalrepresentativesandbeginstoactandinterferemoredirectlyintheprocessingoflawsuitsbytheJudiciary.Whenthishappens,thetrialceasestobethejudicialprocessthatseekstoachieveaminimallycorrectorjustdecision,tobecomethestagedisguisedasabattlethatisnolongerlegal,butessentiallypolitical.

Since2010, thenewspaperOGlobohaspublished reportsabout theallegedpurchase,byformer President Lula, of a triplex at the Guarujá health resort in São Paulo. This samenewspaper,andtheeconomicgroupofwhichitisapart,hassupportedsincethebeginningtheso-calledOperationLavaJatoandthespectacularperformanceofJudgeSérgioMorointhecasesbeforethe13thFederalCourtofCuritiba. InMarch2015,thebeginningofmassdemonstrations mediatically organised against the government of Dilma Rousseff, thenewspaperOGlobogavethejudgethe"MakeaDifference"award,grantinghimthetitleof"PersonalityoftheYear".ThissameJudge,inthedecisionagainstLula,usedthearticlesofthesame newspaper as "evidence" for his conviction. Here is the circularity: the evidence iscreated by the newspaper, which rewards the judge of the case, who uses the evidence

*ProfessoroftheFacultyofLawatUFRJandCNPq’sresearcher**LawyerandanalystatFIOCRUZ

113

createdbythenewspaper.ReferencetoGlobo'sreportsismadeseventimesthroughoutthedecision. In this hallucinatory confusion that is the result of the circulationof images andappearancesfabricatedbythemediaoligopoly,itisnotsurprisingthattheveryroleofajudgeissubjecttochange,althoughmanybelieveinthemythsofheroes.

IfwelookatLula'scaseinthislight,weseethatLula'seventualinnocenceorguiltisirrelevantandoflittleinteresttothefinaldecision,sincetheevidencegatheredbythedefencewasalsoignored.Lula'scaseisparadigmatic,sinceitbringstolightthecomplexrelationsbetweenlawand politics in Brazil today. It is a time of a disjointed politics in themidst of corruptiondenunciations judiciallyactivatedandmediaticallyselectedtobeforgottenoramplified. Inthiscontextthelawisnolongerabletocontaintheforceofpoliticalimpetus,yieldingtoitsmoonstooperatefrompoliticalratherthanlegalreferencepoints.

The confusion between the political and juridical functions and the resulting institutionaldisarray, a phenomenon that has been defeating popular suffrage and the Brazilianconstitution,hasitsmainpointofinflectionintheimpeachmentprocessofPresidentDilmaRousseff.In2016,PresidentDilmaRousseff'simpeachmentwasposedasthesolutiontotheeconomiccrisis(amplifiedbypolitical-mediasabotage),whichforthatpurposewaspresentedasakindofStatereason,capableofexceedingconstitutionallimits.Afterstoicallydefendingherself before the Senate,when therewas a clear lack of a crimeof responsibility,DilmaRousseffwastriedbysenators,justasMichaelKohlhaas,theheroofHeinrichKleist'sbook,wasjudged:shewas,atthesametime,judgedguiltyandinnocent,condemnedtolosehermandate,butwithherpoliticalrightspreserved.Weprefertosaythatshewasfoundguiltybecauseshewasinnocent.WithLulasomethingsimilarishappening,butherewearebeyondKleistandKohlhaas,wecomeacrossKafkaandJosef.K.,inTheTrial.Atacertainpointofhismisadventures,lostinthelabyrinthofthecourt,inthearchitectureofwhichKafkamasterfullyrepresentedtheintricaciesofthelawanditsinfinitefolds,K.states:"Myinnocencedoesnotsimplifythecase(...)Italldependsonmanysubtlethings,inwhichthecourtislost.Butintheendtherearises,fromsomewherewheretherewasnothing,greatguilt."123

Inparagraph961ofhisdecisionthatisasextensiveasitisunsustainable,JudgeMorostatesthattheconvictionofformerPresidentLulashowsthatnooneissotallthatheisabovethelaw.Infact,thatisnotwhatisrevealedinthedecision,butitisonlyusingthatargumentthatJudgeMoro/Globo,somewhatbiasedsatisfiedwithhisallegedimpartiality,seekstomorallyjustifyadecisiondevoidoflegalgrounds.Lula'sconviction,forwhichhisinnocence(orguilt)wasnotconsideredrelevant,showsthatthelawisnolongersohighastolimitthepoliticalwillofajudge.ItshowsthattheJudgehas,infact,surpassedthelawinthe(undeclared)nameof amuch broader political-mediamovement, of which he has become an instrument. Itoccurs that a judge, although making decisions that have political consequences, is notallowedtodecidepolitically,especiallyifhedoessotothedetrimentoflegalreasons.Ajudgeisnotthesovereign,even ifhe intendstousurpthesovereignty,whoseholder,undertheregimesinwhichtherighttouniversalsuffrageisexercised,isthepeople.JudgeMoro/Globoseekstoobstructpopularsovereignty,butheisnotinapositiontoactsovereignly.

In the classic formulationof theGerman juristCarl Schmitt, the sovereign is theonewhodecidesontheStateofException,thatis,whodecideswhatistheexceptionalsituationthat

123KAFKA,F.DerProcess(1925),TheTrial,translatedasOProcessobyMarceloBackes,PortoAlegre:L&PM,2013,p.174.

114

justifies the temporary suspension of the law. Today, in Brazil, many have described thesituation in which we live under the label "State of Exception." However, what we havewitnessed,atleastupuntilthetimewewritetheselines,isnotaclassicStateofExceptioninthesenseofCarlSchmitt,inwhichthesovereigndecidestosuspendthewholelegalorderinordertopreservetheorderitself.ItisindeedtruethatlaterSchmittadheredtoNazismandforgotthisconceptofsuspensionforthereinstatementofthelawandbegantoproclaimthatanew"law"emanatedfromtheFuhrer.

WhatweseetodayinBrazilisthenormalisationofpoliticalperversionofthelaw.Lulawasconvicted,butwhatwasinthiswayimprisonedwaspopularsovereignty.Intheconstructionsof the philosophy of modernity, ‘the people’, except in revolutionary times, was never asensiblereality,butanexternalreferentthatisinvokedasthefoundationofpowerandthelaw,onlytobe,followingthefoundationofthepoliticalandjuridicalorder,preventedfromexpressingitselfagain.Toacertainextent,thepolitical-juridicalorderisalwaysfoundedonan imprisonment of popular sovereignty, which remains something external, like adomesticated beast, prevented from fully manifesting itself. But the people, thatdomesticatedbeast,remainfearedandrespected,astheexternalreferentswhichestablishlegallimitsontheexerciseofpower,throughrespectforaconstitutionthatsetstheselimitsandthewaysinwhichdomesticatedpopularsovereigntycanmanifestitselffromtimetotimethroughtheexerciseofuniversalsuffrage.

In Brazil since the 2016 Coup, the people, who have always been an abstraction and anexternal referent, have been captured symbolically and materially. In this context, thesentencing of Lula fulfils the role of creating a formal impediment to popular sovereigntybecauseitrestrictstheelectoraloptionsoftheforcesdeposedbytheparliamentary-judicialcoupd'état,whilethegovernmentthathasestablisheditselfsincethiscoupdispenseswithhaveanyreference,concreteorevenabstract,tothepeople.TheconvictionofLulaimprisonspopular sovereignty even before itmanifests itself, and is an impediment to that popularsovereignty,whichalthoughcastratedanddomesticatedstillpresentssomelimittothepoweroftheoligarchy.Ontheotherhand,thepeoplehavebeenstrippedoftheirrights,post-coup,andat that timeof thecoup,havingbeen legally isolated fromthepoliticalprocess, sinceindividualandsocialrightsare,aboveall,politicalfacultiesofindividualswhichallowthemtobe legally recognisedas thepeople.Whatcanbeperceivedthen, is that thesymbolicandabstract ‘people’, that has been invoked by democratic constituent processes since theeighteenthcentury,inthisperiodinwhichweliveisnowdisregardedaslegallyandpoliticallyirrelevant.ForthedefactogovernmentinstalledinBrasilia,therearenomorepeople,butjustbodiesthatwillseektheirownformsofsurvival.

TheStateofExceptionappearsherenotintheSchmittiansenseofsuspendingthelegalorderforthepreservationofpoliticalandsocialorder,butinthesenseinvokedbyWalterBenjamininhisthesesonHistory,whenhestatesthat"thetraditionoftheoppressedteachesusthatthe'stateofexception'inwhichweliveisinfactthegeneralrule"(thesis8)124.Asweknow,Schmitt,whowrotefromthestandpointofanindividualised,mythologisedsovereign,didnotadmittheambiguitybetweentheRuleofLawandtheStateofException,sinceforhim"notevery exceptional prerogative, nor every emergencypolicemeasureor order is a Stateof

124BENJAMIN,Walter,ÜberdenBegriffderGeschichte(1940)(OntheConceptofHistory),translatedasSobreoconceitodaHistória.InMagiaetécnica,arteepolítica:ensaiossobreliteraturaehistóriadacultura.7thedition.SãoPaulo:Brasiliense,1994,p.222/232.

115

Exception"125.Thefocuswasonthedecisionthatpoliticallyassertsthesovereigninthefaceof theenemy.Benjamin,on thecontrary,wasawareof thedualityand immanentconflictbetweenexceptionandlawbecausehewrotefromthepointofviewofthe"traditionoftheoppressed",the"subjectofhistoricalknowledge"(thesis12),thosewhosuffertheviolenceofsovereignpower.ThestructureofthisexceptionisparasiticofeveryRuleofLawthatisbasedonsocietiesdividedintosocialclasses,"normalisingitself"asathirdpartyexcludedfromtherelationshipbetweenlawandpolitics.

Theexceptionthatweliveisnormalisedasadenialofrights,itisthatexceptionthat,"inthetraditionof theoppressed"makes itself the rule. This is a Stateof Exceptionwhich isnotdeclared,orformalised,butwhichispresentaccordingtothecircumstance,tothesituation,to those involved. It is not a "state of exception" directed at everyone, since there is aselectivityoftheexception,whichaffectsthepoor,theprisoners,theblacks,theindigenouspeoples,the"enemies"ofeachplaceandmoment.Theexceptionisconcreteandhistoricalinaccordancewiththepowerrelationsofeachsocialformationandisnotanabstractparadigmofgovernment.ForJacquesRancière:

Wedonotliveindemocracies.Nordoweliveinfields,ascertainwritersclaim,whoseeussubjecttothelawofexceptionofbio-politicalgovernment.WeliveinoligarchicStatesoflaw,that is, in Stateswhere thepowerof theoligarchy is limitedby thedouble recognitionofpopular sovereignty and individual liberties.We knowwell the advantages of this type ofState,aswellasitslimits126.

ThischaracterisationbyRancièrehasasmuchmeritpresentingaradicalcritiqueoftherealityofoligarchicsupremacyofregimes,thattheideologydenominates“democraticStatesoflaw”,asitisadenialofanahistoricaldiscourseontheStateofExceptionthatrejectsthejuridicallimitsof thepowerof thisoligarchy,whichare the resultof thehistorical strugglesof theoppressed. Moreover, precisely because of this, implicit in this critique is a theoreticalcontribution quite relevant to the understanding of the relationship between law andexception.AnyretreatfromtheestablishedlimitsofthepoweroftheoligarchyisanadvanceoftheStateofException.InacountrysuchasBrazil,withanincompleteconstructionoftheRuleofLaw,thepermanenceofthelegaciesofslaveryandthemilitarydictatorship,thezonesofexceptionareextensiveandhaveneverbeenhidden.Dailylifeinthefavelasoflargecitiesorinpeasantandindigenousareasisnodoubtcomparabletolifeinthe"fields".

The lawsuit against Lula is included in this context of the advancement of the exception.However,wealsoknowthatpunishmentsbasedoncriteriaoutsidethelawarenotreallynew.ItisenoughtoremembertheimprisonmentandconvictionofRafaelBraga,manifestlyunjust,andwhichtodaysymbolicallyepitomisesalltheviolenceofthepunitivesystemagainstthepoorandtheblacks.

TheimpeachmentofthePresidentoftheRepublicwithoutacrimeofresponsibilitymeansadisruptionoftheoligarchywiththecommitmentmadein1988thattheelectoralresultsfortheheadofStateshouldberespected.Sinceimmediatelythereafter,asaconsequenceofthisusurpationoftherighttouniversalsuffrageandinstallationofagovernmentdevoidofany

125 SCHMITT, Carl. Politische Theologie (1922), translated as Teologia política. In A crise da democraciaparlamentar.SãoPaulo:Scritta,1996,p.92.126RANCIÈRE,Jacques.HatredofDemocracy(2007),translatedasOódioàdemocracia.SãoPaulo:Boitempo,2014,p.94.

116

legalorpopularlegitimacy,anaggressiverightswithdrawalprogramhasbeenunderway.ThedaybeforethesentencingofLulawaspublicised,notbycoincidence,theCongressapprovedabroadamendmenttolabourlegislationinfavouroftheelite.Thesuppressionofthepolitical,economic and social rights of the people is a loosening of the limits of the power of theoligarchy,aretreatfromtheRuleofLaw,anadvanceoftheStateofException.TheconvictionofLulaisonemoreeffectofthisoffensiveandatthesametimeisacondition,shouldelectionstakeplacein2018,forthemtobeevenmorerestricted.

117

TheconvictionofformerPresidentLulaasthemaximumexpressionoftheexerciseoflawfare

JulianaTeixeiraEsteves*CarloCosentino**

ThesentencecondemningformerPresidentLulaisaclearandobviouspoliticalinstrument.Itispartofanantidemocraticpowerproject.Inthissenseitservestoobjectifytheattempttodemoralizethepopularleader.

Lulamustbecondemnedsothattheliberalagendalaunchedunderthecodename"bridgetothefuture"continuestobeimplementedandwithoutriskofbeingundonein2018withthepresidentialelections.Thereformproposalsannouncedinthatdocumentandmanyothersinitiatedbytheillegitimatepresidentrepresentapoliticalagendarejectedinthepresidentialelectionsof2014-timeframeoftheparliamentarycoupthathappenedin2016.

The labor reform implemented under the name "modernization of the labor law" is therepresentationoftheinstitutionofliberalisminthemoldsofearlytwentiethcentury.

In order to better explain the trajectory of the construction of Brazilian labor rules, it isnecessarytorecallthemomentofprivatelawcodificationinwhichrulesforlaborleasingandserviceleasingwereestablishedalongthelinesofcivilcontractualisminwhichtheautonomyofwill,validityrequirementoflegalbusiness,waspredominant.

However, in labor relations,autonomyofwill isavitiatedelement, since thealienationofhuman subjectivity in exchange for survival characterizes vice of consent, nullifying thepreviouslyperfectjuridicalact.

Thelaborreformapprovedadaybeforethereleaseoftheanalyzedrulingbroughtbacktheso-called"negotiatedoverlegislated"inwhichprevailnegotiatedruleswithemployerstothedetrimentofstaterules.

Thereformhasasargumentstheneedtoreducecosts,thechangesintheproductivesystemwith the inclusion of new technologies that reduce jobs, alongside the increase in lifeexpectancyofBraziliansthatimposesachangeintherulesofsocialsecuritywiththeobjectivetoensurethefinancialandactuarialbalance.

TheproposaltoreformtheBraziliansocialsecuritysystemis,infact,routingforacompleteprivatizationofthesystem.DespitethefactthatcomplementarysocialsecurityhasexistedinBrazilforseveraldecades,therestudyisnecessaryfacingtheimpactonworkersincomeandthecountry’seconomyasawhole,sinceitisoftheutmostimportanceanappropriateandsufficienteconomicdevelopment,generatorofjobsandincome,sotheworkercancontributeto theirownpensionconstitutinga social security systemwithanexclusively contributorycharacter,whetherit’spublicorprivate.Inaddition,butnolessimportant,acomplementarypensionsystemplaystheroleofacapitalistincomegeneratorandnotofabenefactorthataimstoaddadvantagesthatthestategivestothecitizen.

* Doctor of Law. Professor of Law at the graduate and postgraduate level at the Federal University ofPernambuco.CoordinatoroftheGraduatePrograminLawatUFPE.PresidentofthePernambucoAcademyofLaborLaw.**DoctorofLaw.ProfessorofLawatthepostgraduatelevelattheFederalUniversityofPernambuco.Laborlawyer.

118

TheEuropeanWelfareStatestartstofeeltheimpactsoftheeconomiccrisisthatreflectsontothereductionofsocialrights.ItisaboutthedismantlingofthesocialpactthatgeneratedtheSocialStateofRightsandtheriseofneoliberalpolicies.Thisrevealsavulnerabilityofthesocialsecuritysystem,publicorprivate,tothefluctuationsofthecapitalistmodeofproduction,sothatcrisesaffectandevensuppresstherightsoftheworkingclass.Theneoliberalhurricanehasbeenmotivatingtheoverthrowofthelivingandworkingconditionsoftheworkingclass.

Witheacheconomiccrisisthesocialrights,especiallytherightsconqueredbytheworkingclass, begin to be threatened especially those of social security nature. This is because arelevant factor for the sustainabilityof thecontributive social security system iseconomicdevelopmentasadeterminingfactorformaintainingthelevelsofformalemployment.

Currently, economic development is triggered, as a priority, by the insertion of newtechnologies.To this rupturemustbeaddedtwomore factors: thesupremacyof financialcapital over productive capital and the vulnerability of the security systems because ofmismanagementand,inthespecificcaseofcomplementarypension,dependence,volatilityandtherisksinherentintheverysystemofthisnewmodelofcapitalismfocusedonthestockmarket.

ThevariousreformsintroducedintheBraziliansystemwerenotabletopreventtheactuarialproblem in which the Social Security lives. Low wage rates, job instability, allied tounderemployment and structural unemployment explain the impossibility of long-termfinancialplanning.Theworkerwhohaslefttheformalitywillhardlyreturntoitandtothebenefits of social security and labor legislation, exposing this same worker to any workconditionthatisofferedtohim.

Lawfare.Theimplementationoftheagendaimpliesneoliberaluseofallsortsofresourcestoachieve its objectives. In Brazil, unfortunately, one observes the deliberate institution oflawfare,which consists of the undue use of legal resources for political persecution. ThispracticehasalreadybeendenouncedbyformerPresidentLula'sdefense,includingbeforetheUN,thatrecentlyaskedtheBraziliangovernmentforexplanationsonthematter,especiallyonitsoccurrenceintheCarwashOperation.

OneofthemainindicationsoftheoccurrenceofthelawfareintheinsistenceofJudgeSérgioMoro in carrying out a criminal prosecution, notwithstanding his flagrant suspicion andincompetenceunderBrazilianprocedurallaws.TheyarenotasinconsistentasrulesthatallowMorotoreceive,onDecemberoftheyear2017,arevenueofR$102,151.58,eventhoughthatamountisnotmorallyacceptableinacountrywheretheminimumwageisR$935,00andthesalaryceilingforpublicfunctionariesisofR$33,763.00.

Suspicionisflagrantlyrevealedthroughactssuchastheparticipationofthejudgeinsocialandacademiceventsrelatedtothediscussionofthecaseonwhichthejudgehimselfisactiveevenbeforehissentenceispronounced.Itseemsreasonabletothecommonandscientificsensethatthejudgemustkeepawayfromanyextra-proceduraldiscussioninordertomaintainitsexemption.

Notwithstanding, (i) he was present at the launch of Vladimir Netto's book about theOperationCarWash.Bookthatexaltstheoperationandincriminatethedefendantsevennothaving,at the timeof the releaseof thebook,whichhavebecomeres judicata sentencesagainstmostofthedefendants,includingagainstformerPresidentLula;(ii)metwiththeactorwhorepresentedhiminthefeaturefilmabouttheOperationCarWash,ina"wellreserved

119

restaurant"inCuritiba,accordingtothenewspaper"OGlobo".Abouttheeventthecitedactor(MarceloSerrado)shot"Itwaslikebeinginasupernationalheroskin".

In 11.10.2016 Rogério Cezar de Cerqueira Leite127wrote an article entitled "DesvendandoMoro"wherehecomparesthejudgewiththeDominicanGirolamoSavonarola,althoughhepointedoutthepartialityofthelastonewhichshoweddidnotexistinMoro,tothewriter"hasaristocraticfeeling"called"thechosenone".

Inresponse,postedinthesamenewspaper,theJudgeraged:Itis"unfortunatethatarespectnewspaperastheFolhagrantsspaceforthepostingofanarticleasthe'DesvendandoMoro',anditsmoresurprisingthattheauthorofthearticleisamemberoftheEditorialBoardofthepublication."Heleftshowhiscrushforthecensorshipofopinionscontrarytohisown.

Sentamessagetothepopulation,whichcanbeseenonYoutube128, thankingthesupportgivenonaFacebookpagemaintainedbyhiswifeinsupportoftheOperationCarWash.Inanothervideoandelection,thepopulationonthetestimonyoftheformerPresidentLulainCuritiba129 in it he thanks the support of the Operation Car Wash and dispenses theattendanceofhissupportersonthedayofthehearing.Whenverifyingthepopularsupporttotheex-presidentonthedayofhistestimony,theJudgestartedtorequestthedefendant,inothercases,thatthetestimonybemadethroughavideoconference.

From the point of view of legal technique the judge also exceeded. (i) in the proceduralinstruction,formerPresidentLulapresentedalistof87witnesses.Thejudgeadmitted,butdemandedthattheex-presidentappearinallsectionsoftestimony,whichobviouslywouldmake itunfeasible.Thedecision in this casewas changedby the second instanceand thepresenceoftheformerpresidentwasdismissed;

(ii)atahearingonDecember16,2016,aprosecutionwitnesswasheardwhooffendedformerPresidentLulaandhisdefensebyshouting"trashband."TheJudgewasnotreprimandedforthisanddidnotpreventthewitnessfromcontinuingtheinsults.AnditalsoprovokedLula'slawyer"Let'sseeiftherewillnotbeacriminalcomplaint,compensationaction,thewitness,right,onthepartofthedefense,"saysthejudge.TowhichZaninresponds:"Itdepends...Whenpeoplepracticeillicitactstheyrespondfortheiractions.Ithinkthat'swhatthelawsays."The Judge insists on the provocation: "Are you going to file a lawsuit against her? "Inreferencetothewitness.Towhichthelawyerresponds:"Areyouadvocatingforthewitness?"The Judge once again provokes: "I don't know, the defense goes against everyone, withcriminalcomplaint, indemnity,"hesaid,clearytotheactionfiledbytheformerpresident'sdefenseagainstthechiefprosecutoroftheOperationCarWashtaskforce,inwhichheasksfor$1millionindamages.Zaninreplies,"Idon'tthinkanyoneisabovethelaw.Inthesamewaythatpeoplearesubjecttocertainactions,theauthoritiesmustalsobe".Moroconcludes:"Okay, doctor. A very good lineof advocacy, "and finally thediscussion endswith Zanin'sresponse:"ImakeyourExcellency'srecordandreceiveitasacompliment";

(iii)inasimilarcaseofthesameOperationCarWash,anatleast,unusualact,Morocausedaspeciesineveryscientificcommunity:aftertheprotocolofthefinalargumentsofthedefense

127Physicist,professoremeritusofUnicampandmemberoftheNationalCouncilofScienceandTechnologyandtheEditorialBoardofFolha.128https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9dq6KhZc1_M129https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wo4HTWkmJoo

120

thecasewasconcludedat7:52aminthefollowingdayandthesentenceof160pageswasfiledtwominuteslater,at7:54.

(iv)Morovetoed21questionsfromEduardoCunha(ex-presidentofthenationalcongress,currentlyimprisoned)addressedtoMichelTemer(actingpresident).Itturnsoutthatthenitwas found that suchquestionswouldundermine theprogressof the interimgovernment.Through controlled action of the MPF was recorded conversation of Temer advising thepresidentof thegroup JBS to continuepayingamonthlyallowance for the sameEduardoCunha,personwithwhom,inthewordsofthepresident,shouldmaintainagoodrelationship.Thepolitical,extra-proceduralrelationshipofthedecisionandthemaintenanceofthecurrentpowerprojectwereclear.

(v) released the audios captured irregularly in a conversation between Dilma Rousseff(presidentoftherepublicatthetime)andLula.OnMarch17,2016,JudgeSérgioMorohaddeterminedat12:18pmthesuspensionofthestaplesinstalledtomonitorLula.Ithappensthathereleasedarecordingthattookplaceat1:32p.m.ItisknownthattheFederalPoliceforwarded theorder of immediate compliancewith the judge's decision to the telephoneoperatorat12:46pm,buttheconversationscontinuedtoberegistered.

The recordings exceeded the jurisdiction of the judge who could not intercept authorityconversationwithprivilegedforum.Andwhat'sworse,caughtconversationoutsidetheperiodofficiallydetermined.Morostill,spreadthecontentoftheconversationtotheprint.Forthisreason hewas heavily criticized by the deceasedminister of the Brazilian Supreme Courtresponsibleforthecase.Inaruling,TeoriZavaskiclassifiedwhathappenedasa"violationofthe jurisdictionof thisCourt,"since itwouldbefor theSupremeCourtalonetodecideoninvestigationsinvolvingauthoritieswithaprivilegedforum.Hecriticized:"TheviolationofthejurisdictionoftheSupremeCourtoccurredatthesametimethatthe judge[SérgioMoro],whenfacedwiththepossibleinvolvementofanauthorityholdingaforuminthepracticeofcrime,failedtoreferthisSupremeCourttheinvestigativeprocedureforanalysisofblockedcontent.And,whatisevenmoreserious,heproceededtovaluejudgmentonreferencesandconductofoccupantsofpositions[withprivilegedforum].Moreover,ithasdeterminedthatthe confidentiality of the intercepted talks should be removed, without adopting theprecautions laid down in the regulative legal order, thereby taking the risk of seriouslyjeopardizingthevalidresultoftheinvestigation.

(vi) The coercive conduction of Lula.Moro imposed a coercive,mediatic and unnecessaryconductonformerPresidentLula,sincehehadneverrefusedtoprovideanyclarificationortestimony.Now,ifthereisnodenialorresistancethereisnoreasontoimposecoercitivityontheact.Itwasaclearintimidatingaction.

Theseare justa fewpointscollected,amongmanyothers, that serveasclearevidenceofLawfarepromotedagainstLula.AnIncompetentJudgment,chosenbythesystemindefianceoftheprincipleofnaturaljudgment,inclearundueextensionofitsterritorialjurisdiction.

Theharmonybetweenthejudge'sdecisionsandthecoupagenda.ItisenoughtorememberthatthesentencewaspublishedthedayafterthevoteoftheLaborReformintheNationalCongress.Themediaeventremovedfromtheagendaofthemainstreampressthediscussiononthecowardlycoupagainsttheworkingclasstoreinforceandannounceinavictorytonethe criminal conviction of a former president of the republic. Evidently the sentencewasexalted,andcommentedonbymeticulouslychosenanalysts.Ithascometotheideathatthe

121

general impressionof the jurists is that thesentence isexcellent,when in fact ithasbeenwidelycriticizedbyvarioussectorsofthejudiciaryandtheacademy.

122

Lula,theenemytobefought

LaioCorreiaMorais*VitorMarques**

The Republican Regime, founded on democratic bases, must obey some fundamentalpreceptsofprocedure.Oneof them isanautonomous JudiciaryBranch, that respects theterritoryofthelaw,defendantimajoritiesinterestsandmainly,itmustnotbeinfluencedbyexogenousfactorstotheprocess.Itistosay,ifacourtdecisionwouldbeinfluencedbypopularclamor,fortheaspirationofapoliticalsectororbytheinterestspublishedbythemedia,oneoftheRepublicanRegimecolumnscollapses.

OnthehighlycommentedverdictofJudgeSérgioMoro,inscopeofOperaçãoLavaJato,statesthatin''II.16'',itshowsthatthejudgmentusednotonlythecase-fileoftheprocess,butalsofactsproperlypublishedbythepresstomakeapoliticaljudgmentabouttheex-presidentLula,aboutyouradministration,aswellasaboutthePartidodosTrabalhadores.

On the ''II.16" the judge Sérgio Moro make use of unusual resources to the good andrecommendedlegaltechniques.Hemakesassumptions,illationsandevenusesafineironywiththeintendedSalvationistplotofOperaçãoLavaJato.

Nevertheless,asentencemuststicktotheevidenceonthecaserecords,andtonotmakesuppositionsaboutthepoliticalactivityoraboutthegovernmentexercisedbythedefendant,whichinthiscaseit'sanex-president.Theverdictshouldinthesis,tojudgecertainconductpracticedbywhoisbeingjudged,andnotaboutwhatiscommonlyknownas''workset''.

The general press of the country, after the conviction of Lula, roared that ''justice is foreverybody''. If really theJustice is really foreverybody, theex-presidentshouldhavebeenjudged only for the denounced conduct by the Public Federal Ministry and not for yourpolitical and governmental trajectory. The referred point of the sentence is the definitiveprove,producedbytheoneandonlyJuizSérgioMoro,whichthetrialfromtheex-presidentwasn'tatall''foreverybody''likethepressstated.

Beforeenteringon themeritsof thedecision, it isworthhighlighting that the sentence isconstitutedbyallthat itconsists.Thisobviousnessmustbebroughtto lightbecausesomemay say that the illation and suppositions are of minor legal importance for thecomprehensionofthedecision.Thisunderstandingdoesnotthrive,seenthatthesentenceisamanifestationofthejudges'willthatwillterminatethelegalimbrogliofronttotheconcretecase,andthiswayallthatconsistsit'saproductofdewillofthejudge.

Thisaspectoftheverdict,whichmayseemtrivial,corroboratesforthethesisthatinBrazilweexperiencea trueStateofException.Theex-presidentwasn't judgeonlyasacitizen,as itshould be, but instead by a damning political plot of witch the sentence corroborates toconstruct.Lulahadinthispointoftheverdict,yourinnaterightofbeingjudgedasanattackedcitizen.Onthe''II.16"itdidnottreattheverdictobject,butittreatedsomethingmuchbigger.

Passingnowtotheanalysisoftheverysentence.

Inparagraphs782and783,itwasaboutthetestimonyofawitnessJoséSérgioGabrielliex-presidentofthePetrobras.InthisexcerpttheJudgeaffirmsthatthelistenerclaimedtonot

*Lawyer,takingaMastersDegreeandassistantprofessoratPUC-SP**Lawyer,takingaMastersDegreeandassistantprofessoratPUC-SP

123

knowanythingaboutthecorruptionschemeneitherabouttheallegedparticipationofLulaasaprincipalactingofthescheme.Then,theJudgeaffirmsthatthedepositionofGabriellididnotenjoy''muchcredit''becausehewasthecompanypresidentatthetimethatthecriminalfactsoccurred.

Ineffect,intheparagraphs784to787,theJudgeMoroaggravatesyourssuppositionsthatGabrielliwasincompetentorlackedthetruthinfrontofjudgment.ThejudgedoesitsothatbasedontheallegationofignoranceofGabrielli,inwhichtheexchangetoCerveróforZeladaontheboardofdirectorswouldhaveapoliticalinfluence.Inotherwords,theJudgeSérgioMoro tries to create a thesis that the ignorance of Gabrielli about this specific fact,unimportanttotheprocess,isinrealityalieoraproveofinabilityfortheexerciseoftheofficeasPetrobrasPresident.

Inparagraphs789 to792 it has a curious fact: JudgeMoroutilizes 4paragraphs to try todiscredita seriesofdefensewitnesses.According toMoro, theex-presidentcalledseveralpolitics and public agents that did not know about the denouncement content just forguaranteetherightfulconductofLula.

Specificallyinparagraph790theJudgecreatesatheorythatthedefensewitnessesmighthavebeenbroughttotheprocess justtoclaimthatthesupportbaseofthegovernmentwasn'toutcome from a mechanism of bribe from Petrobras. For any reader, jurist or lay, thisparagraphshowsthattheJudgecomprehendthatthedefensetestimonyservedastotrytodemonstratetheperennialthesisthattheLulaadministrationhaditssupportbaseinCongressconsolidatedbycorruption.Nowinparagraph792,Morousesagainthegimmickofdiscreditoftheseveraldefensetestimonies.

Fromparagraph793forwarditcameacrosswithpeculiarsassertivetothejudicialsentences.The Judge Sérgio Moro, in apparently an act of compliment, claims that the Lulaadministrationhad itsmerits in fighting corruption.Next he listsmeasures that this samegovernmentshouldhaveimplemented.Inparagraph797hemakesalongobservationwithhistoricreferencesofagentsthatimplementedpoliticsfightingcorruptionandhadtheirsamecrimesundressedbythesamepolitics,orastheJudgecalls''increasemeansofcontrol''.Itcausesestrangementthat inparagraph796,SérgioMoroclaimsthatthemeritsof fightingcorruptionoftheLulaadministrationcouldnotbetakinginconsiderationsinceinthenextparagraphhemakesthisinterestingdigressionwithsarcasmandironyrefinements.

The paragraphs 801, 802, 803 and 804 are crucial to demonstrate the partiality of thejudgment, seen that suchparagraphs seek to contribute for the criminal plot that tries toimputetheex-president.

Inparagraph801theJudgeSérgioMoromanifestshis''strangeness''inthefactthatLulaisnotawareofthePetrobrasscheme,sinceitwasahugescandalandthatitfloodPTcampaigns,ofitsownex-presidentandyoursuccessor.

Following,paragraphs802and803,theJudgespeculateaboutapossiblecondescensionofLula with the corruption. Sérgio Moro says that the absence of reprobation by Lula tomembersofhisadministrationandpublicagentsinvolvedincorruptionduringhistermintheoffice.PreciselytoinvestigatethiseventualapathyofLulawithcorruptionthatSérgioMorobringstosentencetheprocesscalled''Mensalão''.AccordingtoMoro,theex-presidentgavedubiousstatementsabouttheeventsthattookplaceinthisotherprocess,implyingthatLulawouldnotreprove,orworst,complywithpossiblecriminalsfacts.

124

Inparagraph804wehavetheapexofthisplotthatSérgioMorobringstothesentence.Intheunderstandingofthemagistrate,thefactthatLulahasnotshowndisapprovalwiththefactsthathappenedontheLegalAction470demonstrate''colludingwiththecriminalbehaviorofhissubordinatesandthatthismaybeconsideredasapieceofevidence.''.

We have here a truthful juridical scandal. A Judge in exercise of his function brings asprocedural proof the public manifestations of the defendant about other process; heinterprets and concludes that suchmust be valuable evidence. That reasoning, using CarlSchmitt,revealsthatfortheJudgeSérgioMoro,theex-presidentLulaistheenemytobetakendown.

GiorgioAgamben,aItalianphilosopher,whichelaborateonthethemeofException,explaintousthatthepracticeofExceptionrevealsitselfinthemeasurethathasasuspensionoftheLaw, phenomenon that he identifies as ''legal civilwar'', in otherwords, applies a certainunderstandingduetotheexceptionalityofthecase,andaftertheovercomingofthisoneofakindmoment,itturnsbacktoregulatetheapplicationofthelegalframework.

OnOperaçãoLava-Jato,whatwehaveseenitsexceptionaltreatment,withpracticeslikethesementionedabovethateludefromtheLaw.

TojustifythetechniqueofExceptionbeforethesocietyandespeciallytothepublicopinionitiscrucial thatexists thecharacterof theenemy,since, for theweight that itpossessesonsociety,itmustnotacknowledgeprerogativesandminimumguaranties,andinstead,itmustbecombated.ForthejuristEugênioRaúlZaffaronithefigureoftheenemyonasocietyit'sthefirstgermorthefirstsymptomoftheauthoritariandestructionoftheRuleofLaw.

Therefore,weunderstand that theenemy in thismomentofhistoryand, it seems, to thejudgmentalso,isthePartidodosTrabalhadoresoncharactertheiconicex-presidentLula.It'snouseforthedefenseoftheex-presidentLulatoascertainthatformallytheapartmentinquestionisconnectedtothecontractorOAS;witchthedefendantpracticallydidnothaveanyscienceoftheunravelofthissubject.Forthejudge,whatislaid,accordingtowhatisindicatedinparagraph806,istoansweratlastwhatistheroleoftheex-presidentLulainthisoperationandifinfacthewasthegangchief.

It isworthmentioningthatthedefenseoftheex-presidentLulaistreatedatalltimeswithdisbelief by the judge, as is made evident in paragraph 808, in which, all that is pleadpresupposesuntruthandobstaclesforthesearchofrealtruth.

Thepersuasionisonlypossiblestartingatthemomentthatallpartsinvolvedintheprocessspeakup. To treat oneof thepartswith disregard is to understand that your presence isdisposable,indicatingthatthebeliefswerealreadyformedpreviously.

Therefore,whatisnoticedfromitem"II.16"oftheverdictistheexistenceofillationsinregardof the conduction of the ex-president Lula administration and his knowledge aboutnegotiations existingonPetrobras, besides generic facts occurred that don't ascertain thepracticeofpassivecorruptionandmoneylaundry.

Wenoted,for,thisexceptionalitytodayagainsttheex-presidentLuizInácioLuladaSilva,yet,ifwealterthecharacters,perchancetheunderstandingwouldbeother,evidencingso,thepoliticalpersecutionstartingfromlegalinstruments,witchontheboundary,servestoerodethebasesoftheDemocraticRuleofLaw.

125

Moro’ssentenceprovesthattheunrestrainedjudicialassessmentofevidencemustcometoanend

LenioLuizStreck*

Formorethantwentyyears,Ihavebeenexposingtheauthoritarianismthatmanifestsitselfintheunrestrainedjudicialassessmentofevidence,ortheFA(freeassessment),130thatareinfacttwosidesofthesamecoin.IhaveunveileditdirectlyinadebateIhadwithJudgeSérgioMoroatthe2015IBCCRIM.131Hisreplywasthatthejudge’sfreepersuasionissuperiortothesystemoflegalproof.Iaskedhim:sowhat?Thefreeassessmentismorethanthisepistemicoversimplification.Itisthecorollaryofsubjectivism.Oftheauthoritariansubjectofmodernity.Oftheinternalbarbarityofthesubject.Atanyrate,Moro’sreplyfollowsthesamedogmaticline that criesandprotests today.The freeassessmentofevidencenever seemed tobeaproblem,foritwasmotivated.Thisisofanatrociousnaiveté.Thedogmaticdoctrineoflegalthoughtstillbelieves in ideassuchas“first Idecide(i.e. Ichoosewhetherthedefendant isinnocentorguilty)andjustthenImotivate”.Anepistemictrick.

ThisiswhyIspeakhereofarealphilosophicalmistake,forthefreeassessmentisaperfectrepresentation of what I call CPS — the Cognitive Privilege of the (knowing) Subject.Alternatively,theCognitivePrivilegeofSérgio(Moro).Thisisalong-standingmisconception,butitwasonlyaftertheAP470(mensalão)132thatlawyerscametorealisethatinsistingonitwastheequivalentofanepistemicshotintheirownfoots.Itoldso.

Inoneofmymostrecentbooks,HermenêuticaeJurisdição,133organisedunderadialogue-basedstructure,Imakeitveryclearthatwearepayingahighpriceforacceptingit.Nobodyhas yet tried to construct and adequate theory for evidence assessment.We havemorecriteriatoassesstheBrazilianCarnivalthanwedoforourcriminalevidenceassessment.TheBrazilianCarnivalhassurpassedtheLaw.IntheCarnival,therearecriteriathatincludeascaleofgradingpointsfrom1to10(andthereareevendecimalsamongit).ThecriteriainLaw,ontheotherhand,seemtobeletthejudgeassesstheevidencethewayheprefersto,untilhefindsthe“realtruth”.134Howdoweknowwhetherwefoundthe“realtruth”?Well,itissimple.Itisthejudgewhosaysso.Sincewe,thejurists,havesuchanesteemfor“ontologies”,135Ikeepimaginingthe“realtruth”asalostoldladywithAlzheimer,sittingonaparkbench.When

*FormerProsecutorforthestateofRioGrandedoSul;PostdocandPhDinLaw;FullprofessoratUnisinos-RSandUnesa-RJ;Lawyer.130TN:IntheBrazilianlegalsystem,thefreepersuasionofthejudge(inPortuguese,livreconvencimento)isaconceptionbywhichthejudgesarefreetoassesstheevidencesinanygivenprocedureusingtheirownpersonalreason and inner convictions. Lenio Streck, the author of this article, is one of the long-time critics of thisconceptionanditsimplicationsinBrazil.131TN:InstitutoBrasileirodeCiênciasCriminais,orBrazilianInstituteofCriminalSciences.TheIBCCRIMheldits21ºinternationalseminarin2015.132TN: TheAP470 (orCriminal Trial n. 470), publicly knownasmensalão (aneologism inPortuguese for amonthlypayment),wasanotorioustrialundertheBrazilianSupremeCourt(theSupremoTribunalFederal)afteravote-buyingcorruptionscandal,emergedin2005.133 STRECK, Lenio Luiz. Hermenêutica e Jurisdição: Diálogos com Lenio Streck. Porto Alegre: Livraria doAdvogado,2017.TN:HermeneuticsandJurisdiction.134TN:Theso-called“realtruth”(inPortuguese,verdadereal)is,onceagain,a(mis)conceptionintheBrazilianlegalsystemthatdeterminesthatincriminalcases,thejudgesarenotrestrainedbythelegalevidences;instead,theymustpursuea“realtruth”,thatliesbeyondtheprocedurallimits.135STRECK,LenioLuiz.30%dascirurgiasjurídicasdãoerrado.Oquehácomos“médicos”?ConsultorJurídico,SãoPaulo.TN:30%ofthelegalsurgeriesgowrong.Whatiswrongwiththe“doctors”?

126

she is finally found, I imagineacourtclerktellingher:“weneedyoutoappearbeforethejudge”.Thereitis,wefoundthe“realtruth”.

Seriously: freeassessment, “real truth”,andall theseperformativeutterancesarenothingmorethanwarrantsforthejudgetosayanythingaboutthe(lackof)evidence.Besides,IhaveanarticleabouthowAmericanLawtheorisesaboutprobativevalue.EventheAmericanjuryhasmorecriteriathanprofessionalBrazilianjudgesdo.Bingo.Ateachday,itseemsevenmorecertain.136

ItcouldnothavebeendifferentwiththecriminalprocedureinvolvingtheFormerPresidentLuizInácioLuladaSilva.ThefreeassessmentofevidencewassovereignonMoro’ssentence,whichhasseveralaspectsthatfallshort.Therefore,inthisshortspace,Iintendtoshowhowsomeofthemlacksubstance.Justasmuchasthereareseveralshallowaspects,therearealsoseveralanalysesoftheJudge’sdecision,suchasthosefromAfrânioSilvaJardim137andPedroSerrano.138Myplanhereisnottoanalysethesentenceinitsentirety,sincemanypeoplehavealreadydoneit.Itseemstomenotonlyrepetitive,butalsounnecessary.Notonlythat,ifthiswasacountrythattakesitselfseriously,atwenty-minutereadingofthedecisionwouldbemorethanenoughtodeclareitsnullity.

Ihavealreadywrittenaboutit,139anditseemsrighttostartbyitonceagain.IhavelearnedwhenIwasjuststartingmycareerasaprosecutorwithanoldcolleaguethat“hewhoproposesthedismissaloftheprosecutioninsixtypagesdoessoforheshouldhavefiledchargesinsix.Hewhowantstofilechargesinsixtypagescandismissinsix,orevenrequireinvestigationinsearchofconcreteevidenceinstead”.Well,rightfromthestart,thenumberofpagesinMoro’ssentencestandout:two-hundredandthirty-eight.ThatisnottosayIexpectedafifteen-pagedecisionabsolvingtheFormerPresident.Morethanthat,Iwouldnotcriticisethenumberofpagesmerelyoutofbelievinginamysticalnumberoranythingofthesort.IdonotbelieveinaGrundsentence,neitherdoIregardastruethatanidealsentencemusthaveonehundredpages.ThisisnotwhatIplantoreflectuponhere.

WhatIdointendhereistoproblematizesomeelementsregardingthevalidityofthedecision.ThefirstofthemisthenumberofpagesthatMorodedicatestoexplainthereasonswhyheisnotprejudiced.Frompage10topage33(§48to§152),Morodisplaysargumentstomakeitclearthatheisunbiased.Someonehastier(ormaybenot)couldevensaythataJudgethatspent23pagessayingthatheisnotprejudicealreadydemonstratesstrongindicationsofbias.Afterall, it is justasthemotherofadearfriendofminesays:noteverythingisnecessarilywhatitseemstobe,butifitactuallyis,italwaysseemstobeso.

136 STRECK, Lenio Luiz. RAATZ, Igor. DIETRICH, William Galle. Sobre um possível diálogo entre a CríticaHermenêutica e a teoria dos standards probatórios: notas sobre valoração probatória em tempos deintersubjetividade.NovosEstudosJurídicos(Online),v.22,abr-ago.2017.TN:ApossibledialoguebetweentheHermeneuticalCriticsofLawandtheprobativestandardstheory:notesontheprobativeevaluationintimesofintersubjectivity.137JARDIM,AfrânioSilva.Breveanálisedasentençaquecondenouoex-presidenteeoutros.EmpóriodoDireito,Santa Catarina. Available at <http://emporiododireito.com.br/breve-analise-da-sentenca-que-condenou-o-ex-presidente-lula-e-outros-por-afranio-silva-jardim/>.AccessonJuly18,2017.TN:BriefanalysisofthesentencethatdeclaredtheFormerPresidentandothersguilty.138MARTINS,Rodrigo.PedroSerrano:“OprejuízonãoésódeLula,masdasociedade”.CartaCapital,SãoPaulo.TN:ThedamageisdonenotonlytoLula,butalsotosocietyasawhole.139STRECK,LenioLuiz:Checklist:21razõespelasquaisjáestamosemEstadodeexceção.ConsultorJurídico,SãoPaulo.TN:Checklist:Twenty-onereasonswhywearealreadyinaStateofexception.

127

Butsincethemerenumberofpagesisnotanadequatewayofattestingwhetherajudgeisprejudicedornot–eventhoughitstillseemstobeabetterevidencethanareportfromOGloboorevenacommentbyMervalPereira–,140Iwillgofurther,dealingespeciallywiththelanguageusedbyMoro.SinceIamahermeneutist,IfollowHans-GeorgGadamer’slesson–whichisapparentlysomethingretrogradenowadays:beforesayinganythingaboutatext,Iallowthetexttosaysomethingforme.

Ishallproceed.Onthe§109ofthesentence,MoroarguesthatLula’sdefencewasbasedondramaticreasoningregardingthetelephonecommunicationsinterception.Dramatic,saystheJudge, while he himself forgets that the State attorneys listed the telephone number ofTeixeiraMartinsAdvogados141asifitwasthenumberofLilsPalestras,EventosePublicações,thefirmresponsiblefortheFormerPresident’slectures.Wouldthatbeadramaticmistake?It isnot for less thatMoro recogniseson§106 thatheonly foundout that the telephonenumber belonged to the law firm once the defence argued so,when the interceptionwasalreadyover.Thatistosay,theMPF,142throughadissimulation,143interceptscommunicationsfromthelawfirmrepresentingtheDefendant,andtheJudgeseestheargumentasdramatic?Indeed,thesituationisdramatic.

On§113,Morostatesthattheillicitrecordings“arenotevenapartoftheprobativeelementsinthecriminalcharge,whichmeansthattheywerenotconsidered”.Well,itmightverywellbeso,buttheyatleastshowthattheMPFwasnotexactlyperformingitsusualrole,right?Asamatteroffact,Morodiscussesitfrom§128to§131,inwhichthedefenceclaims,basedona“pressconferenceheldbythePublicAttorneysonSeptember19,2016,inwhichtheyattackedtheFormerPresident’spersonalimagewhileexplainingthecontentsofthecriminalcharge”,thatthedefendantwasthetargetofatruelegalwarfare.Morodoesstatethatthedefenceclaimed that the Public Attorneys were prejudiced, and that “even though the PublicAttorneys’ tone inthepressconferencemightbecriticised, ithasnopracticaleffecttothiscriminaltrial,forwhatmattershereistheproductionofauthenticprobativeelements”(§130).Moro also says that “despite the fact that eventually itmaybe understood that the pressconferencewasnotappropriate,itisstillfarofffromaso-called‘legalwarfare’againsttheFormerPresident”(§131).

Well,itisclearthatnotevenJudgeSérgioMorohimselfwouldbecomfortablesayingthatthepressconferenceheldbytheMPFmemberswasappropriate.Letusrememberthatitwasinthat occasion that one of the Public Attorneys exhibited the now notorious PowerPointpresentation,withall the indicatorspointing to Lula’sname.144 It isnotevennecessary toargue much in the sense that such an attitude was not exactly fitting to an impartial,independentattitudethatmaybeexpectedoutofapublicprosecutor.NotevenMorowould

140TN:OGloboisoneofthemostrelevantdailynewspaperspublishedinBrazil,andMervalPereiraisaOGloboright-wingpoliticalcolumnist.141TN:ThelawfirmresponsibleforLula’sdefence.142TN:MinistérioPúblicoFederal,Brazil’sPublicProsecutor’sOffice.143DEVASCONCELLOS,Marcos;RODAS,Sérgio.Todosos25advogadosdeescritórioquedefendeLulaforamgrampeados. Consultor Jurídico, São Paulo. TN: All 25 attorneys from the law firm that defends Lula wereintercepted.144TN:DeltanDallagnol,theleadingProsecutor,presentedacurious,unexpectedPowerPointslidewithaseriesofbubbles,eachonesupposedlyrepresentingelementsofthecriminalcharge,witharrowsallpointingtowardabigbubbleinthemiddlecalled“Lula”. Itthenbecameapractically instant,virallytransmittedjokeinsocialmedia.

128

arguethat.TherearealsoseveralotherMPFmanifestationsthatmightbecharacterisedasinadequateorinappropriate–tosaytheleast.JustrememberthatCarlosFernandodosSantosLima, one of the Public Attorneys,wore proudly in public a shirt that read “República deCuritiba”145and“LigadaJustiça”.146ItismorethanclearthattheMPFwasnotunbiasedasitshouldbeduringtheprocedure,eventhoughMorodoesnotseentorecogniseit(notevenregardinghisownactions).TheMPFwasapparentlyseeking fora trophy.Like if ithadnoresponsibilitywhatsoeverasapublicoffice.

Moropresentssomecontradictoryarguments.HesaysthatLula’sdefencewasdramaticanddiversionist.Thisadjective, let itbeclear,wasused for four times in the firstpagesof thedecision(paragraphs57,65,138,and148).Moroasserts,“ThisJudgewasoffendedseveraltimes by the defence representatives in these unfortunate episodes” (§ 142).He then listsmomentsinwhichtheDefencesupposedlylackedrespectwithhim,highlightingthosethatbotheredhimthemost.Amongthem,there isaquotebyoneofthe lawyersclaimingthatMoro intended on eliminating the defence, an attitude that was supposedly already“sepulchredbytheAlliesin1945”,andwasnow“reappearinginthiscountry”.Thereisalsootherhighlights,allofthemmadebyMoro,suchas“this[theelementsofthecriminalcharge]exist only inside YourHonour’s head” and “the interpretation [of a given statutory rule] isabsolutelycontrarytotheConstitutionandalloftheCriminalProceduralLaw”.

However,Ithinkthattocharacterisealawyer’sdefenceasdramaticisfarmoreoffensivethantoarguethatajudge’sinterpretationofaruleisunconstitutional.TosaythatsomethingexistsonlyintheJudge’sheadisnotevenclosetobeasironicasajudgetellingalawyerthatheshouldeitherknowhisplaceorpassapublicexamtobecomeajudge.147Letusnotforget:therighttocounselissacred.Notonlythat,itisacceptablethatalawyeractsstrategically.AJudgeandMPFmembers,aspublicofficials,cannotdothat.

Moro also says on § 938 that “the Defendant, oriented by his lawyers, has adoptedquestionabletacticsduringthistrial,aimingtointimidatepublicofficialsbyinitiatingdifferentlawsuitsasaplaintiffclaimingthathispersonalhonourhasbeenaffected”.AccordingtotheJudge,“theseactsare inappropriateandrevealanattempt to intimidate thePublic Justiceitself,itsofficials,andeventhepress”.

Thisisaclearuseofdoublestandards.WhyisitthatLula’sinterviewsare“inadequate”andattempts to “intimidate the Public Justice”, and theMPF press conferencesmay only “beeventuallyunderstoodisinadequate”?Whatisthecriteria?Oneoftheparties,theDefendantinthetrial,cameupwithinadequatestatements.Wecanagreeonthat.However,whatabouttheProsecutorthatwaspublicallyseenwithashirtreading“LeagueofJustice”?WhatabouttheleadingProsecutorDallagnol,thathasthreatenedtoabandontheOperationCarWashifthe Brazilian Congress did not pass an anticorruption bill? What about the notoriousPowerPoint press conference? All of these conducts, can we justmaybe consider them

145TN:RepublicofCuritiba.CuritibaisthesoutherncityinBrazilinwhichtheOperationCarWashtakesplace.In 2016, Lulawas recorded talking to the then president Dilma Rousseff – an ally of him – and, during thetelephonecall,LulaironicallyreferredtotheprovincialcityasanindependentRepublic,whichcanbeexplainedbytheFormerPresident’sfollowingstatement:“[supposedly]anything[could]happeninthiscountryifajudge[Moro]wantsit”.RepublicofCuritibathenbecameasloganadoptedbyMorosupportersinresponse.146TN:JusticeLeague.147TN:IntheBrazilianJudiciary,theadmissiontothecareerasajudgeonlyhappensthroughapublicexam.TherewasanepisodeinLula’strialinwhichMoro,unhappywiththeDefence,repliedittooneofthelawyers.

129

inadequate?Arewenow treating theadministrationof justice as somethingwithnothingmorethanacollectiveofenthusiasts,likeifitwasasportwithwinnersandlosers?

Wealsohavethedramatic(andnowIammyselfusingthisword)episodeofthetappedphonecallsbetweenLulaandthethenpresidentRousseffillegallyreleasedbyMoro,whichunveilshispartiality.TheJudgehimselfrecogniseditasamistakeandapologised.148Therefore,if:a)the Judge characterises the Defence as dramatic and diversionist; b) illegally revealsinterceptedtelephonecalls;c)refusestoacknowledgethebiasedconductsoftheMPF;andd)endsallofthatbysayingthatatanyrate,theJudgecannotdeclarehimselfprejudicedwhenthepartyoffendshimorevenfabricatestheallegedprejudicemotive–thisisinthearticle256oftheBrazilianCriminalProceduralCode–,well,wecansaythatthereissomethingoddinallofit.Afterall,ifMorohimselfusesarticle256,heisacknowledgingthatyes,thereisanimositybetween the Judge and the Defence. This is clear.Moro, however, attributes this to theDefence’s attitude.Whatabout the timewhenhemade illegallypublic the tappedphonecalls?HadtheDefencealready“offended”theJudgebythen?OrwouldnotitbethatMorohimself created a situation that would later allow him to hide behind article 256? Thefundamentalquestionhereseemstobeaboutfindingoutwhocausedtheanimosityinthefirstplace.Thatisthepoint.

ThefirstpartsofthesentencemakeitveryclearthatMoroandtheMPFwerebiased.SinceIshallbebriefhere–anditwouldnotbenecessarynottobetogetwhereIwanttowiththistext–, Iwillanalyseveryspecificpoints inthedecision.Someparagraphsthatmightbe inthere evenunpretentiously.However, underneath there is always something that hasnotbeensaid.Silencespeaks.Screams.Thisishowimportanthermeneuticsis.Letusproceedtosomeexamplesofevidencethatwereusedduringthetrial.

Oneof themost commented featureswas the fact thatMorousedaOGloboarticleasarelevantprobativeelement(§376and377;§412;§452).Letusrepeat:anewspaperreportwasarelevantelementfortheJudge’spersuasion.Well,forthosewhostillinsistondefendingthefreeassessment,thereisafieldday.

MoroalsosaysthatLula’smanifestationsduringtrial“areinconsistentevenwithastatementpublishedonDecember12, 2014by Instituto Lula149 in response topress reports” (§ 474).Apparently,theJudgefindsit inacceptablethatastatementby InstitutoLula issupposedlyinconsistentwithLula’strialstatements,afterall“itistruethatthestatementwasmadebythe NGO, but since it is about a personal question regarding the Former President, it isimpossible to say that the Institutedidnot consulthimbefore releasing it” (§476). Letusobserve here that the Judge’s utterance does not meet basic significance requirements,semanticallywise.HowbigisInstitutoLula?Howmanyemployeesdoesithave?WhyexactlyisitimpossibletosaythattheInstitutedidnotconsultLula?Couldnothisownadvisersreleaseastatement?Afterall,whatisthereasonforsomeonetohireprofessionaladvice?See,ifwetookMoro’squoteandchanged“impossible”for“possible”,nothingwouldchange.Letussee:“[…]sinceit[thestatement]isaboutapersonalquestionregardingtheFormerPresident,itispossible to say that the Institute did not consult him before releasing it”. There it is. No

148STRECK,LenioLuiz.Morocriouumnovotipodeextinçãodepunibilidade:pedidodedesculpas.ConsultorJurídico,SãoPaulo.TN:Morohasnowcreatedanewwayofavoidingprosecution:apologising.149TN:Lula’sInstitute.AFormerPresident’sNGO.

130

empiricalverificationjustifieseitherthetruthorthefalsityofsuchaclaim.Itisarbitrary.Itisfittocondemn…andtoabsolvejustaswell.

I follow.Onparagraphs635and636,there issomekindofreverseburdenofproof.Morosays,“LestLuizInácioLuladaSilvaandMarisaLetíciaLuladaSilva150weremerelypotentialbuyersoftheapartment164-A,151triplex,thereshouldhavebeensomediscussionregardingthepriceofboththeapartmentanditsrenovations,sincetheywouldnaturallyhavetopayforit in a regular acquisition”. He says, though, “There is no proof, neither a document, forinstance,norwitnesstestimoniesinthisregard”.Self-explanatory.

Moro also works with presumptions. On § 645, he affirms that “José Adelmário PinheiroFilho’s152testimonial[…]confirmsonlythepartoftheProsecutor’sthesisregardingthetriplexapartmentanditsrenovations.Histestimonial,however,acquitsLulaofthechargesregardingexpendituresconcerningthestorageofthepresidentialcollection.Lesthe[Pinheiro]plannedoncommittingperjuryonlytoacquirelegalbenefits,hewouldaffirmbothcrimes”.Inotherwords, the Judgepresumedthat, lest the testimonialwasnotveridical, thewitnesswouldhavelied.Here,too,wecanrefertosemanticsignificancerequirements(somethingIwriteaboutinmyDicionáriodeHermenêutica):153thereisnowayhowtoeitherproveitordisproveit.Purepresumptionand/orspeculation.

Finally,thereisanotherpointextractedoutofparagraphs802and804.Mororeferences“thelackofanydisapprovaltonefromtheex-Presidentconcerningthecorruptioncasesinwhichmanypublicofficialswereinvolvedduringhistimeinoffice”.Hethenproceedstoclaimthat“usually, if a subordinate commits a crime, it is naturally expected that the superiordisapproves itandalsodemandspunishmentforthedeed.Theex-Presidentdidnotdisplaysuchabehaviourandutterednothingmorethangenericstatementsinthesensethatthosewhowerefoundguiltyshouldbeproperlypunished.Therewasnospecificdesignation,makingitseemthattherewasnoidentificationofthoseinvolvedincorruptioncases–whichhappenedduring the course of the AP 470. This is relevant evidence of connivance with significantprobativevalue”.Letusstopthereadinghereandreflectuponhowseriousthis is.TotheJudge,thefactthattheDefendantrefrainedfrompublicallycondemningspecificwrongdoers–sinceheonlyutteredgenericstatements–hasprobativevalue.Thissurreal.AclearviolationtoHume’slaw.

Thequestionthatremainsiswhyajudgewould:a)usepresumptions;b)reversetheburdenofproof;c)makeclaimswithnopossibleempiricalverification;d)considerthelackof“specificpublicmanifestation”fromtheFormerPresidentasevidence;ande) ignorethepassionateactionsoftheMPF?Well,fortwoverysimplereasons:(i)becausetheJudgehimselfhadapersonalconvictionformthebeginningthattheDefendantwasguilty;and(ii)becausethelegalcommunityinBrazilhasnocriteriaforprobativevalueassessment.Moroisjustlikethe

150TN:FormerBrazil’sFirstLady,MarisaisLula’srecentlydeceasedwife.151TN:TheoriginsofLula’sindictmentandlaterconviction(basedontheMPF’schargesofpassivecorruption,ideologicalfalsity,andmoneylaundering)areintheinvestigationsoftheinvolvementofconstructioncompanyOASintherenovationofatriplexapartmentinGuarujá,Brazil.TheProsecutors(andJudgeMoro)believesthatthepropertyislinkedtotheex-presidentandhisdeceasedwife.152TN:DirectorofOAS.153STRECK,LenioLuiz.DicionáriodeHermenêutica:quarentatemasfundamentaisdateoriadoDireitoàluzdaCrítica Hermenêutica do Direito. Belo Horizonte: Casa do Direito, 2017. TN: Hermeneutics dictionary: fortyfundamentaltopicsonjurisprudenceundertheHermeneuticalCriticsofLawapproach.

131

majorityofjudgesinthiscountry.Nothingnew.Thisiswhatourlawschoolsteach.Everythinggravitatesaroundthefreeassessment.Nowthose23pagesdedicatedtodenyprejudicemakesense,don’tthey?

Istophere.Thiscasehadanexplosivecombination:biasedjudge,biasedprosecutor+freeassessmentofevidence.IfIwereoneofthelawyersrepresentingtheex-President,Iwouldaskthemforthefowlproductionevidence,“practiced”bytheAzandeinNorthCentralAfrica.Inordertoseekforthe“realtruth”,theyconsultthePoisonOracleintheBenge154factor.Thedefendantisdeclaredguiltyorinnocentbywhetherornotafowlsurvivesbeingadministered.poison.Nointuitionismordeductions.IfImaybesoboldtousesuchanironyhere,well,itissafetosaythatLulawasalreadyfoundguiltythedayhistrialwasassignedtoSérgioMoro.ItisnotforlessthatMorosaysthattheimpartialityissuewasexamined“justbecauseitwasalleged”(§148).Ofcourse,everythingwasdecidedalready.Thereasoningcomeslater.

There ismore.Undoubtedly,eventhoughhedoesnotadmit it,Moroadoptedthe“legal”abductive reasoning theory (here is theexotic “theory”broughtupby theMPF in its finalallegations).ToMoro,theProsecutors’thesisistruebecause“itistheonewhobetterexplainstheevidences”(§847,848).Itisaprobabilitytheory!Theoriesaboutprobativevalueandtwothousandyearsofphilosophyweresimplyerasedbyasinglesentence.See,theJudgehimself,allowingthisprobabilitytheoryinsidecriminalprocedureandevidenceassessment,willadmitthatthefactswereprovedbeyondreasonabledoubt.However,withoutcriteria,whatdoubtisreasonable?WhatevertheJudgesaysso?Evenifweadmittedmathematicalreasoningincriminalprocedurallaw,whichcalculationwasmade?Afterseveralprobableconclusionsinprogress, the Judge finally reaches a final probable conclusion! And this conclusion iscondemnatory.

Thissentencesymbolizesalot.Infact,itreinforcesthattheLawdisplayedinlawschoolsisnothingmorethanpoliticaltheoryofpower.Andworse:apoorpoliticaltheoryofpower!Andthisisatrociousfordemocracy.JustlikeIsaidwhenIstartedthisarticle,itispossibletosaythattheBrazilianCarnivalhasbuiltabetterepistemologythantheLawdid.IntheCarnival,peoplebehavealotlesslikefansthantheydoinLaw.Doyouthinkitisagoodthingtoseethe Law contaminated by moral judgements? Do you think it is acceptable to taintconstitutionalrightsaslongasitisagainstanenemy?Justbearinmindthatyouaredailyintrafficandyoumighteventuallygetinvolvedinanaccident.Itmighthappentoanyone.Letusimagineyouareinacarandtheotherpartyinamotorcycle.Well,ifweacceptthatLawisnothingbutasportwithwinnersandlosers,allthatisleftforyouistohopethatthejudgeisamemberofteamcarinsteadofteammotorcycle.Everythingnowseemstobeamatterofenthusiasts.Twothousandyearsofphilosophyfornothing.

IhavenothingagainstMoro;neitherdoIhaveanythingagainsttheMPF.Infact,aftertwenty-eightyearsworkingasProsecutorforthestateofRioGrandedoSul, Istillseemyselfasamemberof it.Nevertheless, anhonorarymember of an institutionmust look after societywithout ever ignoring the constitutional rights of the defendant, impartially. The PublicProsecutor'sOfficecannotbehavelikealawyer,norcanitactstrategically.Onceweadmitit,the Prosecutors, public officials, will be nothingmore than accusers. No different from alawyer.Well,why is it that theProsecutor’sOfficehas similar constitutionalwarranties to

154CHASE,Oscar.Law,Culture,andRitual:DisputingSystemsinCross-culturalContext.NewYorkandLondon:NewYorkUniversityPress,2005.

132

thosethatthe judgeshave? It isquitesimple,actually:sothat itdoesnotbehave like justanotherpartyinthetrial.Partially.Biased.

More than that, my objections here do not relate merely toMoro’s sentence. They are,fundamentally,againstthefreeassessmentofevidenceandinfavourofdemocracy.Iamajurist thatbelievesthat legaldecisionsshallbetakenbyprinciple,notmoral judgmentsorpolitics.Ifthepersonalmoralconvictionsofajudgecancorrectthelaw,whoistocorrectthepersonalmoralconvictionsofthejudge?ItisthedutyofajuristtorecognisethatMorowaswrongwhenhedecidedtoreleaseinterceptedtelephonecalls,justasitistoacknowledgetheillegality of the recorded dialogues between President Temer and Joesley Batista.155Constitutionalrightshavenocolour,gender,race,orideology.Eithertheyarerightsortheyarenot.

Inonesentence:wecanneverknowwhatthejudgethinks.IfajudgeandtheMPFthinkthatreversingtheburdenofproofandabductivereasoningarerevolutionarythings,theyshouldtakealookatbasicpoliticalsciencemanuals.LetushavelessBayesianprobabilities,abductivereasoning,emotivism,andmorerespectfortheConstitution.Todotherightthing istodowhattheConstitutiontellsustodo.Whatreallyisrevolutionaryistocombatcrimewithoutbreakingtherules.Tocombatcorruptionwhileturninglegalprocedureintoameresimulationiseasy.Itisalothardertopickupthepieces.Ifweadmitchaos,therewillnotevenberulestofolloworbreakanyway.

Actually,intimesofconstantly,arbitrarilyignoredlegalandconstitutionalrules,fightingforlegalityisarevolutionaryact.Itisindeedincredible:withmyconservativeconstitutionalism,Ihavenowbecomearevolutionary.

Irestmycase.

155TN:MichelTemer,PresidentofBrazil,wassecretlyrecordedbyJoesleyBatista,abusinessman,discussingmoneypay-offstoEduardoCunha,formerCongressmanwhoisnowinjail.WhileLulaisaleft-wingpolitician,Temerisassociatedwiththeright-wing;thisiswhyStreckbringsthisepisode,tostatethataseriousjuristhasadutytocondemnillegalitiesonbothsides,leavingpoliticsaside.

133

Apoliticaltrial

MarceloRibeiroUchoa*InocêncioRodriguesUchoa

JudgeSergioFernandoMoro’ssentencingofBrazil’sformerPresidentLuizInácioLuladaSilvato9yearsand6monthsinjailmakesamockeryofMrLula’shumanrightsandisaninsulttothelawsgoverningtheBrazilianstate.On7July2017,theformerpresidentwassentencedtoprisonandimposedheftyfinesfortheallegedcrimesofgraftandmoneylaundering.Hewasoneofthedefendantsconvictedincivilcasenumber5046512-94.2016.4.04.7000/PR,whichispartofBrazil’sCarWashcorruptionprobebeingarguedatthe13aFederalCourtinCuritiba,Paranastate.

Considering,though,thatlegalargumentsindefenceofMrLulahavealreadybeenpresentedbyhisoutstandinglegalteam,ledbyCristianoZaninMartins,ValeskaTeixeiraZaninMartins,RobertoTeixeiraandthedistinguishedattorneyJoseRobertoBatochio,aformerpresidentoftheOrderofAttorneysofBrazil;thatcertainparticularitiesofthecasecanonlybegraspedbyhavingdetailedaccesstothecourtpapers;andthatsomeofthesepointsarebeingaddressedelsewhere in this collection by renowned scholars such as Carol Proner, Gisele Cittadino,Gisele Ricobom and Joao Ricardo Dornelles; we will choose to make instead a criticalassessmentoftherationalebehindCarWashoperationitself.Itshighestpointsofarhasbeenreachedwiththissentence:afar-reachingdecisionwhichhassurprisedinitsextentbutnotinitsdirection,consideringthatthegavelseemedbangedandguiltpresumedfromtheonset.

TheCarWashoperationhasbecomenaivelyingrainedinpeople’smindsasamoralvehicletoredeemBrazil’snationalmoralsthankstoacoordinatedstrategycruciallycountingonstrongsupportfromthemainstreammedia,falselyandallegedlyinterestedineradicatingcorruptionfromthegutsofBrazilianpublicadministration.Inreality,itsprimarygoalhasbeentoremovetheWorkers Party frompower at any cost, even if thatmeant abruptly ending a politicalproject thathas, to this date, brought themost important economic achievements to thecountry, providing the best social opportunities to the most sacrificed extracts of thepopulation.

Asitfedonpopularsupportthroughasirencallofsortsfromthemedia,CarWashgraduallyploughedagainsttheruleoflawbydisrespectingpeople’slegalrights,weakeninginstitutionsandignoringbasiclegalguarantees.ItthuscontributedtoerodesupportforthegovernmentoftheformerPresidentDilmaRousseff,pavingthewayforherillegitimatedestitutionthrougha parliamentary coup constitutionally dressed as impeachment for the alleged crimes ofadministrativemisconduct and authorising spending without prior Congressional support.NothingmorethancunningpoliticalmanoeuvringthatreliedontechnicalitiesofthelawtoprovokeacollapseofthedemocraticorderofBrazil.

ButthereisabacklashfollowingthisattackonBrazil’sdemocracyandourconcernisthatthistidedoesnotgetstoppedinthe2018elections.ThepopularityofDilma’sbackstabbingheir,Michel Temer, is now in free fall.Mr Temer and his PMDBparty spearheaded a spurious

*MarceloRibeiroUchoa,PhD,isAssociateProfessoratUniversidadedeFortaleza/UNIFORandpartneratUchoaAdvogados Associados. Inocencio Rodrigues Uchoa is a reformed federal employment judge and partner atUchoaAdvogadosAssociados.

134

conspiracywhichnotonlyillegallyendedhertermbutforcedtheWorker’sPartysocialprojectintoa180-degreeturn.Hisgovernmenthasrolledbackpoliticalandsocialachievementsaspaybackforsupportfromconservativeforcesincludingforeignpowers(especiallytheUnitedStates) interested in weakening Brazil’s sovereignty and controlling Brazil’s strategicresources,suchasdeepwateroil,waterandmining;internationalfinancialspeculatorsandbusinessconglomeratessuchasbanksandmediagroups;right-wingpoliticalpartiesdefeatedthroughtheballotboxbytheleft,particularlythesocial-democratPSDBandthecentre-rightDEM; politically illiterate chunks of the population manipulated by the mass media,conservativesandtheright-wingingeneral.

AreturnoftheWorkers’Party,andtheleft,topowergrowsmoreandmorefeasibleasamoralhangoverlingersonandpeopleregretastheywatchBrazil’sonceexemplarsocialpoliciesgodownhill.ItisinthatcontextthatCarWashpicksMrLulaasascapegoatforBrazil’sproblems,without showing a single unequivocal proof of crime, relying consistently on genericassumptions based on the theory of control over the act and controversial informationextracted under arrest or plea bargain (when there are incentives for finger pointing inexchangeforamildersentence).Ifresortingtothosestrategiesmightproduceevidencetoincriminateanyone,itisnotacoincidencethatthechosenscapegoatistheformerPresidentLula,whowouldgetthevoteofmorethanonethirdofthepopulationifelectionswereheldtoday,accordingtoopinionpolls;who isconsideredbymanytobethegreatestpresidentBrazilhaseverhad,withunrivalledscopetoleadthecountryoutofitsinstitutionalcrisis.

ForthegoodofMrLulaasacitizen,aswellastheBrazilianstate,wehopethatanappealseekingtooverturnjudgeMoro’ssentence,lodgedwiththecorrespondingFederalcourt,maybeconsideredinthelightofprinciplesthatunderpinnationallawsandthejudicialsystem,hopefullyexposingtheabsurdityofthepreviousdecision.Atrialcannotbedecidedbytheaudienceoftomorrow’snews,orhowmuchnoiseisgeneratedbybangingpotsonthebalconyofapartments inwell-offareasof thecountry’smaincities.Atrialonlyhastobefair,andnothingbeyond that.Apoliticallymotivated sentencecannothaveanother fatebut tobeoverturned.

135

Lawfare,thiscrimecalledjustice

MarcioSoteloFelippe

Withtheconclusionofthe"triplexapartmentcase"atthefirststage,itcanbeobservedthattruecrimeswerecommitted.Thosecommittedbythejudge.Ofthecrimesthedefendantwaschargeswith,nothingcanbesaid.

Thisislawfare.Theannihilationofapoliticalpersonthroughjudicialmechanisms.Theseriesofgrotesqueepisodesthatcharacterizedthejurisdictioninthiscaseleavesnodoubtaboutit.Themere fact that theprocessenters thesocial imaginaryasacombat"Morovs.Lula" (amagazine cover stamped a caricature of both as boxers in a ring) gives evidence of theteratological character of themagistrate's performance.Moro committed crimes, violatedtrivial functional duties, violated the defendant's constitutional rights and guarantees,violatedthesecrecyofhiscommunications,strivedtoexposeandhumiliatehimpublicly,kepthimindetentionforhours,revealedintimateconversationswithhisrelatives.Thereisnothingunreasonable about the suspicion that Lula’swifeMariza Letícia's strokeoriginated in theseriesofconstraintstowhichherfamilywassubjected.MarizadiedonFebruary3,2017.

Letusscrutinise,fromthisperspective,someofthearbitrarinesscommittedbythejudgeandaspectsofthedecisionthatrevealthereceptionofextremetheseswhichdeviatefromthesoundexerciseofthemagistracyandfullydemonstratethewilltocondemn.TherecognitionofthevalidityofthissentencebytheHigherCourtswillbethemostforcefulevidencethatweliveinastateofexceptionandthattheConstitutionisnowauselesspieceofpaper.

Violationofthetelephoneprivacy

Theinviolabilityofcorrespondenceisaclassicfundamentalright.ClauseXIIoftheUniversalDeclarationofHumanRightsstatesthat"nooneshallbesubjectedtointerferencewiththeirprivacy,family,homeorcorrespondence..."

The1988BrazilianConstitutionstipulatesasafundamentalrightandguaranteeinclause5,itemXII:"theprivacyofcorrespondenceandtelegraphiccommunications,dataandtelephonecommunicationsisinviolable,exceptinthelattercase,bycourtorder,inthehypothesisandinthemannerestablishedbylawforthepurposeofcriminalinvestigationorcriminalproceduralinstruction."

Notetheexception.Thereare twoconditions forviolating telephonecommunication: (i)acourtorder;(ii)forpurposesofcriminalinvestigationorcriminalinvestigation.

TheprovisoisregulatedbyLaw9,296,datedJuly24,1996,which,inarticle10,statesthat"itisacrimetointercepttelephone,computerortelematiccommunications,orbreaksecrecyofjustice,withoutjudicialauthorizationorwithobjectivesnotauthorizedbylaw".Thepenaltyistwotofouryearsofimprisonmentandafine.

MorohaddeterminedwiretappinglinesusedbyformerPresidentLula.On16thMarch,2016,at 11h13 a.m, he suspended themeasure and informed the Federal Police. The dialoguebetweenLulaandDilmawaspickedupat1:32pm,whenthemeasurewasnolongerinforce.Mororeceivedtherecordingand,at4:21pm,theordertopublicizetheconversationbetweenthe president and the former president was given, which was followed by Rede Globobroadcastingtheaforementionedconversation.

Thisconductstrictlycomplieswithwhat isdecreedinLaw9.296/96.Therecordingwasnolonger covered by court authorization and there was no purpose authorized by law. The

136

intention was specific and completely impregnated with political interest. Lula had beenappointedministerandwouldtakeofficethefollowingday.Theannouncementoftheaudio,thatday,throughRedeGlobo,aimedatcreatingapoliticalclimatetopreventtheinvestitureoftheformerpresident.Moroavailedhimselfcriminallyandunworthilyofthetogatoimposeon Lula a political setback, to disturb the country and to create an atmosphere for theimpeachmentofthepresident.

Minister Teori Zavaski said itwas illegal to broadcast the tape. In this case, illegalitywasevidentlyacrime.Theminister,however,abstainedfromtheconclusion,notonlyatthattime,butalso,asdidhispeers,whenthematterwasaddressedtotheSTF(SupremeFederalCourt)plenary.

Abuseofauthority

theCodeofCriminalProcedure ispreciseon thematterof coercive conduction. It canbedeterminedintwocases,providedfor inarticles218and260:whentheaccuseddoesnotcomply with the subpoena for interrogation, or when the witness does not heed thesummons.

LulawastakenfromhishomeatdawnanddriventoCongonhasairport.Theformerpresidentwasnotatthattime(March4,2016)adefendantandhadnotbeensummoned.Therewasnever an acceptable explanation for him being led to the airport, given the existence ofmultipleUnionfacilitiesinthecityofSãoPaulowherehistestimonycouldbetaken"withoutturmoil"(theexplanationgivenbyMoro).

ThereisasuspicionthattheideawastotakehimtoCuritiba.Amediaspectaclewasintended(the press had beenwarned) intending the perverse content of the ex- president’s publichumiliation.Lulawasdeprivedofhis freedomforsixhours.Thiswasbothviolationof theconstitutionalguaranteeofindividuallibertyandexpressionofabuseofauthority,asprovidedinart.4,letter"a",ofLaw4,898,datedDecember9,1965:"itisalsoanabuseofauthority...toorderorexecuteameasuredeprivingindividualfreedom,withoutlegalformalitiesorwithabuseofpower."

Anabuseofauthoritysubjecttoadministrative,civilandpenalsanctions.Thatistosay,Moroonceagaincommittedacriminaloffenseandviolatedfunctionalduties.

TappingLula’sattorney’soffice

EverytelephoneofTeixeiraMartinslawfirmwastapped.RobertoTeixeira,Lula'srenownedlawyer, is its owner. The telephone company informedMoro that it was a law firm. Theprerogativeofsecrecyinlawyer-clientcommunicationis inherenttotherightofdefense.Moro excused himself in a way that capped mockery: there had been no attack on theoperator's services due to the volume of services of his Court Section, of the numerousprocessesthatrunthere.Asithappens,MorohasanexclusivedesignationandonlyoverseestheCarWashcase.So,heeitherconfessedgrossnegligenceorlied.Anegligencethatcannotbeobservedwhenitcomestothesubjectmatteroftheindictment.

The"foundations"ofthesentence

The fact that Lula was condemned can thus be synthesized as follows. According to theindictment,OAS,responsibleforworksintworefineriesbelongingtoPetrobras,distributedbribestocompanydirectorsandpoliticalagents.ThiswouldhavebeentoLula'sbenefitasthedifference in the price between a single apartment and a triplex in a building located in

137

Guarujá,adifferencethatwouldamounttoR$2,429,921.00.ThatiswhyLulawouldhaveincurred in thecrimeofpassivecorruption,whichconsists,according toarticle317of thePenalCode,"tosolicitorreceive,directlyorindirectly,forhimselforforothers,evenifoutofofficeorbeforetakingit,butduetoit,improperadvantage,oracceptthepromiseofsuchanadvantage."

The condemnationwouldonly be justified if itwere shown that Lula had control ofwhathappened inPetrobras. Ifhehadconsented, joined,participatedand that therehadbeenpracticeofaspecific,determined, identifiedact,rewardedbytheapartment inGuarujá. ItshouldbenotedthatformerpresidentCollorwasacquittedpreciselybecausethepracticeoftheaspecificactwasnotdemonstrated.

Nothinghasbeenproven.Thereisnottheslimmestindicationofpracticeofanofficialactormastery of what was happening within the state. This fragility Moro tried, in vain, tocompensatewithinformalconfessions(therewasnoformalagreementofpleabargain)oftheOASdefendants,particularlyLeoPinheiro.AfterdenyingLula'sparticipationinthekickbackscheme,PinheirochangedhistestimonyafterbeingarrestedbyMoro.Hesawtheopportunityto gain benefits by telling Moro what everyone knew Moro wanted to hear. Althoughsentencedtomorethanthirtyyearsinanothercase,hissentenceswereunifiedintotwoyearsandsixmonthsofimprisonment.

Let'slookatmoneylaunderingastypifiedinClause1ofLaw9.613/98:"toconcealordisguisethenature,origin, location,disposition,movementorownershipofassets, rightsor valuesarising,directlyorindirectly,fromacriminaloffense."

ThefactthattheapartmentappearsasbelongingtoOAS,Lulabeingsupposedtobethe"defacto owner" - the alleged advantage of the specific act never practiced – provided theopportunityofconvictionformoneylaundering.

Theunderstandingthattheperpetratoroftheforegoingcrimemaybetheactivesubjectofmoneylaundering,althoughhavingadherents,isunsustainable.Itispartofthepunishingfurythatplaguesus.Ithighlightspartofitercriministomakeitanothercrime.

Verbsthatarethecoretothetype-concealordisguise-areinherenttotheantecedentcrime.Noonecommitsanycrimewithouttakingcarenottoexposeitsproduceinordertoattainthedesiredadvantage.Noonesteals,forexample,acartoostentatiouslyparadeitthroughthestreetsofthecity.Concealmentordisguise is themeansfortheexhaustionofcrime, finalappropriationoftheadvantage.Therefore,punishingtheperpetratorofthecrimeformerelyconcealingordisguisingitisdoublepunishmentforthesamething,theso-called"bisinidem."

Evenifitwereadmittedthattheactivesubjectoftheantecedentcrimecouldbeanactivesubjectofthemoneylaunderingoffense,asecondconductwouldbenecessarytomakethecrimefruitful.InthejudgmentofCase470,the“Mensalão”Case,severaljudgespronouncedin that sense. For its synthesis and clarity I take a passage from Supreme Federal CourtMinisterBarroso:

"Theclandestinereceptionandabilitytoconcealtherecipientofthebribe,besidesexpected,integratestheverymaterialityofpassivecorruption,notconstituting,therefore,adistinctandautonomousactionofthemoneylaundering.Inordertocharacterizethisautonomouscrime,itwould be necessary to identify subsequent acts designed to restore the unduly receivedadvantagetotheformaleconomy".

138

Indeterminationoffactsandstatuteoflimitation

Morodidnot,atanytime,establishtheexactdateofthefacts.Thisisindispensabletoverifytheconsummationandtheconsummationisthestartingpointforthestatuteoflimitation.Lulaisnowmorethan70yearsold,whichhalvesprescribeddeadlines.So,howtoknowwhenthecrimesarestillaccountablefor?

Stateofexception

Allconsidered,whatwehaveistypicallawfare.Thedestructionofthepoliticalenemythroughanapparentlylegalprocess.

Moroisnotasolitaryandrecklessjudgepursuingapoliticalcharacter.Lawfarehasonlycometo this point because it has had the endorsement, coverage, and complicity of thehigherCourts, including the STF, which, among other things, kept mute about the telephonecommunicationconfidentialitybreach(remember,TeorididnotdwellontheMatterwhenthethemewenttotheplenary,ashispeersdidnot).Withthishereceived"licensetokill".

InTRF-4 (RegionalFederalCourt–Region4), therapporteurof therepresentationagainstMoroforbreachoftelephoneconfidentialitycitedCarlSchmitt,theprinceoftheNazijurists,to justify that itwas an exceptional situation, thus denying effectiveness to constitutionalrightsandguaranteesoftheformerpresident.

Morohashadafavorablecoverageofthemassmedia,whichtransformedhim,inthepopularimaginary,intoaholywarriorfightingthedragonofevil.

Moro participated, consciously, deliberately, in the impeachment coup. The illegalbroadcastingof theaudioof the conversationbetween Lula andDilma,delivered toRedeGlobofordisseminationonthedayimmediatelypriortoLula'sinaugurationasminister,couldhavenootherpurpose.

Itisespeciallyimportanttoconcludethatwearenolongerinademocracy.Whatwehavewiththepreparationsandconsummationoftheimpeachmentisanewtypeofdictatorshipthat deceptively preserves the classical political and juridical institutions of a liberal anddemocratic state, but empties them of real democratic content (which the jurist andmagistrateRubensCasarahasbeencalledpost-democracy).Inthisnewtypeofdictatorship,whatusedtobedonebytheforceofarmsandviolencetodestroythepoliticaladversaryisnowdonebylawfare.Inthis,theJudiciary,whichintheolddictatorshipshadanaccessoryrole,asanadjunct,becomes theprotagonistof illegitimatestateviolence.Before itwasasoldierorapolicemanwho,inthedeadofnight,destroyedthecitizen.Nowit'ssentencingindaylight.

139

Thecapitainofbushandthecarrierpigeon156

MarcioTenenbaum*

Duringtheperiodcomprisedbetweenthesixteenthandnineteenthcenturies,slaveryinBrazilwasthemodeofproductioninsucheconomy.TheimmenseterritorydiscoveredbyPortugalwassuitableforalarge-scalecultivationofsugar,somethingsodesiredbytheEuropeans,whowere extracting it from the beet. So, the slave labor became de “solution” found by thePortuguesemetropolistohandlewithsuchproductionand,forsuchreason,theBrazilhadtransformedintooneofthemainimportersofAfricanSlaves.Ontheotherhand,itwassoeasytokeeptheslaveunderyokeoftheLordofthe“CasaGrande”,i.e.,abighousewheretheownerof the farm livedwithhis family, and in the “Engenho”, i.e., a sugar canemill,through constant physical punishment against thosewho insistedon running away to theQuilombos.157As,areactiontothedesperatestruggleforfreedom,itwasnecessarytocreateanapparatusofsearchandapprehensionofthesefugitiveslavesthatthreatenedthecurrentmodeofproduction.Then,itwascreatedthefigureofthe“capitãodomato”.

Inthesameway,fromtimetotime,thedifferentBrazilianelitescreatetheirowncaptainsofbush,mainlywhentheexcludedmajorityofthepeopleemitsomesignthattheyintendtoleavefromtheplacewhichtheyconsiderastheproperone.So,withthispurpose,ourelitesdonotusuallytendtodirtyitsownhands,gettingusedtooutsourcingorhiring“laranjas”158,nowadays,twotermsinvogue.

The end of slavery and the birth of the Republic, did not represent great symbol ofemancipationintheexcludedmasses’lives,notevenforthosewhoenteredintothenewlycreatedBrazilianArmyandalso,forthosewhoparticipateintheWarofParaguay.WhensuchindividualsreturnedtoBrazil,theyfoundanewtypeofhousinginthecapitaloftheEmpire:the“favela”,i.e.,theslum,alow-incomeurbanregioninBrazil.

TheHistoryof theBrazilianeconomicdevelopment isbasedonahistoryofexclusion. It isobserved,herein,thatjustasmallsectionoftheBrazilianpopulationisbeingcontemplatedwiththeconstructionofit:inthepast,wehadtheLordoftheMills;inthepresenttime–atleast,untilthearrivaltothepoweroftheWorkers’Partyin2003-thecaptainsofindustryandthebankingsystem.DuringtheOldRepublic,inordertoensuretheprivileges,thepolicewas in chargeof resolving the social conflicts,whichhasn’t changedmuchalong theNewState, givingpower to someone that becamea famousChief of thepolitical police of theFederalDistrict,directlyresponsibleforthedeportationofOlgaBenarioforNaziGermany,i.e., Filinto Muller. In addition, during the military dictatorship, such responsibility wastransferredtothearmedforces,inordertoensure,acountryforafew.Now,withtheFederalConstitutionof1988inforce,istheBrazilianelitesseekingintheJudiciaryBranch,thefigureoftheCaptainofbushfromthepast?IstheJudiciaryBranchacceptingthetasktobringbacktoitsplacetheslavewhodreamedoffreedom?IfLularepresentsthedreamofZumbi(i.e.,hewasoneofthefirstfightersagainstslaveryinBrazil),andmanyotherswhobelievedinthe

156CapitãodoMato, i.e., “captain of bush”was a servant of a Brazilian farm responsible for capturing thefugitiveslavesandbeingcommissionedtorecaptureotherrunawayslaves.*MarcioTenenbaum–Attorneyatlaw.157Quilombo-Itreferstothevillagethatshelteredslavesfleeingfromfarmsandfamilyhouses,usuallyoutsidetheurbanareas.158Laranja–“Orange”,i.e.,someonewhoparticipatesinanactofcontravention(voluntarilyorunknowingly)providingonlyhisorherdatatocoverupunlawfulpeopleorprocedures;

140

possibilityofemancipationoftheBrazilianpeople,theinconsistentconvictionreceivedbytheformerPresidentdoesnotrepresent,insomemeasure,thesignthatthiscountryisreservedforthefew?

TheCaptainsofBush,althoughoriginatedfromthelow-class,wereportrayedbyRugendas(i.e.,JohannMoritzRugendaswasafamousGermanpainter)mountedonfinehorses.Manymembers of the Brazilian Judicial System, on their outsourced function to ensure themaintenanceofthestatusquo,havetheirimagesrelatedtoprizes,tripsandhighsalaries.But,inthesamewaythatthecaptainsofthewoodsofthepast,theydonotmarrythedaughtersoftheLordsoftheMills.

TheinconsistentsentenceofJudgeSérgioMoro,whoconvictedtheformerPresidentLulato9yearsand6monthsinprison,isnothingmore,thananewattemptofourelitetoputonhalterinthosewhoforsomemomentbelievedthattheBraziliancapitalismshouldincludemore than their historical background of 30%. In this sense, the sentence, is not onlycondemningtheindividualoftheformerPresident,butequally, italsocondemnsaprojectcommittedtoegalitariangoalsand,alsowithatransferofincomethatallowssocialmobilityandprofessionalgrowth.

Carrier pigeons are trained to carry and take messages. Through a slow and exhaustingtraining,apigeonwilllearnhowtoflybacktoitshomewheretheownercouldreadtheirmail.This is the guarantee, that themessagewas delivered. If, the Brazilian judicial system, isconvictingwithout evidence the former President Lula, intends to eliminate the country’smostpopularpolitical leader,actingherein,as thecaptainofbush.They just forget thatapoliticalleaderlikeLulawillneverreturntoplacewhereheleft.Afterall,hewouldnotbewhoheis,ifhehadavocationforcarrierpigeon.

141

TheconvictionofLulaandthenegativeargumentationintheconstitutionalstate

MargaridaLacombeCamargo*JoséRibasVieira**

TheconvictionoftheformerpresidentLuizInácioLuladaSilvaappealsmarkedlytoanarrativecontextthatextrapolatesthelimitsoftheactualcase.InanarticlepublishedonJota,inMarch2016,underthetitle“AestratégiainstitucionaldojuizSergioFernandoMorodescritaporelemesmo”159 (“The institutional strategyof the judgeSergioFernandoMoroasdescribedbyhimself”),weshowedthatthe judgewhoauthoredtheconvictionof theformerpresidentLula,inhisacademicpapershasalwayssustainedtheprevalenceoftheJudiciaryagainsttheotherpowersoftherepublic,undertheequationthat“thebiggerthedelegitimationofthepoliticalsystem,thebiggerthelegitimationofthemagistrature”.And,inthebestschmittianstateof exception style, inwhichdecisionism160 prevails, he appeals directly to thepublicopiniontolegitimizehisactions.Thiscanalsobenoticednow,intheconvictionoftheformerpresidentLula,inwhichwefindaspeechthatisprimordiallyorientedtowardsthepublic,andwhosepersuasiveforcefallsovertheconstructionofacriminalnarrativethatgoesbeyondthelimitsofthecase.Therefore,thedecisionunderconsiderationcanonlybeunderstoodinthecontextoftheparliamentarycoupof17April2016,whenthegovernmentsupportersintheNational Congress turned against the elected president Dilma Rousseff, accepting therequestforherremoval,whichwascompletedon31Augustofthesameyear.161

ElioGasparidescribesthecoupinanutshell(translatedfromPortuguese):“ThefirstideawastoelectAécioNeves.Itfellshortbythreemillionvotes(3%).Thencamethesecondchance,whichwastooverthrowDilmaRousseff.Itworked,andMichelTemerwenttothePlanaltowithaplatformthatwastheoppositeoftheonesustainedbyDilma’scampaign,butwithanalmostidenticalgroupofsupportersintheparliament.”162

Theparliamentarycoup,whichisthusmergedwiththeImpeachment,hasonlybeenpossiblebecauseitreliedonastrongcampaignagainstthegovernment,promotedbythemanipulativepress.ThemainstreammediatookadvantageoftheCarWashinvestigationresultstoinstigatea war between the public opinion and corruption, weakening the current institutions. Inmomentssuchasthis,thecredibilityofthepowersthataresupportedbypopularsovereigntytakes the biggest hit, especially when it happens under the approval of the Judiciary.Democracyisthusdamaged.

When the combat against corruption,which lies in the field of crime, is carried outwithpoliticalends,thepoliticalandjuridicalspheresgetconfused.ThisiswhatwasseenrecentlyinBrazil,withtheImpeachmentofpresidentDilma,whichcountedonthecomplianceoftheJudiciaryPower.TheSupremoTribunalFederal(theSupremeFederalCourtofBrazil)notonlyomitteditselfinregardstotheImpeachmentbutalsostartedtosanctioneveryunorthodoxinitiativetakenbythejudgeresponsiblefortheOperationCarWash,whichhelpedtocreate

*ProfessorofLawatUFRJ**ProfessorofLawatUFRJ159https://jota.info/artigos/estrategia-institucional-juiz-sergio-moro-descrita-por-ele-mesmo-28032016160AboutdecisionismintheStateofException,seeRonaldoPortoMacedo–CarlSchmitteaFundamentaçãodoDireito.SãoPaulo:Saraiva,2.ed.,2011,especiallytheitem4.1.161About theparliamentarycoup, see thebookwrittenbyWanderleyGuilhermedosSantos,Ademocraciaimpedida:oBrasildoséculoXXI(RiodeJaneiro:FGV,2017),especiallypages25to31.162OGlobonewspaper,9July2017.

142

the“bodyofwork”thatwasnecessarytothedeflagrationofthewholeprocess.Thiswasatypically corporatist attitude from the Judiciary, which also counted on the expressivecontributionoftheFederalCourtforthe4ªregionand,byenteringthefieldofpolitics,servedalso as a way to confer legitimacy to what was not legitimate. All of this to ensure thesubstitution of the president and dispel from the political landscape the Partido dosTrabalhadores(Workers’Party)anditsmainleader,theformerpresidentLula.

It was a traumatic process for the Brazilian people. Not only because the economy andcredibility of the country were extremely affected, but also because the adoption of theausteritymeasuresthatfollowedtheprocessledtothesetbackofthesocialrightspreviouslyachieved,inthebestneoliberalstyle.Butthesewerenotthelimitsofthenegativeeffects.Thesuccessofthecoupdependedontheadnauseumderogatoryportrayalofourinstitutionspromoted by the mainstream media. Day and night, night and day, political parties,parliamentariansandmembersoftheGovernmentweretargetedbythepress,andpoliticswasdiscredited.Evenifthroughaselectiveprocess,aimedtoaffectsomepartiesandprotectothers, the party politics was fatally wounded, prompting the search for alternativeframeworksintheprivatesector,whereitisbelievedthattheheraldsoftheentrepreneurialmoralitycanbefound.

Moreover, sectarianism took over the society, reaching the families and personalrelationships.Thehatredpreviously inhibitedbysocialnormsfoundafertilegroundinthesocialmedia, since in the isolation of the virtual environment people feel encouraged tomanifest radical positions, not rarely in an offensive and discriminatorymanner, that thephysicalpresencerepresses.Theseareperfidious repercussions that thesupportersof thecoup might not have imagined, since it seemed possible for everything to be peacefullyresolvedthroughtheImpeachment.

Ithappensthatthecoupwasnoteffectivewhenitcametotheresults intended,sincetheneoliberalreformsitsoughttoimplementdidnotreachthepreviouslyenvisionedsuccess.TheTemergovernmentwasn’table to form frameworks for itsadministration. Itwasalsotargetofcorruptionscandalsandlostpopularity.The“market”abandonedTemer,accordingtothesameElioGaspari;andnowthe2018generalelectionsapproach,withPT(Workers’Party)appearingasastrongcandidatetothePresidency.Inthepathwayofthecoup,whichdidn’tachieveitstotalfulfillment,theconvictionofLuizInácioLuladaSilvamightverypossiblysurfaceinaprovidentialmomenttopreventtheleftfromgettingbacktopower.Inthesamemanner that Dilma was removed from the presidency by the “body of work”, Lula wasconvictedbythe“contextofendemiccorruption”whichsurroundsus.JustasDilmahadthe“pedaladasfiscais”andthebudgetarydecreesaspretextforherremovalfromthepresidency,Lulahadtheghost“property”ofatriplexapartmentinthecityofGuarujá(SP)asjustificationforhisconvictionforcrimesofcorruptionandmoneylaundering.

AsitistypicalofaStateofExceptioncontext,inwhichtheinstitutionsfindthemselvesbrokenandrulersspeakdirectlytothepeopleinsearchforsupport,thejudgeSérgioMoro, inhisdecision,speciallyaddressesthesociety.Heconstructsanarrativethatmeetseverythingthesocietywantstohear,whichisalsoaneasyspeech:thefightingofcorruption.Agoodpartofthe238pagesisfilledwithjustificationsaboutthemeasuresofexceptiontakenduringthewholeprocessof incriminationof the formerpresidentLula,underthe logic that theendsjustify themeans, and alwayswith the backing of the Judiciary power.Whatwemay call

143

“lawfare”,i.e.thepolitizationofthelawfortheunlimiteduseofpowerandthelawservesasweaponagainstthelawitself;orthelawfightsthelawitself.163

Inordertoachievethisend,rhetoriciswidelyusedbythejudge.Butinabadsense,becauseitdoesnotrestrictitselftothelimitsoftheprocess.Heconstructsanargumentativelinethatoverflows the concrete case, in search of support from the public. He goes beyond theconfirmation of the passive corruption and money laundering crimes, in relation to thesupposedpropertyoftheapartmentthatwasallegedlyreceivedasabribe.Thus,hisargumentissustainedbyacriminalcontextthathe(thejudge)constructs.

Iplaceontheaccountofbaduseofjudicialrhetoric164everystrategyofargumentationandof convincing that surpasses the limits of objective substantiation of the authorship andmaterialityofthecrimethatistheobjectofthedenunciation,inastrategyofpureconvincingof thepublic ingeneral.Differently fromauthorsofpost-positivistmatrixwho invest inanargumentationthatrespectstheinstitutionallimitsoftheConstitutionalState,suchasAlexy,MacCormick,DworkinandAtienza,165whatisseeninthesentenceofthejudgeMoroisanargumentation that, in the line of the State of Exception, breaks the limits that areinstitutionally imposed, in this case remarkably by the rules of the penal procedure. Headdresses the societydirectly, appealing toanargumentation that ismerelypersuasive insearchofsupportforhisdeeds.Heusesfragmentsofotherlawsuitsandinquiriesinprogress,suchasisthecaseoftheremodelingoftheranchinAtibaia.SincetheproofsofpropertyoftheapartmentinGuarujáareweak,thejudgeSérgioMorogetshelpfromtheseothersources,goingbeyondthelimitsofthelawsuit,toconstructanexplanationthatisrobustenoughtoremedysuchfragility.Evennewspaperarticlesbecomesupportforhisprobativenarrative.

After concluding for the property of the apartment basedmainly on the testimonial of aconfessing defendant, the president of the contractor companyOAS,which as a judiciarycollaboratorwouldbenefitdirectlyfromtheresultsoftheinformationpresented(items643to 647 of the decision), the judge densifies the justification of his decisionwith what heexplains are the causesof the crime: theparticipationofOAS in thePetrobras corruptionschemeanditsrelationwiththePartidodosTrabalhadores,whichhethendescribesindetail.Butthejudgewentfurtherandpointedoutaseriesofotherpeopleinvolved,evenifoutofthescopeofthelawsuit,transcribingexcerptsfromtestimoniesthat,byforceofillations,endupmaking him incriminate the former president Lula (items 648 to 806 of the sentence)(translatedfromPortuguese):

801.Itseems,bytheway,alittleoddthat,infrontofthemagnitudeofthecriminalscheme,illustratedbythefactthatPetrobrasacknowledgedaroundsixbillionrealsinaccountinglossesfrom corruption in the balance of 2015, that the former president wouldn’t have anyknowledge, maximum because it, the criminal scheme, would also have involved the

163SeeinterviewgivenbyJohnComaroff,professoratHarvardandspecialistinthedelimitationofthecategory“lawfare".http://www.downloadyoutubeonline.com/video/skCRotOT1Lg164 I use here the term “rhetoric” as in “new rhetoric” by Chaim Perelman, who, in his theory, draws theattentiontothepersuasiveelementsofthejudicialsentences.165 Post-positivism assumes the juridical argumentation in a perspective of values, respecting the limitsinstitutionallyimposed.Alexydefendsthetheoryofthespecialcase,workingthepracticalreasoninthelimitsofjuridicaldogmaticsandofjudicialprecedents;Dworkin,withtheanalogyofthechainnovel,circumscribestheinterpretationandapplicationofthelawsintheprecedentsandintheprinciplesthatcharacterizetheLawasIntegrity;MacCormickrespectsthelimitsoflogicalanddeductivereasoningthatisparticulartotheLaw;andAtienzaenclosestheargumentationinthelimitsoftheConstitutionalState.

144

utilization of bribes in corruption agreements at Petrobras for the financing of electoralcampaigns,includingfortheWorkers’Partyandbywhichtheformerpresidentwaselectedandelectedhissuccessor.

802.Besides,itisremarkable[tonotice]theabsenceofanyjudgementofdisapprovalbytheformerPresident in relationto thepublicagents that,duringhisGovernment,wouldhaveparticipatedinthecriminalschemethatvictimizedPetrobras.

Wesee,therefore,thatthejudgehadtogofartoconvictLula.Buthisargumentissustainedmuchmorebytherhetoricforceofthenarrativethatheconstructsthanbytheprobativesetoffactsthatisnecessarytoconvictsomeone,muchlesssoifweconsiderthecrimesindicatedintheaccusationthatoriginatedthePenalActionn.5046512-94.2016.4.04.7000/PR,whichiscurrentlyinquestion.

Thesentenceissustainedmostlybyanargumentofpurelyrhetoricnature,becauseitgoesbeyondthelimitsofthecaseandseekstoobtainthesupportofthepublicexclusivelybytheforceofpersuasion,notoflegality.ItisanabusiveargumentationthatdoesnotbefitthelimitsimposedbytheConstitutionalState,166inwhichtheinstitutionsprevail,beingmoresuitedtothedynamicofaStateofException,inwhichdecisionismreigns.

166ManoelAtienza,inhislastworkFilosofíadelDerechoyTransformaciónSocial(Madrid:Trotta,2017)madeanassessmentofPhilosophyofLawarticulatingtheargumentativeperspectivewithconstitutionalismandthetheoriesofsocialtransformation.

145

ViolenceandspectacleinthedecisionagainstpresidentLula

MariaCristinaVidotteBlancoTarrega*SamiraAndraosMarquezinFonseca**

Introduction

Theconvictionofex-PresidentLuizInácioLuladaSilvabyafirstinstancejudgeinacriminalcasewithout the necessary, due and appropriate legal basis expressed in the text of thesentence,without crime, besides flagrant illegality is amanifestationof the deep state ofviolencefacedbyBrazil,inthecurrenttimes,withtheretractionofrightsandtheconsequentspectacularizationofpublicrecognition.Violencethatconfrontscitizens(firstlyLula,acitizenwithrightofaccesstojustice,andmanyotherBrazilians),againsttheBrazilianpeople,againsttheinstitutions,againsttheState,againsttheConstitutionoftheRepublic,againstdemocracy.

Thisisanalyzedhereinthetheoreticalperspectiveofthesocietyofthespectacle,originallyelaboratedbyGuyDebordandinthelaterideasofFranciscoBosco(2017),associatedwiththereflectionsonviolenceanditssourcesofpassion,broughtbytheBrazilianthinkerAdautoNovaes(2017)andotherscholarswhosecontributionscontributedtoitsdebate.

Thecontextandthedecision

There is in Brazil a violent process of democratic dismantling and consequentspectacularization of public life, carried out by themedia,market agents and institutionswhose duty is, paradoxically, to defend democratic institutions. Add to this the absoluteabsence of the debate about the responsibilities of political subjects, especially theresponsibilityoftheorgansofjurisdictionalperformanceandthedeparturefromtheethicsofobedience,apresuppositionofthefirstmeaningofdemocracy.

Thedemocraticdismantlingisexposeddailyinthemedia,whichbuildsandperpetuatesthespectacleandthatshields thepoliticalactors throughtheconstructionof idealcharacters,conforminganuncriticalpublicopinion.

Inthishistoricalprocess,markedbyactionsandantidemocratic judicialandadministrativeresponsescontextualizesthecondemnationofLula.

Thus,inalongandconfuseddecision,thejudgedisregardstheobjectivityofthedecisionandshifts theeyesof the court, the reader, the citizen, toother investigations, constructingaspectacularaccusatoryscenariotomakeadecisionwithoutevidence,withoutbasisoflaw.Thejudge,inthisaction,revealsaboveallthespectacularizationofpubliclifeandtheuseofjurisdictionasan instrumentof violenceagainst the jurisdiction,against theconstitutionalorder.

Theretractofrightsandthespectacle

The constitutionalist Dalmo de Abreu Dallari (2017) points out with great propriety theunconstitutionalityofthedecisionbyrelying,inhisarguments,ontheideaherepresentedofbeingviolentasviolatingtheConstitutionandcontrarytodemocracy.Theauthorwarnsthat

*FullProfessorattheFacultyofLawoftheFederalUniversityofGoiásandUniversityofRibeirãoPreto**Lawyer;MasterstudentinCollectiveLawandCitizenshipatUniversityofRibeirãoPreto;Post-GraduatedinCivilProceduralLawbytheUniversityofRibeirãoPreto;GraduatedinLawfromtheFederalUniversityofRiodeJaneiro

146

thedecisionhasanunnecessaryconstructionconsideringthat"theaccusationspecifiesthecrime committed by the accused." He adds that the judge goes around "citing facts anddevelopingargumentsthatdonotcontainanyevidenceofthepracticeofacrimethatwouldhavebeen committedby Lula."Andwithout anybasis for a legal reasoning comes to theconclusioncondemningtheaccused.Thebasisfortheconvictionwasnotlegalandasetofcircumstances inevitably leads to the conclusion that the motivation was political, whichconstitutesaclearunconstitutionality.

"Thisviolence,whichisextremelyclearinthetextofthedecision,fromtheoutsetthoughtspectacularlytoasocietyofspectacles,leadstoreflectionontheroleoflawandinstitutionsintheconstructionofeverydayviolence,andontheparticipationofindividualswhorecognizethemselvesandarerecognizedintheseinstitutions,andoftheirpassionsinpropellingastateofwar.

Theretractionofcitizens'rightsinthefaceofpoliticaladversities,whichexemplarilypresentsitself in Lula's condemnation, amplifies the potential for spectacular recognition inintersubjective,institutional,andsocialrelations.

Francisco Bosco (2017), in the work "Violence and society of spectacle" affirms that thespectacle is an instance of the social recognition directly associated to the smaller legalrecognitionofthecitizens.Accordingtotheauthor(2017,p.18)"Theweakeningofthepublicspiritmeanstheweakeningoftheinstanceoflegalrecognition(sinceitisinpoliticsthattheprocessesofextensionofrightsaredefined)".

Thispromotestheriseofthespectacleasaninstanceofrecognition,obeyingaprivatelogic.Themediaadvances,therefore,andtheconcernofthejudgebodywiththeconstructionofaspectacularscenario, in thecondemnatorydecision for theLulacase,areevidencesof thefragilityofthepublicspiritpresentthereandofthenecessityofthatbodytoobtainbyothermeansyourownrecognition.

Thefragilityofthepublicspiritisthefragilityofapublicethicandoftheresponsibilitiesofthepolitical subjects that are shaping the institutions. Democracy presupposes politicalresponsibilities.Theseresponsibilitiesareshapedbyresponsibleobediencetoethicsandlawin the public space it occupies. The political subject responds in his intersubjective andinstitutionalmediations."Toholdthepoliticalsubjectaccountableistoremindhimthathecanneverbecompletelyexemptfromthesysteminwhichheparticipatesandfromthesocialandeconomicviolencethatthissystemproduces."(GROS,2017,p.23)Responsibilitiesmustoccupyanimportantspaceindemocracy,onpainofdemocracyitselfsuccumbing.Thisiswhathappens incontemporaryBrazil,after thedepositionof the legitimatelyelectedPresident,DilmaRousseff-thedemocraticcollapse.

AdautoNovaes,inhisbook"PassionateSourcesofViolence",(2017)selectsasetofessaysbymeansofwhichheseekstoanswer"Whatistheroleofpassionateviolenceinthedestinyofmankind",rememberingthatviolenceisapassionateforce.AndtheauthorleadsthoughttoreflectwithLeopoldoandSilvathatviolenceispartofthehuman,asadialecticofcreationand destruction, present in social relations,who try to hide it and in politics that tries torationalizeit.

WhatweseeinthefieldofsocialrelationsinBrazil,especiallyinthereceptionandexpositionoftheincriminatingprocessandthedecisionhandeddownagainstthepolitical leaderLuizInácioLuladaSilva,whethermediaticorjuridical,istheattempttoconcealandrationalizethe

147

Destructive violence of Brazilian democracy instrumented by the passionate force of thehuman.Humanbehindandinthenameofinstitutions.

ThereisnodenyinghumanpassionintheBrazilianscenarioofestablishingviolenceagainstBraziliandemocracyinthelasttwoyears.Andinhimthehatredandimpetusofdestructionthatdrivesthemanbehindtheinstitutions,notablypolitical.Novaes(2017,p.10)citesFreudand Einstein's dialogue in "WhyWar" and the consensus among authors thatman carrieswithinhimselfaninstinctofhatredanddestructionthatmobilizeshim.AndwithAlain(2017,p.12)hestatesthatanypassionjustifiesitself.Thatthetruecauseofhatredishate,whichgrows in themovement itself.Thishatredand impetusofdestruction is identifiable in thelegalcontextsthatsupportthescenarioofthedeconstructionofdemocracyinBrazil.

TheincessantquesttoreachthepoliticalleaderLulaisdrivenbyimpulsesofhatredandneedsrecognition of objective existence of certain social actors that interactwith him in publicspace,ininstitutionalspaces.

Boscorecallsthattherealityofhumanexistenceisintersubjective.Humanpassionsarethere.There is no autonomous reality. "To be humanly real, to be a constitutive part of humanreality,tobehumanassuch,theindividualmustberecognizedbyothers"(BOSCO,2017,p.14). Lack of recognition threatens the feeling of self, the security of one's own objectiveexistence.Thestruggleforrecognitionpresupposesthedestructionoftheother,notbyhisdeathbutbyhisdialecticalsuppression.Inthisrelationshipbetweensubjects,inthesearchforrecognition,thereisevidenceofanintrinsicneedtosuppressthepoliticianLula.Boscostatesthat"therelationofrecognitionisconstitutivelyastruggleandpotentiallyviolent"inwhichtheonewhoseeksrecognitionreactsinsuchawayasto"actuallysuppresstheotherthatisthesourceofhisanguishofobjectiveinexistence."(BOSCO,2017,p.14).).

Inthisspectacularsocietytheneedtodestroytheotherforrecognitionitselfispresent.ThisiswhathappenswithLula.

Finalconsiderations

ThecondemnatorydecisionagainstLuizInácioLuladaSilva,inadditiontothelegalaspectsoftheunlawfulnessimposedbythenon-substantiationofthepracticeofcrime,forthemanyreasons already pointed out by so many jurists, of the unconstitutionality shown byconsecrated constitutionalists and that we are not allowed to reproduce in that space,Concerns.

Thefirstoftheseishowmuchthisexemplarydecisionindicatesthebroaderandmorepresentdayinstallationofasocietyofspectacle,presupposingtheretractionoflegalrecognitionsandtherefore a loosening of rights in the contemporary state. We can conclude with thetheoretical reflectionpresentedhere that the advanceof themediatic scenarios,which isconstructedinthedecisionwiththevariousnarrativesnotrelatedtotheallegedcrimethatisbeingjudged,andwhichisalsoconstructedinmanyothersituationstojustifyquestionsoflawareDirectlylinkedtothedenialofadequatelegalspacesandtothesuccumbingtotheruleoflaw.

The second basic concern is that this spectacular society imposes itself through violence.Violence against citizens, against the people, against democratic institutions, against theFederalConstitutionandagainstdemocracy.

Violence that feeds thedestructionof theother, especiallyof theotherpoliticianwho, inmirroringofwhat is aroundhimself, is responsible for thehumananguishof somepublic

148

subjects who are faced with their own objective inexistence within the processes ofrecognition.

Andeverythingrespondstoaprivatelogicinwhichthepublicspaceissubjugated,inaprocessmobilizedby thehumanpassions,withoutdiscussionsonethicsandresponsibilitiesof thepoliticalsubject.

TheexitfromthisconditionofundemocraticdominationdependsonthecapacityofBraziliansocietytobecomeawareofthisprocessandtoreactagainstit.

.BOSCO,Francisco.Violênciaesociedadedoespetáculo.InNOVAES,Adauto.Mutações:Fontespassionaisdaviolência.Ebook.SãoPaulo,EdiçõesSESC,2017.DALLARI, Dalmo de Abreu. Condenação de Lula: sem fundamento legal. Jornal do Brasil. Disponível emhttp://www.jb.com.br/sociedade-aberta/noticias/2017/07/15/condenacao-de-lula-sem-fundamento-legal/.Acessoem19dejulhode2017.DEBORD,Guy.Lasociétéduspetacle.ParisGallimard,1988.GROS,Frédéric.Aéticadaobediência.inNOVAES,Adauto.Mutações:Fontespassionaisdaviolência.Ebook.SãoPaulo,EdiçõesSESC,2017.NOVAES,Adauto.Org.Mutações:Fontespassionaisdaviolência.Ebook.SãoPaulo,EdiçõesSESC,2017.________________Onzenotassobreasfontespassionaisdaviolência.NOVAES,Adauto.Org.Mutações:Fontespassionaisdaviolência.Ebook.SãoPaulo,EdiçõesSESC,2017.

149

Whoisabovethelaw?

MariaGorettiNagimeBarrosCosta*

Ileftmyhouseonemorningandranintoafriend.ShetoldmeformerPresidentLulahadbeenarrested,havingbeencaughtattheairporttryingtofleethecountry.Thestorywasplayingnonstoponthetelevisionshesaid,beforeaskingmehowIhadn’theard.“Thethief!Thiswillbetheendofhim.”

Arrivinghome,Isawithadresultedfromajudicialsubpoenaraidfilmedlivefromhelicoptersfollowing the car, seemingly designed to create the air of an arrest. I learned that forcedsummonswereusefulwhenwitnessesrefusetotestifyvoluntarily.Thishadnotbeenthecase.ItwasasubpoenaissuedwithoutthepriornotificationstipulatedinArticle260oftheCodeofCriminalProcedures.Lulawastheninterrogatedatanairport,alocationseparatefrompolicefacilities.

Lulahadbeencaughtbysurprise,buttheGloboNetworkhadn’t.Thelivehelicopterfootageof the police cars driving Lula to the airport, while interrupting regularly scheduledprogramming,seemedtobeasceneoutofaCriminalProcedureShow.

Thejudgewhosignedthesummons,SérgioMoro,routinelygivesinterviewsonthistelevisionnetwork. On one such prime time nationwide broadcast, he even requested the public’ssupportfortheinvestigation.Ajudgeaskingforpublicsupport?

JudgeMoroalsoreleasedtelephonewiretapsofLulatothenetwork,illegalsecretrecordingswithoutmentionofanycrime.They includedaconversationofMarisaLetícia, Lula’swife,talkingtotheirson.Agossipcolumnistmighthavecalledthisa“scoop,”butthestoryonlycametolightbecauseofjudicialpower.

Theargumentusedasjustification–asitwere–wastheveryconfessionoftheendoftheRuleofLaw.Hesaidthatthepresidingoperationshouldnotfollowtherules,becausethiswasaspecialsituation.MoroarguedthattheLavaJetoperation"bringsunprecedentedproblemsandrequiresunprecedentedsolutions."

Andthetelevisionnetwork–holderofoneofthebiggest,ifnotthebiggest,fortunesinthecountry–treatsMoroasitsrepresentative,ahero.Itproducesanarrativeinthissenseandinvestsinitheavilyinadailyefforttohypnotizeitsviewers.Thetargetaudience,whobuythisnarrative,arethedepoliticized.

Just as in the pre-Nazi era, under the false justification of fighting corruption, fascistexpressionsandmovementsarecomingoutofthesewer,beingencouragedandnaturalized.Stateagenciesinvolvedincriminalprosecutionhaveclearlybeeninfluencedbythiswaveoffascism.

JudgeSérgioMorowasnottreatedlikeaherobecausehewasajudge,i.e.,becausehewasimpartial, but precisely because he was partial, representing political opposition to thedefendant.Hewasaherofordisplayinghispartialityandopenlyignoringthelaw.

*MariaGorettiNagimeisalawyerpursuingaMaster’sDegreeinPoliticalSociologyattheUniversidadeEstadualdoNorteFluminenseDarcyRibeiro(UENF)andpostgraduateworkinHumanRightsandCriticalLawStudiesattheConselhoLatinoamericanodeCiênciasSociais(CLACSO).

150

Thecoversof twomagazinesbelongingtothenetwork’ssamemediagroupshowedMorofacingoffagainstLulainaboxingring.HisboxinguniformborethecolorsofthepoliticalpartythatopposedthatofLula.Astonishedbythenonchalantmannerthemagazinesdepictedthesituation,thepopulationwondered,“IfMoroisinthefight,thenwhoisthereferee?”

Like themagazines, the entire population knew thatMorowould find Lula guilty,with orwithoutacrime.

Research institutes, suchas theDatafolha, included JudgeMoro inpublicopinionsurveys,placinghimasapresidentialcandidatecompetingagainstLula.

Thisevidentlackofneutrality,however,wasnotrecognizedasaproblem,butratherbecameapointofpride:Morowastheembodimentoftherulingclassandatruesymbolofafascistmovement."Overridingthelaw"isasourceofprideformembersoftheexploitingclassaswell as thosewho repeat themaxims taught by this class throughmassmedia hypnosis.Consequently,itiscommontohear,"Iwanthimarrested,nomatterhoworwhy."

According to research institutes IBOPE and DATAFOLHA, at the end of his two terms asPresidentoftheRepublic,Lulahadanapprovalrateofover90%.Ifconvictedafteranappeal,hewouldbeineligibletorunonceagainforthepresidencyoftheRepublic.

Lula’sfundamentalrightsarenolongerbeingrespected.Thepoliticalgroupandinstitutesthathavestagedacoupd'étattodeposealegitimatelyelectedpresidentarethesameoneswhowanttowageLawfareinordertoavertLula'scandidacy.

Theirintentionswerebroughtintosharpfocusbythescandalouscoupgovernment’scutsinsocialprograms.Lulaismerelyasymbolofaprojectpromotingsocialinclusion.Asanexampleofitsmanagement,theeliminationofchildslavelaborintheNortheastregionhasprovokedthewrathoftheclassthatbenefitedfromslavery.

Lula’ssentencingtookplacethedayafterpassageoflaborreforms.Onecannotignorethecorrelationofthefactsandtherevanchistcontentthatconnectsthetwoevents.

EveryoneknewthatMorowouldcondemnLula.ManyarbitraryfactswerecommittedtothedetrimentofLula,creatingnewsfortheGlobotelevisionnetworkforoverayear.Whenthesentencearrived,theweaknessoftheaccusationswasevenmorestriking.

TherulingsaidthatanapartmenthadbeensetasideforLulaandhisdeceasedwife.InBrazilthereisalotofbureaucracybeforeapropertycanbecomerecognized.Onemustpayhighnotaryfeesandwaitforproceduresfinallytoruntheircourseinordertoreceiveadeed,withthenecessaryregistrationofthepropertyintheGeneralPropertyRegistry(RegistroGeraldeImóveis).Muchlessthantheowner,Lulaneverevenhaddirectorindirectownershipoftheproperty.ThepropertywasalwaysinthenameofOAS.Noneoftheactsstatedinthesentenceas "proof of ownership" - visits to the property, willingness to acquire it, reservation ofpropertyforfutureacquisition-evenifproved,wouldserveasproofofpropertyifanycitizenwantedtoprovepossessionofanassetbeforeacourtoflaw.

Thatiswhythesentencebecamealegaljokethroughoutthecountry.Peopleaskedhowapropertycouldbetransferredbasedonlyonaverbalagreement,acquiredmerelybyvisitingitorplanningafuturepurchase,andifmoneycouldbelaunderedwithoutmoney,etc.

Inlawschoolweusedtohearjokesaboutvain,grandstandingjudges,judgeswhodecidefirstandonlysubsequentlyworktojustifytheirdecision.Atthetime,however,everythingseemedfarremovedfrommeoratleastwellhidden.Inevermetanylegaldecisionmakerwho,while

151

judgingacase,wouldthinkofgivinganinterviewandthankingthepopulationforitssupport,wouldleaktoatelevisionnetworksecretwiretaprecordings–whosecontentsrevealednocrime–ofaperson-of-interest’swifetalkingtoherson.Ihadofcourseseenillegalprocedures,butnowithasgottentothepointthatajudgedoesnotevenbothertoappearimpartial.Onthecontrary,heseemsproudofbeingasymbolofoppositiontoapersonhejudgesandtohavehismeasuresavoidprescribedrules,allwhileinthespotlightofanationwidestage;thishasbecometheutterdemoralizationofthejudiciary.

Today,thePSDB,apartyopposedtoLulaandprotagonistofthecoupd'étatof2016,postedthe results of an opinion poll on itswebsite. The questionwas "The conviction of formerPresident Lula by Judge SérgioMoro, in your opinion, shows: __” Respondents had threepossibleanswers."1-ThatthereisnooneabovethelawinBrazil","2-Thatjusticewasdone"and"3-Thatitwasapoliticaldecision."

Afteranhourontheair,over94%hadresponded"itwasapoliticaldecision."Intwohoursofairing,thewebsiteremovedthesurvey,postinginitsplacethemessage,"Sorry,butthepollisnolongeravailable."

Foraleaderhistoricallyrecognizedforimplementingsocialinclusionandanti-hungerprojectsto be convicted criminally without evidence in order to sideline him from presidentialelections has three visible consequences: increased public discredit of the Judiciary, theseparationoflaw,justice,andsocietyinBrazil,anddemonstratingthefrailtyofthedemocraticruleoflaw.

152

Lula’scase:Acountryonthefringesofthelaw

MaríaJoséFariñas*

ForthelastthreeyearsBrazilhasbeenundergoingasizableregressioninthesocial,economic,legal and political aspects of its public life. This regression has given rise to a dangeroussystemiccrisisforthecountryasawhole.ThelatestmanifestationofthiscrisiscanbefoundinthesentencehandeddownbySérgioMoroagainsttheexBrazilianPresidentLuiz InácioLuladaSilva(2003-2010),intheadjudicationofthecorruptioncaseagainsthimbroughtbyPublicMinistry.

Itistobenotedthatsaidsentencewashandeddownonedayafteradeep“reform”inthelabor lawswasapprovedbytheBrazilianSenate.Thisreformsignificantlycurtailsworkers'rights, coupled with the reversal of social welfare policies that had been enacted by thelegislatureduringLuladaSilva'spresidentialtenure.

Theformat,thecontentandthecontextofandsurroundingthiscase-see-inclundingthebiasmediacoverage-pointtoa“criminallawofauthor"whereinPresidentLulahimself,andnotthefacts,istheobjectofthejudgmentandofthesentence.Internationallyitisthoughtthatwearewitnessingan“adpersonam”judgment.ThisstateofaffairsisfurtherillustratedbythejudicialhandlingofthecasesforcorruptionbroughtagainstAécioNevesandPresidentMichelTemer,bothofwhomareunderheavySTF'sprotection.Inbothcasestheamountatissueismuchhigherandsociallevel.

TheproceedingagainLulaseemtoshowalackorsufficientevidenceforajudgmentagainsthim; it is to be noted that the Guarujá triplex apartment, upon which the judgment forcorruptionagainstLuladaSilvaisbased,doesnotappearamongtheconfiscatedproperties.The intent of this judgment is not to sentence Lula to a jail term; thiswouldmakehima“martyr” in the eyes of a largepercentageof Brazilian citizens, and in turnwould furtheraggravate the social fissures within Brazilian society. The intent is to keep him from acandidacyintheupcomingpresidentialelectionsof2018.

Havingsucceeded,ayearago,inimpeachingPresidentDilmaRousseff-andnotexactlyonthebasisofcorruption-it isnowtimetosentencePresidentLuladaSilvainordertodefinitelyobliteratehispoliticalcareerandhis favorableelectoraloptions.TheobviousaimofthesestepsistheweakeningofthePTandtheeasingofthepathoftheneoliberalstructuralreformsalreadyundertakenbytheTemergovernment.

Inmyopinion,Brazilissufferingfrom“constitutionalanomie”,astheArgentinian“jusfilosofo”CarlosSantiagoNinosetsforthinhisbookUnpaísalmargendelaley(ACountryontheFringesoftheLaw).Brazilis,becoming“acountryoutsideofthelaw”;acountrywhereacultureofnon-fullfilmentofpromises,andimpunityprevails.Acountrywhere,oncepowerandmoneyare achieved, anything goes; a country full of consent corrupt practices, administrativefavoritism,arbitrariness,elitism;ofpoliticaldefenseoftheoligarchy,ofcorporateandprivateinterests, and with serious dysfunctions in democratic political representation. All of theabovehavingbeenfurtheraggravatedbytherevelationofcorruptioninPetrobras.

* Catedrática de Filosofía y Sociología del Derecho Universidad Carlos III de Madrid (España)jose.farinas@uc3m.es

153

Undertheseconditions,theRuleofLawanddemocracybreakdown;whentheRuleofLawfails,politicalpowerdevolvesintoeitherauthoritarianismoranarchy,oraStateofException;whendemocracyfailswehavesocietalexclusion,socioeconomicinequalityandinjustice.

JudgeMoro'sjudgmentagainstLuladaSilva,aswellasrecentactionsundertakenbytheSTFandtheBrazilianParliamentgiverisetoconsiderableconcern.Ononehandweseeagenerallackofregardandobservanceoflegalrules,andweespeciallynotethefailureofcompliancewith constitutional norms-given their direct normative effectiveness in favor of private,concretesubjectsandinterests;ontheother,wehaveignoranceofthepurposeoflegalrules,whichshouldsafeguardthefulfillmentoftheexpectationsandrightsofthemajority.

The citizenry understands the above as lack of “constitutional loyalty” by bothpublic andprivatepowerstructures.Theyseethesepowerstructuresasusingtheconstitutionalrulesfora purpose different to the one for which they were created. To put it as Gabriel GarciaMarquezwouldsayit:“tocircumventthelawswithoutviolatingthem,or/andtoviolatethemwith impunity”. Ultimately the citizenry comes to distrust, and becomes frustrated anddisaffected by standards and institutions that should respect and protect the rights of allcitizens,thatshouldreinforcetheseveryrights,andthereforeshouldshieldbothcitizensandrightsagainstwhatLuigiFerrajollicalls“thewildpowers”,referringtoboththearcaneandthenewpowersstructuresarisingfromtheneo-conglobalization.

Inaddition,allisshroudedinpervertedcallsforpoliticalhonestyandforfightingcorruption,whilenotcaringforeliminatingtheircausesandsources,butonlyforjustifyinglookedforandper-ordainedresults.Thecausesareasfollows:theBrazilianpoliticalandeconomicsystemsare in ruins, theyareat theirnadir.Brazil isundergoinga seriousconstitutional crisis: thedemocratic institutionhavebeen co-optedby theprivate interests of large economic andfinancial power structures, popular will has been hijacked, and fundamental rights andfreedomsarebeingcurtailed.Atthesametimethemajorsocialproblemspersistsbecausetheyarecausedbyapoliticalandeconomicsystemsthatsystematicallyproduceallkindsofinequities.Theproblemisnotoneonlycausedbythelackofpersonalethics,theproblemlaysinasystemthatsupportscorruption.

Itisnotatallclearthatthegoalsareequality,societalinclusion,civilrights,decentwork,andthenationalinterest;nooneseemstowanttoseriouslyundertaketofightagainsteconomiccrimesnor against political corruption andextortion.Becauseof these,Brazil is unable toovercomeitssocialandpoliticalunderdevelopment.Brazilwillcontinuetooperateunderaconstitutionalsystemoflawsthatliveonpaperonly.AcountryandasystemthatallowstheuseoftheLuladaSilvaasthe“scapegoat”foracorrupt,plutocraticsystemthatisnowabletoactwithoutanycounterweights.Ithasfallenintothesnail’sstrategyandcorruptsarestillunpunished.BrazildoesnotconformtoaRuleofLawmodel,nortoademocraticstatethatupholdsitslawsanditsconstitution.Wemustrememberthatinstitutionsnotonlygainorloseprestigeaccordingtowhattheydo,butalsoforwhatisdonetothem.

154

ThealreadyforeseentrialofPresidentLula.

MartonioMont’AlverneBarretoLima*

Withoutanysurprisewhatsoever, thedecisionof JudgeSérgioMoro,Chiefof13thFederalCourtinParaná,camepubliconJuly12th,2017,aboutthecaseinvolvingformerpresidentLuizInácioLuladaSilva.Hewassentencedtonineandahalfyears,asidefromtheinterdictionforanypublicpositionorofficeduringtwicetheamountofthesentence,accordingtolineII,art.7ºoftheLawnumber9.613/1998:“objectively,formerpresidentLuizInácioLuladaSilvaandhis associate Paulo Tarciso Okamoto, were accused by the Federal Public Prosecution ofpracticingcorruptionandmoneylaunderingcrimesandinthesentencetheoriginornotofthe accusation will be examined, not more, not less”, paragraph 56 of the decision. Aneventualimpartialityofthejudge,constantlyallegedbythedefendant´sdefense,isdefinedas“merediversionism”,accordingtoparagraph57(alsoparagraphs65,138,148)ofthetextofthesentence.OnJuly16,theformerPresident´sdefenseputintothespotlightembargoclaimofferings.OnJuly19,the“order/decision”fromthesameJudgebecamepublicwiththeunfoundedembargos167.

Whyaffirmthatthissentencecausednosurprise?Arethereseverenegativeconsequencestowhat is still left of the Brazilian democracy with such statement? Could the sentence beexculpatory?Iwillsoonansweranddiscussthosequestions.

ThejudgeSérgioMorohadalreadywrittenin2004,whatwouldbeoneofthemainvalidationgroundsofhisdecisions,especiallywhenthepenaltyisnotfavorabletothe“powerful”oftheeconomyandpolitics.Inhiswriting“ConsiderationsaboutOperationmanipulite”168,SérgioMorodidnotleaveanydoubt:publicopinionshouldbeinvolvedindecisivemannerincasesofprominentpoliticalprocesses:

An independent Judiciary, from both external and internal pressures, is the necessarycondition to support lawsuitsof the kind.However, publicopinion, as the Italianexampleshows,isalsoessentialforthesuccessofthelawsuit.(...)Maybethemostimportantlessonofalltheepisodeisthatthelawsuitagainstcorruptionisonlyeffectivewiththesupportofdemocracy.Itisdemocracywhichdefinestheboundariesandthepossibilitiesofalawsuit.Ifdemocracycancountonpublicopinion,ithastheconditionstoadvanceandpresentreliableresults.Ifnot,therewillbenosuccess169.

*DoctorandPost-DoctorinLawbytheFrankfurtUniversity.FullProfessorattheUniversidadedeFortalezaandAttorneyfortheMunicipalityofFortaleza.167Thesentencehasgrammaticalandtypingmistakes:“Petrorás”(paragraph189,page34/218).Theknowledgeof theauthorof thesentence isnotdenied:he isaDoctor inLawby theUFPRandaprofessor in thesameuniversity.Hismistakesarenotworthymentioningjustbybeingmistakes,whichwecanallmake.Theyshouldbementioneddue to the rush forpublishing thedecision insuchacomplexcaseandofgreat impact in theBrazilianinstitutionallife,astheJudgehimselfrecognizes.(paragraphs960,961,pages218/218)168RevistadoCentrodeEstudosJudiciáriosdoConselhodaJustiçaFederal,nº26,dejulho/setembrode2004,pp.56-62.169Id. Ib., pp. 57/61. Original: “Um Judiciário independente, tanto de pressões externas como internas, écondição necessária para suportar ações judiciais da espécie. Entretanto, a opinião pública, como ilustra oexemploitaliano,étambémessencialparaoêxitodaaçãojudicial.(...)Talvezaliçãomaisimportantedetodooepisódiosejaadequeaaçãojudicialcontraacorrupçãosósemostraeficazcomoapoiodademocracia.Éestaquemdefineoslimiteseaspossibilidadesdaaçãojudicial.Enquantoelacontarcomoapoiodaopiniãopública,temcondiçõesdeavançareapresentarbonsresultados.Seissonãoocorrer,dificilmenteencontraráêxito”

155

Itdoesn´tseemproblematictoconcludewhatistheauthor´sperceptionaboutlawanditsenforcement: the strengthof the lawapplication,even inademocracy,dependsmoreonpublicopinionthanonthematurityof law institutions.Thatonewill“define”thisanotherone.IwillnothavethenecessaryspaceheretodebatethepartialityofmassmediainBrazilandthroughouttheworld,especiallyincurrenttimes.Equally,itshouldn´tbepresumedthatthe Judgeconducting theLava JatoOperationdoesnothavediscernmentaboutmeansofcommunicationandtheirlinkstoeconomicandpoliticalinterests,asidefromtheirownandeven their role inmodern society.Whatmust be registered is that SérgioMorodoes notmentioninasinglelineofhisreflectionthepossibilityofpartialityinmassmedia.

Inotherwords:justicewillonlybemadewithintenseandpermanentsupportofmassmedia.Since their support to legal actions contrary to their interests is noteven imaginable, it isreasonable to conceive that therewill be at least a convergence of interest between theJudiciary Branch, which performs the task of suing and judging, and the means ofcommunication,whichpermanentlyandintensivelyinformpublicopinionoftheselawsuitsandtrialsbythejudiciary.Alsoabsent inSérgioMoro´sreflectionisthecomparisonoftheItaliancase,heldasaparadigm,andtheeconomicconcentration inmassmediagroups inBrazil.InItaly,thereisdiversityofinformation;theBrazilianexampleispreciselytheopposite.

Sérgio Moro did not leave any doubt regarding the side he chose. In his search forconsolidatinghisexposedideain2004,heattendedseveraleventsandreceivedmanyawardssponsored by mass media openly unfavorable to the Partido dos Trabalhadores (PT, theWorker´sParty)andformerPresidentsLulaandDilmaRousseffaswellasawardsfromtheirmainpoliticaladversariessuchasthecurrentmayorofSãoPaulo,JoãoDoria;hedeterminedformerpresidentLula´sunnecessarycoerciveconductionand leakedphonetaps–toRedeGlobo–wherethethenPresident,DilmaRousseffwasheard,encroachingthecompetenceoftheSupremeFederalCourt;MorowasphotographedwiththemainoppositionleadershipofthePTandtheirgovernments.Thesearejustsomeofthefactswhichoccurredandthereareseveralof them;however, theyareprimarysources forresearcherswithamorespaceforwriting.Theyareallavailableinwebsitesthroughouttheworld170.

ThereisanobjectiveelementthatenablesjudgeMoro´spartiality.HehimselfapologizedtoMinisterTeoriZavaskiwhenthetelephoneconversationbetweenformerPresidentLulaandthethenPresidentDilmaRousseff3wasimproperlyreleasedtoRedeGlobo171.Eventhoughitisknownthattheapologyisnotconstitutedinanyproceduralfiguretodissipatepunishmentformagistratepractice infringement, thedecisionof theRegional FederalCourtof the4thRegioncausedsurprisedwhenMoro´sattitudewasappealedinthatCourt.TheReporting´swords are clear, dubiousness is not allowedwhen decided by the non-application of anypenaltyagainsSérgioMoro:

It is known that the lawsuits and criminal investigations from the so called Lava-JatoOperation,undertherepresentedmagistrate,areasingleandexceptionalcaseinBrazilianlaw.Therefore,with thegatheringof the telephonecommunication secrecyof thepeopleunder investigation in the operation, served to preserve it of successive and notorious

170The pleadings of former president Lula´s defense,with a description of facts and juridical argument areavailable:http://www.averdadedelula.com.br/pt171Inparagraph126,p.24/218,JudgeSérgioMororecognizesthathe“mayhavemadeamistake”regardinghisdecisionagainstthesecrecyoftherecordedtelephoneconversationsbetweenPresidentandFormerPresidentofRepublic.

156

obstructionattempts,accordingtothem,guaranteeingthefuturecriminallawapplication,itis correct to understand that the secrecy of the telephone communications (Constitution,art.5º, XII) can, in exceptional cases, be supplanted by the general interest in justiceadministrationandinthecriminallawapplication.(…)Soitseemsthatthemagistrate´sviewcannotbecensored(…)172.

UntilthepresentmomentJudgeMoro´sunderstandingwasnotreviewed,andwasconfirmedbytheFederalRegionalCourtofthe4thRegion.AmongstallfactsthereisalsothefailureoftheBraziliandemocracyand itsFederalConstitution.OurdemocracyhasalwayshadgreatdifficultiesindealingwithrepublicanisminthescopeoftheJudiciaryBranch.Thefeelingofcasts,filledwithspecialprivileges,andwithaclanpoliticviewhascharacterizedasocietyofslaverytradition,alwayswiththeneedofbeingserved.EvenconservativeviewsonBrazilcanseesuchreality3.

How canwe explain a judgewho feels free to commit illegal acts andwidely release thiswithout any repression? It is only the certainty of impunity regarding his actions and thecronyismofsuperiorinstancesfinallycapturedby“publicopinion”thatexplainthesurvivalofsuchseriousoutragestodemocracyandtheConstitution.

TheseprecedentshavemadepossiblethepredictionofthedecisionwhichcondemnedformerPresident Lula. It was an announced outcome. There is the sadistic celebration of thosecontrarytotheformerPresidentandwhodonotgettiredofsayingthat“Lulashouldbeinjail”withoutevenknowingwhatcrimehecommittedandwhicharetheevidencestothatcrime.Therefore,Iwillanswerthequestionaskedinthebeginningofthisarticle:anypersonknew,sincethebeginningofthisprocess,thatLulawouldbecondemned.Thisperceptionwaswidely spread in almost all means of communication, almost every day and even morefrequentlyafterthepresentationoffinalallegationsoftheprosecutionandthedefense.Itisnaturalthatinaninstitutionalenvironment,evenifregulatedbyaConstitutionandlawswhichpossesseffectivenessandvalidity,butwhichallowssomeonewhoenterslegalactiontobealready condemned, cannot be characterized as a democratic rule of law. The lack ofpossibilityofafairtrial,withoutpreviouscondemnation,madebyapartialjudge,asitisthiscasewhichisbeinganalyzed,onlyweakenstheConstitution,lawsanddemocracy.

Whatthesentenceagainsttheformerpresidentmeansisnottheproceduraldefeatwhichstrikeshim.Thesentenceisthefinaldefeatofanewconstitutionalorderthatwaswantedinour country. It was a modern, leading and interventionist Constitution that offered thenecessarymechanismsforBraziltobelessunequalandmoregenerouswithitspeople.AftertheConstitutionalAmendmentnº95/2016,whichsuspendedtheexistingConstitutionandwithLula´ssentence,thereisnotaConstitutionanymore,andwenolongerhaveademocracywithapartialJudiciaryPowerthatdoesnotcorrectitselfwhenneeded.

The reactionaries really do have something to celebrate. But those who fought for thisConstitution,whogavetheirlivesfordemocracy,fortheindependenceofpowers–especiallytheJudiciaryandPublicMinistry–nowmustwatchhowthepowersoftheStatecanbeusedto eliminate adversaries.Maybe themistake came from the progressive Brazilian sectors,

172P.A. CORTE ESPECIAL Nº 0003021-32.2016.4.04.8000/RS. https://gedpro2.trf4.jus.br/form imprimir.html.asp?codDocumento=8527569,acessoem30.09.2016,p.4-5of5.

157

blindedenoughtobelievethatinBrazil,thenational“elite”couldreachareasonablecivilizedlevelevenwithastrongmodelofmarketeconomy.

However,thosewhoperpetratedthe2016coupagainstDilmaRousseffaswellastheoneswhosupportedthem,willalsobedefeated.WhatisstrikingLulanowandtheprecedentthatwasopenedwith the removal of a President hits the target right next to thepeoplewhodefendedthecouponcetheRubiconRiverwascrossed.Iamnotnaïvetothinkthatthepowerofmeansofcommunication,inalliancewithajudiciarybureaucracyandwithaneconomicallydependentelitehavelearnedthatwhatstrikesLula,Dilmaandtheirpartyalsostrikesthem,aswecanseeinthecasesofSenatorAécioNevesandPresidentMichelTemer.Itwouldbelikedemandingfromthosesectorssomekindofcivilizationprocessthattheyareincapableofseeing.WedonothaveinBrazilanelitethatappreciatesandrespectshistoryanditspeople:it´stheexactopposite,theyhatethemestizopeoplethattheyhaveto livewith.WhatwehaveleftforBrazilisacountrywalkingwithitsownlegs,withitspeople.Withoutthis,wewillneverstopbeingacountryofthefuture.

158

TheconvictionofLula:apromisefulfilled

NasserAhmadAllan*

The conviction in the trial court of the former president Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva did notsurprise the legal community.Noteven themajorityof theBrazilianpopulation.Everyonesupposeditwouldhappen.

Notbecausetheinvestigationoftheprocesshaswipedoutanycontroversyovertheexistenceofcriminalpracticebytheformerpresident,butbecauseofwhatwaspreviouslyannounced:hisconviction.Regardlessofresponsibility,materialityandpre-trialmotions,weallknewthatthecriminal judgewouldsentence the formerpresident.Something thathepromisedandfulfilled.

TheresultofthesentencehadbeenannouncedevenbeforetheFederalProsecutionfiledthecriminalcomplaint.SufficeittorecallthatonMarch16,2016,thesameJudge,SérgioMoro,illegallyliftedsecrecyovertelephoneconversationsamongtheformerPresidentLulaandhisfamilymembers,oneofthembeingheldbetweenhimandthethenpresidentDilmaRousseff.

Thejudgetooktherisk.Hebrokethelaw.

Dayslater,intryingtoexplainhimselfformallytotheFederalSupremeCourt,heshowedthepartiality,whichhealwaysrejected,withwhichheinstructedandjudgedthecriminalcaseagainst former President Lula. The judge said in his written statement that despite “theintercepteddialogue[betweenDilmaandLula]beingrelevantinthelegal-criminalperspectivefortheformerpresidentLuizInácioLuladaSilva,sinceitindicatesthepurposeofinfluencing,intimidatingorobstructing justice,withregardtothehonorablePresidentoftheRepublic,there isno indicationof itbeingbasedon thispurpose” (emphasisadded).HeonceagainaccusedformerPresidentLulaofcriminalconductinassertingthatliftingthesecrecyofthetelephoneconversationrecordingswasintendedto“preventfurtherconductbytheformerpresidenttoobstructjustice,undulyinfluencemagistratesorintimidatethoseresponsiblefortheprocedures”173.

ItshouldbenotedthatthereisnothinginthecontentofthewidelypublicizedconversationsbytheBrazilianpressthatconfirmsthestatementsoftheaforementionedjudgeorindicateattempts by the former president to obstruct the ongoing investigation or to intimidatemembersofthepublicprosecutor'sofficeorthejudiciary.

Afterthepublicationof therecordingsobtainedthroughtheserecordings,wewitnessedasuccessionofeventsthatculminatedinthecoupd'état,withtheremoval,firsttemporaryandthendefinitive,ofanelectedpresident,withouthavingcommittedacrimeofresponsibility.

Theinitialactsofthisplotresultedinthepoliticaluseoftherecordingsbytheconservativepress,massifyingtheideathattheappointmentofformerPresidentLulatotheMinister-ChiefofStaffhadoccurredtogivehima“privilegedforum”174.PreliminaryInjunctionsgrantedby

*Post-DoctorateoftheGraduatePrograminLawoftheFederalUniversityofRiodeJaneiro-UFRJ.MasterandPh.D.inHumanRightsandDemocracyattheFederalUniversityofParaná.LawyerinCuritiba-Paraná(Brazil).173Excerptedfrom:SérgioMoroapologizesfor'polemics'onLulaandDilmarecordings.ElPaís.SãoPaulo,31.Mar. 2016. Available at: https://brasil.elpais.com/brasil/2016/03/30/politica/1459296826_155962.html,accessedon23.Jul.2017(inPortuguese)174T.N.-UnderBrazilianlaw,governmentministerscanbetriedonlyinthe“privilegedforum”oftheSupremeCourt.

159

first instancejudges, inaflagrantusurpationoftheSupremeCourt jurisdiction,deniedthevalidityoftheappointment,madebyaPresidentoftheRepublic,ofacitizenwho,atthattime,wasnotevenchargedwithacrime.

Shortly afterwards, the political representative of the opposition in the Supreme Courtgrantedan injunctionsuspending theappointmentof formerpresidentLulaasMinisterofState.

Itshouldnotbeforgottenthatinanydemocraticregime,wherethelawprevails,amemberofthejudiciaryisalsosubjecttothelawsandincommittingsomeillegalityshouldbepunishedadministrativelyandcriminallyforhisacts,whichsofardidnotoccur.Onthecontrary,theFederal Regional Court of the 4th Region, analyzing the judge's conduct, declared theexceptionalityofthecase.Forexceptionalsituations,exceptionaldecisionsarelegitimate,waspracticallywhat they said. Likewise, some of the defenders of the aforementioned judge,adoptingthelogicofMachiavellianutilitarianismthattheendsjustifythemeans,havearguedthattheillicitnesspracticedbyhimdecisivelycontributedtotheremovalofPresidentDilmaandshouldthereforebeforgiven.

In spite of vehemently denying any political-partisan purpose in the disclosure of therecordings,thisjudgewasquiteelucidativeintheorderhemade,assertingthat“thelifting[of the secrecy] will provide (...) healthy public scrutiny (...). Democracy in a free societyrequiresthatthegovernedknowwhatrulersdo,evenwhentheyseektoactprotectedbytheshadows”175(emphasized).ItseemscompellingtoconcludethatheaccreditedthenPresidentDilma and former President Lula the practice of actions under the protection of "theshadows", denoting his appreciation about the content of the conversations, heavilyoverreachingtheroleassignedtothemagistrate,actingasapoliticalactor.

ThedisclosureoftherecordingswiththeconversationsofformerPresidentLulawas,infact,anessentialpiecefortheconsolidationofthecoupin2016.Iamnotsureifatthattimethesaid judgewasawareof thedimensionofhis actions. Taking into considerationhispublicdeclarations and academic interventions, he does not appear to be someone with suchintelligenceandanalyticalcapacity.However,somethingseemsunquestionable:heintendedto prevent the obtainment of privileged forumby former President Lula,whichwould beachievedwiththeappointmentasMinisterofState.Heintendedtobethejudgeresponsibleforthe investigationand judgmentof thefuturecriminalchargesagainst formerPresidentLula.

Nevertheless,why?Whytakesuchadifficulttask?Theinglorioustaskofsentencingsomeoneadmiredbythemajorityofthecountry,althoughdispleasingcertainsegments,amongthemthe caste towhich the judgebelongs. Perhaps, for vanity, somewill say. Theanswer thatsoundsmostplausibletome,however,isthatheintendedtoguaranteehisconviction.Onecould not run the risk of transferring jurisdiction to the Federal Supreme Court and,consequently,totheAttorneyGeneral. ItwasnecessarythattheinvestigationremainedinCuritiba.Thatisexactlywhathappened.

ThedisclosureoftherecordingstookplaceonMarch16,2016.Almostsixmonthslater,onSeptember14,theFederalProsecutionfiledthefirstcomplaintagainsttheformerpresident.Inapressconferenceheldalmosttwoweeksbeforethemunicipalelections,includingapower

175Ibid.

160

pointexhibition, theprosecutors'accusationsthattheformerpresidentwastheheadofacriminal organization were presented. A fact, incidentally, that was not subject of anycomplaint,servingonlytotarnishhisimageandhonorandpubliclyattackingthereputationoftheformerpresident.

Justoveraweek later,onSeptember22,thearrestofGuidoMantega,theformerfinanceministerof theLulaandDilmagovernments,wasordered,whichwasnotcarriedoutonlybecausehehadhiswifehospitalizedforacancertreatment.However,onSeptember26,intheweek inwhich themunicipal electionswere tobeheld, at the request of the FederalProsecution,thejudgeorderedthearrestofformerministerAntonioPalocci.

BoththecomplaintagainstformerPresidentLulaandthedetentionoftwoofhisex-ministersjustbeforetheelectionshaveseverelydamagedtheimageoftheWorkers'Party,whichhassignificantlydamagedtheperformanceoftheircandidatesintheelectoralprocess.Itseemsobvious to conclude that, in relation to these facts, the planning of the actions of therepresentativesof thePublicProsecutor'sOfficeand the judgewas linked to theelectoralcalendar.Certainlynotbychance.

Idonotintendheretoaddressthearbitrarinesspracticedbythejudge,denouncedbythedefenseoftheformerpresident,duringtheproceduralinstruction.NorwillIstickmyselftothegroundsforit,adoptedinthesentencetoconvictformerPresidentLula.Inthisbook,therewill be other authors whowill analyze this with greater correctness and resourcefulness,dedicating themselves to the technical and juridical aspects of the case, such as theprescription of the alleged crimes practiced, the conviction based on some circumstantialevidencecollidingwiththerestoftheprobativeset,etc.

IwillrestrictmyselftotheattempttomakeexplicitthatformerPresidentLulahasalwaysbeenconvicted.Evenbeforethecomplaintwasfiled,hewasalreadyconvicted.SincethebeginningofOperation“Lava-jato”hehasbeen,andstill is, thecentral targetof theUnitofCuritiba(composedofmembersoftheFederalPolice,theAttorneyGeneral'sOfficeand,finally,the13thFederalCourtofCuritiba,whichisresponsibleforthecriminalcasesresultingfromtheoperation).Theinvestigation,thecharges,theinstructionofthecriminalcaseandfinally,thesentence,characterizeaprocessofpoliticalpersecution,withclearintentiontotarnishthepoliticalcapitaloftheformerPresidentLulaandhispoliticalpartyandinthelastresort,tomakeitimpossibleforhimtoapplyforanewpresidentialmandate,whichmayoccurifthejudgment is held in second instance, with the proviso that the trial should happen earlyenoughtopreventhimfromregisteringthecandidacy.

Whoeveritmatters,thatis,towhomthecondemnationofformerPresidentLulahasbeenpromised, andwhat other interests are hidden in these proceedings are issues that havearousedmuch controversy, but I think it would be difficult to face themwithoutmovingourselves on the sandy terrain of speculation. I believe, however, that the next acts willindicateiftherearemoreinvolvedinthisplot,ifthecalendaroftheFederalRegionalCourtofthe4thRegionwillalsobeconnecteddirectlytotheelectoral,oriftherearestilltracesoftheDemocraticStateofLawandtheguaranteesprovidedintheconstitutionaltextof1988.Thatisyettobeseen.

161

Usingandabusingthecompulsoryprocessofawitness

OtávioPintoeSilva*

Thepublicationof the judgmententeredby JudgeSérgioMoro in the trialof thecriminalprosecutionbroughtagainstformerPresidentLuizInácioLuladaSilvahasarousedcontroversyinthelegalcommunity,giventhegroundsthatwereusedtosupporttheconvictionofthedefendant for the crimes of graft and money laundering in the so-called “Car WashInvestigation.”

Inthispaper,Iintendtofocusmythoughtsonaspecificpoint:theviewsexposedinthesaidjudgmenton the instrumentof compulsoryprocessof awitness,which isprovided in theBrazilian legalsystemtorequireacitizentotestifybeforea judge,regardlessofhisorherwillingnesstodoso.

AstheBrazilianStateestablishedthemonopolyofcriminalprosecutionbyprovidingintheConstitutionthat“thereisnocrimeifthereisnopriorlawdefiningit,noranypunishmentifthereisnolegalimposition"(article5,paragraphXXXIX),ithastofulfillitsduty,throughtheJudicialBranch,ofassessingthedifferentsituationsoflifethatinvolvethepracticeofofensesand, when called upon, it should take only the appropriate actions (provided for in thelegislation)tosolvethelegalissuesbroughttoitsattention.

ThiscallsforadiscussionoftheprincipleofdueprocessoflawasapoliticalcommitmentoftheStatewithitscitizens,assetoutinarticle5,paragraphLIVoftheConstitution:“nooneshallbedeprivedoftheirlibertyorpropertywithoutthedueprocessoflaw.”

CarlosRobertoSiqueiraCastroexplainsthattheprincipleofthedueprocessoflawisoneofthe oldest doctrines of legal science that emerged in theMiddle Ages, traveled over thecenturies and secured its presence in contemporary law with renewed strength. In theconstitutional lawof theUnitedStatesofAmerica, thedueprocessof lawhasundergoneprofoundchangesinthecourtsystem,whicheventuallybroughtaboutsomenewfeaturestotherelationshipoftheStatewithindividualsandsociety,reflectingtheviewofhumanbeingsandtheworldaboutfreedomandsocialsolidarityinthe21stcentury.Thehistoryoftheso-calleddueprocessof lawshowshowithasshiftedfromamereproceduralguaranteetoasubstantiveprinciplethatlimitsthemeritsofstatedecisions176.

Theseviewsareoftheutmostimportance,astheprosecutionmustbeperfectlyinkeepingwiththeConstitution,which,afterall,governsthelawsthatwillbeenforcedintheresolutionoflegaldisputesandinthepunishmentofthosewhocommitoffenses.

Inthisregard,AdaPellegriniGrinoverputsit:ProcedurallawdoesnotstandapartfromtheConstitution:muchmorethanameretechnicalinstrument,thelegalprocedureisanethicalinstrumentforenforcinglegalguarantees.Theproceduralsystemsarebuiltonthepoliticaland social principles laid down in the Constitution,making up an undeniable parallel linebetweentheconstitutionalsystemandtheproceduraldiscipline.177

*ProfessoratFaculdadedeDireitodaUniversidadedeSãoPaulo—USPandmemberoftheStateCounciloftheBarAssociationofSãoPaulo176 CASTRO, Carlos Roberto Siqueira. O devido processo legal e os princípios da razoabilidade e daproporcionalidade.RiodeJaneiro:Forense,2010,p.5/26177 GRINOVER, Ada Pellegrini. Os Princípios Constitucionais e o Código de Processo Civil. São Paulo: JoséBushatskyEditor,1975,p.VII.

162

TheprincipleofthedueprocessoflawasincludedintheConstitutionhasthemeaningofafundamentalrightofanycitizen.Itisnotonlythedutyofajudgetoensurecompliancewiththe procedural rules of law: it is a guarantee provided to the citizens, along with otherfundamentalrightssetoutintheConstitution.

AsDalmodeAbreuDallariputsit,theConstitutionisthepeople’sdeclarationofpoliticalwill.Itsolemnlyexpresseswhatonewishesfortheorganizationandlifeinsociety.178

It can be said, then, quoting Norberto Bobbio, that the provisions set forth in article 5,paragraphLIVofourConstitutioncanbeclassifiedas“adamant,”that is,theydetermineacertainactionthatmustbetaken. Itdiffersfromthe“hypothetical” legalprovisions(thosedeterminingacertainactionthatshouldonlybetakenundersomespecificcircumstances).Itisadamantbecauseitprescribesanactiontobetakenevenifanyfailuretotakeitdoesnotentailanypunishment:abidingbythelegalruledoesnotdependonanycondition,atleastasfortheindividualtowhomthelegalruleisdirected(thejudge).179

ThisisoneofthedifficultiesofLaw:dealingwithvagueorindeterminateconceptswithaviewtoassigningsomeconcretenesstothem.AccordingtoKarlOlivecrona,thepurposeofalllegalprovisions,courtdecisions,contractsandotherlegalactsistodirecttheconductofhumanbeings.Therefore,thelegallanguageisameanstothisend;itisessentialforsocialcontroland communication. Words can be filled with emotion or volition, they can work assignificationorrealization;butthepurposeoflegallanguageisthatofgivingdirections.180

Initems67to77ofhisjudgement,JudgeSérgioMoropresentstheargumentstosupportthevalidityofthecompulsoryprocessauthorizedbyhimtotakeformerPresidentLulatocourt,although he acknowledges the “legal controversies” of adopting this compulsory processwithoutpreviouslysubpoenaingthecitizentobetakentocourt.

He argues that such procedure was necessary because some wire-tapped conversations“suggestedthattheformerPresidentandhisassociateswouldtakeactiontodisruptthecourtwork,whichcouldputpoliceagentsandeventhirdpartiesatrisk.”

Healsosaidthat,eventually,timetoldthatsuchmeasurewasrequired,astherewasariotatthe Congonhas airport, where the former President was taken by compulsory process totestify,“aspoliticalactivistswerecalledtotheairport toputpressureon lawenforcementagents.”

Itistruethatthedoctrinevalidatestheuseofcompulsoryprocesswiththelegalnatureofaprovisionalcustodialsentencethatcanberuledagainstthevictim(incrimesinvestigatedbycriminal prosecution), witnesses, and even against the person under investigation orprosecution.

It turns out that the justifications laid down in the judgment are not consistentwith theconstitutionalguaranteeofthedueprocessoflaw,astheJudgehimselfacknowledgesthatnosubpoenahasbeenservedandnotobeyedbytheformerPresident.

178DALLARI,DalmodeAbreu.ConstituiçãoeConstituinte.SãoPaulo:Saraiva,1982,p.21/30179BOBBIO,Norberto.Teoriadellanormagiuridica.Turim:G.GiappichelliEditore,1958,p.240/241180OLIVECRONA,Karl. Lenguaje jurídicoy realidad.BuenosAires:CentroEditordeAmerica Latina,1968,p.43/59

163

Inthisregard,Article8oftheInter-AmericanConventiononHumanRights(alsoknownasthePactofSan José,CostaRica)establishes,concerning theso-called judicialguarantees, that“everypersonhastherighttoahearing,withdueguaranteesandwithinareasonabletime,by a competent, independent, and impartial tribunal, previously establishedby law, in thesubstantiation of any accusation of a criminal nature made against him or for thedeterminationofhisrightsandobligationsofacivil,labor,fiscal,oranyothernature.”181

If itwasnecessarytoseekclarificationonfactualmattersthatwereunder investigationorsubstantiation,itwouldhavesufficedtojustserveasubpoenaupontheindividualwithasetdateandtimeforhimtoappearandtestifybeforethejudge.Thecompulsoryprocessofawitnesscanonlybeadoptedincasesofabsenceorunreasonablefailuretoobeyasubpoena,sinceitisoneofthejudicialguaranteesgivenbytheBrazilianStatetoitscitizens(andmadeexplicitbeforetheentireinternationalcommunity).

Tosumitup,thereasoninglaiddowninthejudgmentisnotconvincingwithregardstotheindispensabilityofthecompulsoryprocessofthewitness.Theactofforce,broadlycoveredbythemedia,wascompletelyunnecessaryandimproper.

Afterall, theallegednecessity toensuresecurity to lawenforcementagentscanneverbeplacedabovetheindividualguaranteesofthecitizenswithouthurtingtheprincipleofthedueprocessoflaw.

181DecreeNo.678,datedNovember6,1992.Availableathttp://www.planalto.gov.br/ccivil_03/decreto/1990-1994/anexo/and678-92.pdfretrievedonJuly20,2017).

164

JudiciaryactivisminLula'ssentence

PauloPetri*FabianoMachadodaRosa**

Inthe2015"Thetimehascome"article182publishedintheSpanishnewspaperElPaís,formerPresident FernandoHenrique Cardoso analyzed the Brazilian political scenario contendingthatinthecurrentstageofourhistorynoroomwasleftforthemilitarytoactaspromotersofchangesnecessaryforthecountry,aresponsibilitynowtransferredtothejusticesystem–or,inCardoso’swords,"theremustnotbeimpossibleobstaclesforthejudge,theprosecutors,thepoliceandthemedia".Morethantwoyearslater,theFHCinterviewremainscurrentandonemustwonder if the former president’s assertionwas a randomlymade statement orwhetheritispartofpoliticallyrelatedguidelinesobservedintoday’spolitical-judicialscenarioinBrazil.

FormerPresidentFernandoHenriqueCardosocertainlydidnotrefertothephenomenonofthejudicializationofpolitics,inwhichpoliticalagents,notablytheExecutiveandLegislativePowers, transfer their decision-making process to the Judiciary, giving it inappropriateprotagonism.FHC’sapparentsurrendercannotbeseenasrecognizingjudicialprotagonismintoday’sscenario,sinceitignoresthesocialtensionofthismovement.Infact,populardemandforstrengtheningofdemocraticinstitutionsandsocialrightsisstill inplace;however,suchdemandiscounterbalancedbycrisesintheseinstitutions,asaresultofimplementingright-suppressinglawsdevoidofpopularinterests,passedtopreservethepoliticalandeconomicpowers in force – a fact noticeable in the intensitywithwhich reforms are approved andprocessedintheNationalCongress.Depletedofpoliticalandsocialmeaning,suchinstitutionshaveincreasedexponentially,alongwiththepowerofthejudiciarybranchinsociety,andinaddition to the weakening legitimacy of representative spaces, such as in citizenshipachievement. This representativeness crisis is discussed indetail by formerMinister TarsoGenro’sessayTheFoundationsoftheRuleofLawandtheCrisisofRepresentation,publishedinBook1oftheNewParadigmsInstitute–INP.Thisishowthejudicializationofrights,politicsandsocialprocessescomesintoplay.Wearenotoverlookingthisphenomenon–quitetheopposite,sinceitbecomesstrongerwitheachdaythatgoesby;however,whatFHCadvocates,andwhatwearenowexperiencing,isanotherelementofthisphenomenon,thatis,judicialactivism.

Todiscuss thismodality,we refer to LuísRobertoBarroso’swords, as theMinisterof theFederalSupremeCourt–STF,inhisJudicialization,JudicialActivismandDemocraticLegalityarticle183:"judicialactivismisanattitude,itmeanschoosingaspecificandproactivewaytointerpret the Constitution, thus expanding itsmeaning and scope. It is usually installed insituationsofLegislativePowerretraction,ofacertaindisplacementbetweenthepoliticalclassandthecivilsociety,preventingsocialdemandstobeeffectivelymet".ItispreciselyinthisvacuumthatthejudicialapparatusoftheStateisputtopractice.Inthenameofanalleged

*LawyerandMasterinPoliticalSciencebyIUPERJ.**Lawyer.Translatedby:RaneSouza182http://brasil.elpais.com/brasil/2015/02/01/opinion/1422793512_769635.html.AccessedonFeb2,2015.183 http://www.oab.org.br/editora/revista/users/revista/1235066670174218181901.pdf. Accessed on Jul 18,2016.

165

fightagainstcorruption,rightsaresubverted,basicprinciplesoflawsuchasthepresumptionofinnocence,ampledefense;righttocontestanddueprocessoflawarerelegatedassecondrate,convenientlymanipulatedforinquisitorialflareorasaresultoftheyellow-greenvoicesindemonstrationsorofmovementsfinancedbylargebusinessentities.

However, the heralds ofmorality from Curitiba have given a new face to theworldwide-studiedphenomenonof judicial activism;as such judicialbureaucracyalwayswantsmore,usingthemediaspotlightaspartofitsstrategicarsenal.Fromtheoutsetofthisprocess,policeactionshavebeensetupwiththemainstreampress–whatwouldbethepointofnotexposingthe accused to public execration?All phases of the operations have been followed up byextensiveanddetailedcollectiveinterviews,inwhichithasbecomecommonforprosecutorsand chiefs of police to discuss "the crimes committed", solemnly ignoring the guidingprinciplesoflawdescribedabove,thusbehavingastrueinquisitorsbyignoringthefactthatitisthePublicProsecutor'sOfficeresponsibilitytoactascustus legis. It isnotuncommontonotice someof thesepublic agents rejoicing in the faceof intense street demonstrations,whichhavenowembarrassinglydisappeared, thus crossing the fine linebetween lawandpolitics.Therehasevenbeenajudgewho,afterapublicdemonstration,issuedastatementsaying he felt "touched by this support". Whenever requested to speak (with specialpredilection for international statements), this judge makes a series of considerations ofpoliticalnature,knowingthat(oratleastheshouldhaveknown)judgesdonotalwaysservethewillofthemajority,neithershouldtheybasevotesandpositionsonit,especiallybecausesuchprofessionalsmustruleincounter-majoritywayswhenevernecessary.Thetimewhen"ajudgeonlyspeaksontherecord"ismostdefinitelygone.

Therefore, seeing that judicial activism derives from a judge’s proactive position ininterpretingtheConstitution,weseethattherights inscribed inour1988Constitutionarebeingsuppressed,astheaforementionedfacts leadustobelievethat legaldevicesfromaConstitutiondifferentfromourownnowseemtobeinplaceinBrazil.

The criminal action conducted by 13th Court judge, in Curitiba, which resulted in theconvictionofformerPresidentLula,isawell-roundedsamplethatpedagogicallyexplainshowtoapplyjudicialactivism.Itisastonishingthatacriminalproceedinghasbeeninstitutedonlytojustifythepreliminarywilloftheaccuser, inwhichajudgeisdeliberatelyaddedtosuchpurpose. The process begins with a previously established result – and there goes thepresumptionofinnocence,withtheinterrogationportrayedbythepressasaconfrontationbetweendefendantandjudge.Wouldthisnotbetheinstructionstage?

Inareversalofprocedurallogic,thetechnicaldefenseisforcedtoproduceevidenceoftheaccused’sinnocence,regardedbythejudgeresponsibleforchairingtheprocessasanobstacletohispre-establisheddecision,frighteninglymadeclearinthesentence.Ampledefense,righttocontestanddue legalprocessarethereforereplacedbypermanentattemptstorestrictprofessionallegalpracticeinhearings,regularmotiondenialsforproductionofevidence,useofdifferentparametersintheanalysisoftestimonialevidence,relativizationofdocumentaryevidence,amongothermeasuresthatfavoracriminalprocedureofexception.

With the sentence, the only surprise is the tranquility with which the judge ignores theevidenceproducedintheprocess,listssubjectivitiesasamethodofanalysisandadoptsanembarrassingpostureofpersonaljustificationtoapplyhisdecision.FormerPresidentLulawillmeethimagainand,unfortunately,thesameprescriptionwillbeused.Nodifferentoutcomeis to be expected, however startling itmay seem (and is) for the agents of law and for a

166

democraticsociety.Itwillbeuptohigherauthoritiestore-establishthelaw–andwemustbevigilant.

167

Theprocess’unconstitutionalitycondemningLulaandBraziltoimprisonment

PedroPulzattoPeruzzo*TiagoResendeBotelho**

Condemningpopularleadersisn’tanewfeatureinthehistoryofhumankind.Judicialpartialityand injustice is more recurrent than one could imagine. After all, the occidental juridictraditionfindsintheLawthelegitimacyofstructuralformsofoppression,atbesttoofferafewcrumbstotheoppressed.

WealsoknowthatimagesofjudgesandprosecutorsaremoretiedtotheIustititasymbolicimage(theGodwithblinkeredeyes)thanwiththeGreekGodDiké(withopenedeyes).BesidesadmittingthatJustice ignoresjudgesandprosecutors livingfullofprivilegesandadditionalstipends,blindfoldpreventstheunderstandingthatliteratemenandwomenarecapableoftransfiguringthelawandpushinglivestoindignity.

Revisitingthepastisthemostviablewayforconcludingthatlegalinjusticesarefrequentlybeingpracticed.Denouncingthemisanethicalduty.Ifinthepastthestatewascapableofsentencing unjustly and illegally political leaders as Tiradentes, Olga Benário, Mandela eGandhi,why thepracticewouldchangecurrently?Whichare theguarantees thatpoliticalpersecutionsagainstpopularleadersarepastevents?

Under the rule of law, the Constitution should be the limit of state discretion and theguaranteethatnohumanbeingispersecutedorvictimofinjustice.Theconstitutionalnormmust ensure proper legal processes (5th article, LIV), ban proofs acquired through illegalmeans(5tharticle,LVI)andguaranteepresumptionofinnocence(5tharticle,LVII).However,thefragileBraziliandemocracyhavebeendespisedwiththeundue impeachmentoverthedemocraticallyelectedpresidentDilmaRousseff.Theprocesswasstartedbythetoday'sjailedbutonceHouseofRepresentative’sleaderEduardoCunhasince2015.Thefearthattheanti-democraticschemeisreverseddwellsinaNorthwestmanthatchallengeshisownlimitsand,for the third time, could be president of Brazil (again through legitimate and democraticelections).

However, there’s an issue potentially preventing the man to take office. The processesinvolving the greater political leader in Latin America are full of obscurities, trunkedinformation, mistakes, judicial abuses, legal thesis contrary to those common in theconsolidated jurisprudence, few compromisewith the crime’smateriality, lots of selectivespectacles by themeans of communication, and complicit with the coup organizers. This

*PhDandMasterinLawfromtheUniversityofSãoPaulo.CatholicPontificalUniversityprofessorandlawyer.E-mail:peruzzopp@hotmail.com**PhDCandidateinPublicLawintheUniversityofCoimbraandMasterinLawfromtheFederalUniversityofMato Grosso. Federal University of Dourados’ Metropolitan Area professor and lawyer. E-mail:tiagobotelho@ufgd.edu.br

168

processplacedonapedestalofheroescriminalsasEduardoCunha184andthe“JaponêsdaFederal”185(aFederalPoliceagent).

TheculpabilityofaPresidentishigh?Nodoubtitis!Butwhatisculpability?It’sadisapprovaljudgment.Inthisregard,itseemsinadmissibletoturnablindeyetotheresponsibilityofthoseonesactingatthepublicwhenascertainingacrime.Thestatehasthepower/dutyofapplyingthepenallawforthesimplyfactofexistingthepresumptionofethics.However,ifanystateagentimpliedinthelegalprocessmoveawayfromethicstheapplicationoflawisillegitimate.

In thespecific caseunderanalysis, judgeSérgioMoro’sexplicitpredilection fora rangeofcorrupt and conservative political figures is the main factor that turns his sentencesillegitimate.Furthermore,thepracticeofillegalities(spectacularizationoftheprocess,illegaltelephone trapping, and so on) in the course of the process and disregard of witness’statementsinfavorofLulabringtothejurisdiction(partofthestatepower)theintolerableaphorismthattheendjustifiesthemeans.

ThisadageisespeciallyintolerableinBrazil,sinceitcriminalizespovertyanddiversitysincethecolonialinvasorarrivaloverindigenous,poor,andminoritiesingeneral.Lulacertainlyisnot poor anymore. However, in the prisoner's box itwasn’t the presidential figure, but agovernpoliticsthatforthefirsttimeinhistorydecidedtotrytakecareofpovertystructurally.Onemoretimepovertywascriminalized,becausewecannotdisconsidertheJudiciaryBranch.Inotherwords,apenalprocessledbyanarbitrarymemberofthenationaleconomicelite,inajudiciaryunabletocontrolowngrievancesand,morethanthat,unabletochangethestatusquoofcolonialheritage,materializedinpublicfiguresasRenanCalheirosandAécioNeves.

Furtherconsiderationsabout theabusiveapplicationofpleabargaining isworth. InBrazil,decontextualizedandirresponsiblerepetitionsofalienjuridicinstitutionsisoneofthecauses-maybethemostimportantone-forthecurrentcolonialstatewelivein.Stimulatingpleabargaininginacountrythattranslatesintheprisonsystemasetofmediaevaldungeonsmightbeunderstoodasacrimeof illegalconstraintorthreat.Another issueworthmentioningisjudgeMorodeclarationofbeinganspecialistinManiPulite,butnotlettingcleartothepeoplethatconsequencesastheascensionoftheneoliberalandownerofamediaempireBerlusconiwaspossibleduetothisoperation.

It’sclear,thus,thatit’snotcorruption,drugtrafficking,orsmugglingofforeignercontainersdisturbing aspects in Brazil. Tax frauds and evasion doesn’t disturb if the purpose is“strengthening and generating employment”. Arm trafficking also doesn’t disturb if thepurposeisprotectingthelatifundio.Thingsthatreallybotherarekidssmugglingtobuytheshoesofthepropaganda,armedindigenouscommunitiesforself-defenseor,still,thepoormigrantelectedpresidentandworldreferenceforfightinghunger.

184TheroleofthecoupmedialeadmembersofUnionForcetoyell“CunhawarrioroftheBraziliannation”.Availableat:<http://mais.uol.com.br/view/jinmcnm98vmk/forca-sindical-homenageia-eduardo-cunha-em-sp-04020C183464E0A95326?types=A&>.AccessedinJune18th,2017.185Atthenewsavailablenext,“Japonêsdafederal”,oncecondemnedtouseelectronicankletforfacilitatingsmugglingand,wasbacktoescortingprisonersofLava Jato.Wouldthisbeawayofcreatingcharactersandsuperheros?Availableat:<http://g1.globo.com/pr/parana/noticia/2016/09/com-tornozeleira-japones-da-federal-volta-escoltar-presos-da-lava-jato.html>.AccessedinJune18th,2017.

169

A judgewilling to behave as a superhero has absolutely nothing to contributewith socialjustice,theRepublicangoal(3rdarticle,I,FederalConstitution),economicorder(article170,FederalConstitution), and socialorder (article196, FederalConstitution).Moro sentencedLulaasRafaelBragawassentencedbytheJudiciaryBranchforhavingasanitizingbottleatthedemonstrationsinJune2013.Zeronostrongproofsofcriminalmaterialityandauthorshipisthecommonelementamongthem.Thisisfoodforoutrage!

The sentence that condemns Lula toprison isonlyoneamongst lotsofothersunjust andillegitimate condemnations delivered by the Judiciary Branch. The poorest citizens in thiscountryfaceitmorefrequently.Althoughdeliveredindividually, itsdamagestodemocracyareirreversible,affectingbothwhocommemoratesthecondemnationandwhoadvocateinfavoroftheconvicted.Thedemocracywasweakenedbytheviolationofthelegalprocessthatreacheseachoneofus.Condemningwithnoproof,disconsideringwitness’statementandthehistoryofaman thathasbeenbuildingdemocracy is condemningBrazil and theBrazilianpeople.

Precedingarbitraryactstothesentencehavemoretosaythanthedecisoryact.Beforethesentencecouldbecomeofficial,Brazilandtheworldwereawareofitsresults,butnotbecauseproofs were robust and clear-sighted. On the oposite, since practices in the process byjudiciarymembersandthePublicMinistryannouncedshamelesslywhatwasabouttocome.Thehistory ismarkedbyadisrespectful legalprocess inthemomentLulawascondemnedbeforeanyofficialsentence.

ThePublicMinistrygrievanceatLava JatoOperation in the13thFederalCriminalCourt inCuritibaintentstosustainthattheex-presidentcommittedcorruption(articles317and333,CP)andmoneylaundering(1starticle,caput,V,Law9.613/98).

The judicial sentence that condemned Lula in July 12th, 2017,wasprecededby countlessviolationsthatareworthofanalysis.Oneofthemostsignificantwasthecoercitiveconductionfor testimony inMarch4th,2016.Lulaneverrefusedtogotoanaudience.Therefore, theconductionisanafrontwiththearticle260oftheCodeofCriminalProcedureand9tharticleof the American Convention on Human Rights contents. Moro’s excuse was based on“avoidingpublicorderdisruption”.Ajudgeshouldn’tcommunicatepreviouslythemainmeansofcommunicationaboutthisconductiftheaimwasavoidingpublicorderdisruption.

OtherblatantillegalitieswerephoneinterceptionsofLula,hisfamilymembers,andlawyers.Theseillegalitiesinjure5tharticleoftheFederalConstitutionand2nd,8th,and10thoftheLaw9.296/96.Amplifyingtheviolation,amongsttheinterceptionstherewasatalkbetweenLulaandthethenpresident-in-officeDilmaRousseff.Plus,inMarch16th,2016,suchaudioswerecastbythemediaunderthejustificationofapublicinterestact, includingthosewithcontent thathadno relationwith theprocess.At thegrievance23.457/PR inMarch22th,2016, by Dilma Rousseff at the Supreme Court, the minister Teori Zavascki claimed thatreasons of interpretation were “abusive” and the “conversation public disclosure wasunacceptable”. In March 29th, 2016, Moro recognized that caused “unnecessaryembarrassment”asaskedtheSupremeCourt“respectfulexcuses”.

Infaceofaclearpartialityandforeseenthecatastrophicjudicialdecision,Lulaandhisdefencepresented a suspicious exception case at the 4th Federal Regional Tribunal. The casewasrejectedduetotheunderstandingthatthehugemediacastandpublicopiniondidn’tbreachthejudicialimpartiality.Foramatterofjustice,thenumberofarguedandprovedfactsshouldgivetotheoffendertherightofthe impartialitybeyonddoubt.ConsideringLulaapolitical

170

leaderofextremepopularityinLatinAmericaand,atthesametime,withnaturalrejectionsofanex-president,itwouldbeanaturalandhumanactajudgedeclaringhimselfsuspect,aswell as the Supreme Court. Arguing suspicious is not begging remission, but striving forimpartiality,arightofanycitizenthatfeelsviolated.Lulaisnotbeyondthegoodorthebad,somagistrates.What’sthereasonforjudgeMorotoissuepersonallyLula’ssentenceunderstrongsignsof impartiality?Theanswervariestoeachinterpreter,butwhenpresentingit,rememberwearetalkingaboutadecisionwithLula’snamemorethanonehundredtimes.Accordingtosemiotics,wecouldhavelotofexplanations.

Inananticipatedresultofthesentence-peoplealreadyknewtheobviousresultbefore itcould be promulgated, the ex-presidentwas condemned for a nine years and sixmonthsreclusion(article317,PenalCode)withasurcharge(§1st)forimproperadvantagereceivedfromtheOASGroupasaresultofacontractwithCONEST/RNESTandmoneylaundering(1starticle,caputV,Law9613/1998)formaskinganddissimulatingentitlementandbenefitsinatriplexapartment.

Regardingcorruptionandmoney laundering, it’sworth registering that the lawappliedbyjudgeSérgioisMoroisinexcusablyoutdated.JudgeHerculesor,bettersaid,MorocondemnedLulabasedonarticlearticles317thofthePenalCodeand1st, lineV,oftheLaw9.613/98.However,since2012thelineVisrevoked.

It’s worth reviewing a little Penal Law’s basic theory. There are crimes that require theeffective injury to a protected public asset to conclude a process: these are the so-calleddamagecrimes(murder,forinstance).However,insomecasestheattemptorthreatofinjuryaresufficientelementstoconfigureacrime:thesearetheso-calledhazardouscrimes.Thiscategoryincludescrimesforaconcretethreat(inwhichthere’sathreatassessmentaftertheact,asmaltreatment)andcrimesforabstractthreat(inwhichthepresumedthreatisjudgedbythelegislator,regardlessiftheconductactuallycausedathreat,asdrinkingalcoholanddriving).

Likewise,therearematerial(thatdemandanaturalisticresult)andformal(thatexemptthisexternal result) crimes. The crime of passive corruption, for instance, is a formal crime,becauseischaracterizedastheactofaskingorreceivingtooneselfortheother,directlyorindirectly,whetherornotinapositionbutduetoit,anyadvantages.However,althoughtherearecrimesdischargingthedemandofanaturalistresultoraneffectiveinjurytotheprotectedpublicasset,thecentralissueisthatinanyofthesecrimecategoriestheproofofacriminalactisfundamental,becausewithoutitthere’snonexusofcausality.

For centuries now thepenal lawhasbeenbuilt and strengthenedas a techniqueof statepowerthatdemandsasafundamentalcriteriaassuranceandclarityofthecriminalact.Inthehypothesisofnoclarityregardingthecausalnexusorauthorship,theprincipleindúbioproreomustbeappliedtoabsolvetheconvict.

Regarding the apartment, the failed attempt in demonstrating Lula’s ownership puts intoquestionthetypificationofillegalenrichmentandmoneylaundering.First,it’simpossibletosentenceenrichmentifthere’snoproofoftitularityorpecuniarybenefitsderived.Second,anassetmustbedemonstratedas acquiredbybribesorother illegalmeans. In aworst-casescenario, if Lula had the asset - a never proved hypothesis - he never took hold of it.Furthermore,anexusofcausalitybetweenhispreviousconductandadvantageofitwasneverproved.

171

Ruthlessly and trying toweakenevenmore Lula’s advocacy,on July19th, 2017, abidingarequest of the Federal PublicMinistry,Moro determined the blocking of assets to repairinjuriestoPetrobras.Well,aprotectivemeasurewouldhavelegalsupportiftheFederalPublicMinistrywouldhaveprovenarealriskofLuladismantlinghispatrimony.Suchrisksareoutofquestion: the evidence is a political decision seeking to attackmorally andmaterially thevictim.Withtheblockingofvaluesarbitrarily,theconclusionisthatapreferenceforillegalitytriestoweakenLula’slegaladvocacy.

Celso Antônio Bandeira de Mello stated that: “Disrespect for fundamental rights in theJudiciaryhasbeenconstant.JudgeMorois,inmyopinion,verylittlequalifiedtobeinoffice.Themagistraturerequiresequilibrium,serenityand,aboveall,impartiality”186.Supportingthisperspective,DalmodeAbreuDallariindicatedthat“[...]asentencewithnolegalgroundturnspronounced the political motivation of this decision and judge Moro’s unconstitutionalbehavior, susceptible to punishment by major organizations in the Magistrature”187.Equilibrium, serenity, and impartiality are far from being characteristics of the processesinvolvingLula.Sincethere’snomaterialitytotheproclaimedthesisandbreakingwiththelegalprocess,Morogarbspleabargainingofhumanbeingsthat,afraidofpenaltiesfortheircrimes,dowhateverispossibletobeoutofjail.

Current timesmight be glorious for somepeople, but history always reserves amnesia tojudgesthatattheirtimedaretopersecutepeopleconstructinglegacytothehumankind.Thestruggleagainstabsoluteauthoritarianismofapartialjudicialstatewillnevercease.InpoetryManoeldeBarros’saying,“freedomfindsitsway”.

186 Brazil’s newspaper (Jornal do Brasil). Bandeira de Mello: Moro isn’t able to be a judge. Available at:<http://www.jb.com.br/pais/noticias/2017/07/19/bandeira-de-mello-moro-nao-tem-habilidade-para-exercer-a-funcao-de-juiz/>.AccessedinJuly18th,2017.187 DALLARI, Dalmo de Abreu. Lula and the sentence: no legal basis. Jornal do Brasil. Available at:<http://www.jb.com.br/sociedade-aberta/noticias/2017/07/15/condenacao-de-lula-sem-fundamento-legal/>.AccessedinJuly18th,2017.

172

JudgementagainstLulaimpingetheprincipleofequalityofarms.

RicardoFrancoPinto*

ThedestructionofbasicprinciplesofLaw,morespecificallyofCriminalLaw,ismucheasierthanone could imagine.Generally, a single judgement holds such a power of destructionwhetherithasthesupportofthemassmediaattheserviceofthedominantpower.

As in the case in question (Lula's conviction) andmany others known throughout history(Mandelacouldbetheclearestexample),itdoesnotmatter,strictlyspeaking,thecontentofthesentence,butthepersononewantstoconvict.

Thus,somejudgementsworkonlyasasortof"backdrop"forwhatisreallyatstake,whichisthepoliticaldecisionaboutthefateofacountryandtheimplementation,inthecaseofBrazil,ofultra-liberalmeasures,preciselywhatishappeningjustoverayear.

With the enactment of the 1988 Constitution, at least two of these basic principleswereguaranteed: the first, the separation of powers; the second, equality of arms in judicialproceedings.

The firstprinciple (separationofpowers),wouldbeguaranteedwith theestablishmentofthreeofthem(inapoliticalevolutionofBenjaminConstant’s ideas,whostatedthattherewere fivepowers188), asbefore itwasadopted in the first republic,with inspiration in theinterpretationofMontesquieu.

Inthebodyofthe1988Constitution,wefindthedivisionofpowers(executive,legislativeandjudicial)mainlyintwoofitsarticles:art.2,whichstatesthattheLegislative,theExecutiveandtheJudicial, independentandharmoniousamongthemselves,arethepowersoftheUnion;andart.60,§4,whichactsasaprotectiveruleof thepreviousarticle,establishingthatnoproposal of amendment shall be considered which is aimed at abolishing: (...) III - theseparationoftheGovernmentPowers”.

The importanceof this principle lies in thepolitical non-interference (or influence)of onepowerinanother,sinceitwouldjeopardizethedemocraticsystem.Weunderstandthatthisprinciplehasbeenandwillbeanalyzedelsewhere,andwewillnotreferdirectlytoitinthisarticle.

Thesecondprinciple,whichwewilltrytoanalyzewithalittlemoreaccuracy,istheprincipleofequalityofarms189.ItisalsorecognizedbytheBrazilianConstitutioninwhatisarguablythemostfamousarticleoftheConstitution(art.5),whichestablishesthatallpersonsareequalbefore the law, without any distinction whatsoever. Obviously, all those who work withCriminal Law know that this principle is not strictly obeyed (neither in Brazil nor in othercountries),butaminimumofrespecttoitshouldbeobserved,sothatatleasttherecouldbeareductionofproceduralinequalitybetweenprosecutionanddefense.However,whatdoesthismeanincriminalproceedings?Thattheweaponsinchargeoftheprosecution(usuallythePublicProsecutor'sOffice)areidenticaltothoseofthedefense.Inaddition,thiscompliance

*VisitingProfessorofUniversidadPablodeOlavide(Seville-Spain).LawyerattheInternationalCriminalCourt(The Hague - Netherlands). International PhD from Universidad de León (León - Spain), and specialist inInternationalLawandPolitics,intheareasofTerrorism,StateTerrorismandHumanRights.188 Constant stated the powers were the following: Real, Executive, Representative Durable (hereditaryassembly),RepresentativeofOpinion(electiveassembly)andJudiciary.189Alsocalled“parityofarms”.

173

with theequalityof arms is anobligationof all institutions,butmainlyof the judges, andespecially of the judge of the particular criminal case, since he/she is the first andmostimportantguarantorthatparitybenotonlyperfectlyestablishedbutalsomaintaineduntiltheendoftheprocedure.

Unfortunately,itwasnotwhatwasobservedneitherintheproceedingsnorinthejudgementagainstLula.Wecananalyzethreeexamplesofthecourseofthecriminalinvestigation:wefirsthadthefamousandchildlikepresentationofthepowerpointofthecomplaintagainstLula,wherethePublicProsecutoraccusedhimofbeingtheheadofacriminalorganization,callinghim“themaximumcommander”ofthecorruptionschemeinvestigatedintheDocketknownasLavaJato190.ThisisanillegalactionbecauseaProsecutordoesnothavetherighttoaddress a Brazilian citizen (or foreigner) without granting him or her any possibility ofdefendinghimselforherself.Thisisaclearbreachofthelegaldutyofalljudicialactors(judge,publicprosecutorand/orlawyers)topreserve,always,thedignityofthedefendant(inthiscase,ofapossiblefuturedefendant).Thisclearlyunbalancestheequalityofarms,sincetheaccusationusesavastmediaspacetoshedtheseaccusations,whichcausesthatthecriminalprocess transcends the limitsof the judiciaryandobtains thedesired impact in society. Inotherwords,aclearmediamanipulationofthecriminalprocess,sincethedefensedoesnothavethepossibilitytousethesameweapons,becausethemediaservilityisclearlyagainsttheinterestsofthedefendant.Inthiscase,againstLula.Whatmeasureshavebeentakenbythecourtjudge,responsibleforensuringtheequalityofarmsandtherightsofthedefendant?None.

ThesecondexampleisLula'sfamousforcefulcoercion.TheFederalPoliceagentstookhimtoone of the Police Stations without even being notified in advance to declare before theinvestigating judge.Oddlyenough,all thepressknewabout the forcefulcoercion,andyetanothershowwascreatedwiththesoleintentionofconductingasearchonhisproperty.Adeplorableillegalaction,nowcommittedbythejudgehimself,whohadthebasicobligationtobepartial.Atthispoint,itwasalreadyclearthatthejudgealsostandsasaprosecutor.

The third example is the leaking of recorded telephone conversations (authorized by thejudge)betweenLulaandhisfamily,andespeciallybetweenLulaandPresidentDilmaRousseff,laterdeclaredillegalbytheFederalSupremeCourt,onceoneofthepersonsrecordedwasthePresident of the Republic (in those cases, only the Supreme Court could rule about therecordings).Theviolationofarts.8and9ofAct9.296/1996shouldhavebeensufficienttoexcludetheinvestigatingjudgefromthecase,sincehemayhavecommittedcrimesinactingthisway,accordingtotheart.10ofthesamelegalprovision191.Fromthispointon,removing

190ThisoperationinvestigatescorruptionatPetrobras.(NT:Petrobrasisapublicly-heldcompanyoperatingonanintegratedbasisandspecializingintheoil,naturalgasandenergyindustry).191Act9.296/1996:(...)Art.8.Theinterceptionoftelephonecommunication,ofanynature,willoccurinseparatefiles,appendedtothepolice investigation or criminal proceedings, preserving the confidentiality of the respective investigations,recordingsandtranscriptions.Soleparagraph.Thejoinderonlycanbedoneimmediatelybeforethereportoftheauthority,inthecaseofapoliceinvestigation(CodeofCriminalProcedure,art.10,§1)orintheremittanceoftheprocesstothejudgeforthedecisionaccordingtheprovisionsofarts.407,502or538oftheCodeofCriminalProcedure.

174

theinvestigatingjudgefromtheprocedurewasabsolutelynecessary.Obviously,thatdidnothappen, and since then Brazilian society was well aware that Lula would be convicted,regardlessofanyproceduralissue.Thecuriousthingatthatmomentisthatboththeso-called“left-wing”or “right-wing” citizens (andeven the “center”)were sharing the same feelingaboutit.Moreover,everyonewasquiteright.TheopinionamongthosewhoworkdailywithCriminalLawwasnotdifferent:Itwasclearthattheprinciplesofcriminallawwerenotvalidforthis“special”criminalprocedure,thatexceptionalitythatwasalwaysstronglyopposedbyall thedemocrats ruled this process and finally that the final aimwas the conviction. Theobjectiveproceduralpersecution,dividedininvestigation,instructionandsentencehadbeenpolitically changed to public conviction, violation of procedural rights and confirmation ofconviction.Aswesay inSpain,a trueparipé192. Lula’sconvictionsentence (thoughpoor inlegalandargumentativeterms)wasonlyamatteroftime,butitwouldneverbeamatterofjustice.

In this book, many authors will analyze in an exhaustive way the sentence against Lula.Nevertheless,webelieve it is necessary todrawattention to an issue thatwould supporteverythingwehavearguedpreviously:thesentenceiscomposedof962paragraphs(dividedinto 238pages); out of these, only fivewerededicated to thedefense theses. Thewholesentence is clearly a self-defense of the judge, rather than an exhaustive analysis of thearguments and theses of prosecution and defense (in this instance the lack of analysis ofdefensetheses).Equalityofarmshereisonlyaconceptthathaslongbeendeprecatedinthisprocess.

Afterthesentence,Lula'slawyersfiledamotionforclarification,andthejudge(whointhecourse of the proceedings has always treated them without due respect and politeness)refusedtoadmitthattherewerecontradictionsorgapsinhisjudgement.Nothingnew,notsurprisingly. Then, he ordered the seizure of goods of Lula, in another decision not onlycontroversial, but also very absurd andwithout any legal support.Why dowe state this?Becauseinthedecisiononthemotionforclarification,thejudgeclearlyrecognizestherewasnoharmtoPetrobras,thusexpressing:

“ThiscourtneverstatedinthesentenceoranywherethatthevaluesobtainedbyConstrutoraOAS193inthecontractswithPetrobraswereusedtopaytheundueadvantagetotheformerPresident.Moreover, in the course of the proceedings, this Court, by denying unnecessaryexpertiserequiredbytheDefensetotracetheoriginoftheresources,hadalreadymadeitclearthattherewasnosuchcorrelation(items198-199).Neithercorruptionnormoneylaundering,

Art.9Arecordingthatisnotofinteresttotheevidencewillbedestroyedbyjudicialdecision,duringthepoliceinvestigation,thecriminalprocedureorevenafter,attherequestofthePublicProsecutororoftheinterestedparty.Soleparagraph.ThedestructionwillbeattendedbythePublicProsecutor'sOffice,withthegrantedpresenceoftheaccusedorhislegalrepresentative.Art.10. It isacrimeto intercepttelephone,computerorelectroniccommunications,orbreakthesecrecyofjustice,withoutjudicialauthorizationorforpurposesnotauthorizedbylaw.Penalty:imprisonment,fromtwotofouryears,andfine.192NT:theSpanishwordParipémeans“putonanact”.193NT:BraziliangroupOASS.A.providesheavyandcivilconstructionservices,includingengineering,planning,execution andmanagement services for the building, transportation, infrastructure, oil and gas, sanitation,concessionsandenergysectors

175

having corruption as a prior offense, require or would require that the amounts paid orconcealedcamespecificallyfromPetrobras'contracts”.

Curiously, if we quickly analyze paragraph 880 of the conviction, we find a very clearcontradiction:

“Eventhoughpartofthematerialbenefitsweresubsequentlymadeavailableduring2014,arisingfromcreditsoriginatedfromConstrutoraOAS’contracts,signedonDecember10,2009,consideringhereonlytheCONEST/RNEST jointventure’s194contracts,constituteanundueadvantagemadeavailableduetothepositionofafederalpublicagent,notonlyforthethenPresident,butalsofortheexecutivesofPetrobras”

Inaddition,inrelationtothisblatantcontradiction,wewouldask:“sowhathavewedecided?”

Thisisjustoneofthemanyreasoningsthatwecouldmaketoprovethattheprinciplesoflawtowhichwereferredatthebeginningwereandcontinuetobeclearlybroken.TheprincipleofequalityofarmsisbrokensothatLulacanbeconvictedandtheprincipleoftheseparationofpowersisbrokensothathecanbeprevented(throughacriminalconviction)fromdisputingthePresidencyoftheRepublicin2018,reestablishingdemocracyinthecountry.

Weknowthatopposingargumentswillberaisedinrelationtotheoneswehavejuststated,althoughwealsoknowthattheyarealwaysthesame,curiously:thatwecannotbeliteral,thatthisover-refinementisnotnecessary.Icouldevenagree,ifweweredealingwithpurelypoliticalissues.Butwearefacingajudicialprocess,andevenmore,acriminalone,whereallquestions must be exhaustively analyzed, never in an en passant way as the sentence“analyzed”(infiveparagraphs)thedefensetheses.Inaddition,ifweactdifferently,wewouldnotbeinaccordancewiththeLaw,muchlessseekingJustice.Whatwouldbesoughtwouldclearlybea“fitting”betweenasentenceofaccusatorythesesanddecisionspreviouslytaken.

Thiswholeprocess,asEugenioAragãosaidinarecentinterview,isatrue“chicanery”.

194JointventurecomposedbytheBrazilianenterprisesOdebrechtandOAS.

176

Thedueprocessbetweenjusticeandpolitics

RobertodeFigueiredoCaldas*

Thisbriefarticleaimstopresent, inasimpleandaccessiblelanguage,someofthereasonswhy a large part of the national and international legal community received withapprehensionthecontentoftheconvictionsentencehandeddownagainstformerPresidentLuizInácioLuladaSilva,inJuly2017.MyanalysisisbasedonthejurisprudenceoftheInter-AmericanCourtofHumanRights,morespecificallyontheinterpretationgiventodueprocess.

Thedueprocessof lawcomesfromtheAnglo-Saxon legalsystemandhasspreadtoothersystems, such as ours, of Roman-Germanic origin. Lately, the term "due process" isincreasingly used without the adjective "legal" because the institute has not only beenestablished in law, but also in national constitutions and in international conventions andtreaties,especiallyofrightshumans

Dueprocessisalegalprincipleandfundamentalguaranteerecognizedasahumanright.Itisasetofminimumproceduralorjudicialguarantees,including,butnotlimitedto,therighttoa"competent,independentandimpartialtribunal"(Article8.1oftheAmericanConventiononHumanRights -ACHR), toasimpleandrapidprocess (Article25.1of theACHR)andtoample defense. Substantial safeguards against violation of fundamental rights are alsocontemplatedinthedueprocess,"evenwhensuchviolationiscommittedbypersonsactingintheexerciseoftheirofficialfunctions"(article25.1oftheACHR),includingjudicialfunctions,as,forexample,thecontentofsentences,whichmustbereasonableandproportionate.

Dueto itsgreat importance,dueprocess isoneoftheissuesmostfrequentlyfacedbytheInter-AmericanCourtofHumanRights.Preciselyforthisreason,overtimeandthroughthesettlementofsubsequentcontentiouscasesandtheformulationofsomeadvisoryopinions,theCourthasbeenbuildingarespectablecollectionofbindingprecedentsondueprocess,ofjuridicalrelevanceforthewholeAmericancontinent.

Wheninvestigatingandprosecutingcrimes,anycrimes,suchminimumdueprocesspostulatesmustalwaysbeinflexiblyrespected.DueprocessistheexactpartofJuridicalScience,aboutwhichtherecanbenoinvention.Thisisforthegoodandprotectionofeverypersonbeforethe Judiciary, for thegoodof the ruleof law,democracyandhuman rights. Even in casesexamining, for example, the most serious crimes against human rights or crimes againsthumanity,therigorousapplicationofdueprocesscannotberuledout.

Corruption and related crimes are also very serious, although they are not universallyclassifiedaslesehumanity.Inseveralcountriesoftheworld,particularlyinLatinAmericaandBrazil, there is a serious situationof corruption inpublic spaces, in thebiddingprocesses,procurement, construction, works, services, job filling, political agreements, electioncampaignfinancing,legislativeprocess,taxinspection,policing,socialsecuritybenefits,legalproceedings, frauds of all kinds that undermine public confidence in state agents andgovernment officials, deplete the treasury and greatly reduce social investments. In otherwords, corruption affects the life of society directly by putting in risk the population,particularly those in vulnerable situations,moredependent on state investments in social

* Judge and President of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights, a formermember of the Public EthicsCommittee of the Presidency of the Republic and a former Counselor of the Public Transparency and Anti-CorruptionCouncil.

177

rights, such as health, education, security, public transportation, housing, food, socialassistance,amongothers.Itisveryimportanttoinvestigateandcombatsuchcrimes;thisisanunquestionablepoint.However,theState,beitrepresentedbypolice,publicprosecutor,magistrateoradministrativeauthorities,cannotunderestimatetheimperativesequenceoftheruleslegitimatingdueprocess.Suchrulesguaranteetheequalityofallbeforethelawandconfirmthevalidityofthedemocraticprincipleinstateinstitutions,whichshallactimpartiallyregardlessofthepreferencesorindividualorientationsofthepublicservant.

Acknowledgingtheimportanceoftheissueinquestion,inAprilofthisyear,weheldanexpertconference on "Judicial ethics and the fight against corruption: independence and judicialresponsibilityandtheroleofspecializedorganizations"195attheheadquartersoftheInter-American Court in San José, Costa Rica. The discussion focused on the SustainableDevelopmentGoals, also known as theUnitedNations Agenda 2030,which have as theircentralobjectivestheeliminationofhungerandpovertyandthepromotionofgeneralwell-being.Among thevarious items in theAgenda, it isworthmentioningObjectiveno.16196,whichisto"promotepeacefulandinclusivesocietiesforsustainabledevelopment,providingaccesstojusticeforallandbuildingresponsibleandeffectiveinstitutionsatall levels."Theachievementof thisobjectivewillbeaccomplisehdthroughthe implementationofseveralgoals,amongwhichwehighlight16.3197,whichaimtopromotetheruleof lawandensureequalaccesstojusticeforall,and16.5198,whichseekstoreducesignificantlycorruptioninallitsforms.

Inordertostrengthenjudicialinstitutions,boththeprocessingofcasesofcorruptionbeforethe Judiciary, and corruption, ethical deviation and conflict of interest within the judicialstructure,whetherofthepolice,ofofficialsorofjudges,werediscussed.Itwasalsodiscussedtheimportanceofimplementingcodesofethicsand/orconductintheJudiciary,inspiredbyart. 11 of the United Nations Convention against Corruption199, promulgated by Brazil on31.1.2006.200AmongtheconclusionsoftheConference,thefollowingstandout201:

195Theconferencewasco-organizedbytheInter-AmericanCourt,theGermanCooperation,andtheJudicialIntegrityGroupoftheUnitedNationsOfficeonDrugsandCrime(UNODC),withtheparticipationofjudgesandnationaladministrativeauthoritiesfromAmerica,AfricaandEuropeandSpecializedAgenciesoftheOrganizationofAmericanStates(OAS)andtheUnitedNations(UN),aswellastheIbero-AmericanCommissiononJudicialEthics.196Tocompletetext,see:http://www.un.org/sustainabledevelopment/es/peace-justice/.197“Promotingtheruleoflawatthenationalandinternationallevelsandensuringequalaccesstojusticeforall”.198“Significantlyreducecorruptionandbriberyinallitsforms”.199“Article11.Measuresrelatingtothejudiciaryandprosecutionservices1.Bearinginmindtheindependenceofthejudiciaryanditscrucialroleincombatingcorruption,eachStatePartyshall, in accordance with the fundamental principles of its legal system and without prejudice to judicialindependence, take measures to strengthen integrity and to prevent opportunities for corruption amongmembersof the judiciary. Suchmeasuresmay include ruleswith respect to the conductofmembersof thejudiciary.2.Measurestothesameeffectasthosetakenpursuanttoparagraph1ofthisarticlemaybeintroducedandappliedwithintheprosecutionserviceinthoseStatesPartieswhereitdoesnotformpartofthejudiciarybutenjoysindependencesimilartothatofthejudicialservice.”200 To complete Promulgation Decree text, see: http://www.planalto.gov.br/ccivil_03/_ato2004-2006/2006/decreto/d5687.htm201 To complete text of the Communication of the Inter-American Court on the Conference, see:http://www.corteidh.or.cr/docs/comunicados/cp_16_17.pdf.

178

1. Judicialintegrityisaprerequisiteforsustainabledevelopmentandrespectfortheruleoflawandcontributestopoliticalstability,legalsecurityofcitizens,privateinvestmentandglobaleconomicprogress.

2. "Theimportanceofintegrity,transparencyandaccountabilitywithinthejudiciary,aswellastheindependenceandimpartialityofjudgesaspreconditionsforaccesstojusticeonanequalfooting,toenablehumanrightstobeeffectivelyprotected,"wasemphasized.

3. Theneedtoimplementinternationalnormsandstandardsonjudicialintegrityandtherule of lawwas emphasized and to promote the adoption of the Ibero-American Code ofJudicial Ethics and the Bangalore Principles on Judicial Conduct, in addition to thejurisprudence of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights Human as guides for judicialreforms.

4. Duringtheevent,itwashighlyemphasizedthatthefightagainstcorruptionorethicaldeviationcannotbeselective,thatis,onlywithregardtoapolitical,ethnic,religiousgroup,etc.,otherwisethecredibilityandlegitimacyofInstitutionsofpersecutionandjudgmentwillbeundermined.Thatistosay,onceastandardofjudgmenthasbeenusedforagroup,itmustserveeveryonewithoutanykindofselectivity.Inparticular,judgesmuststrictlyabidebythelaw.

Withthisinmind,itfollowsthattherealizationofhumanrights,theruleoflawandjudicialintegrityaretherealantagonistsofcorruption.Theinclinationandpassionofamemberofthe judiciaryforacause imply,necessarily, thatheorsheshouldnotbeabletoact intheprocess. Abdicate from judging the case for an impediment or suspicion, for the bestrespectabilityand legitimacyof thedecision, isa logicalandnecessarycommand.Becauseonlytheimpartialjudgecanmakeajudicialdecisionwiththeelementsofbalance,whetherintheanalysisofevidence,orinthereasonableconclusion,prudentandstrictlyconnectedtothosesameevidence.Otherwiseitisthejudgehimself,andnotonlyhissentence,thatwillbeobjectofreprobationinthepublicsphere.

GoingbacktothecaseofformerPresidentLula'sconviction,thesubsequentactsofJudgeSérgio Moro, prolator of the sentence, were objects of public challenge and ethical-disciplinaryquestioningbeforetheNationalCouncilofJusticelastyear,withoutanyscoldingagainsthimrecognised.SomepublicfactsalreadyshowedtheanimosityofthemagistrateinrelationtoformerPresidentLulaandthethenPresidentDilmaRousseff,thatistosay,thoseelected nationally in the last four presidential elections by direct elections, expression ofrepresentativedemocracyinthecountryandsocialpacttheninforce.

Allareequalbeforethelawanditisthisequalitythatmustoperatetojudgefromthesimplestofpeopletoaformerpresident.Inthelattercase,thisisaparticularlysensitivecausebecauseitinvolvesapersonwhoistheobjectofthemajoritysocialchoice,thatis,theoneinwhichthepopulationhasplacedhopesintheconductofthenation.AndintheparticularsituationofformerPresidentLula,itreferstoapoliticallyactiveindividual,pointedbyrecentpollsasthenumberonepopularpreferencefornextyear'spresidentialelection inanyscenarioofopponents. It iswell known thata condemnatorycriminaldecision removeshim fromtheelectoral race, that is, itpreventssociety fromchoosinghim,which iswhy it isevenmorenecessarytohaveaconsistentstatementof reasons foranydecisionaffectinghispoliticalrights.

179

The Charter of theOrganization of American States, founder of the entire inter-Americanhuman rights system, states in its preamble that representative democracy "is anindispensableconditionforthestability,peaceanddevelopmentoftheregion."FortheInter-AmericanCourt,similarly,"representativedemocracyisdecisivethroughoutthesystemoftheConvention."202.

Thecasesinvolvingthehighestrepresentativesofanationarealwaysveryimportant.Thesearecalledhardcases.Incasessuchasthese,thegood-judge-impartial,non-partisan,zealousandcautious-mustagreeontheexaminationoftheevidence,applytherulesofthegameandfollowthejurisprudence.Thejudgecannotneglectorinnovate,andifhedoes,casuistry,exception and arbitration prevail, not justice. Therefore, the condemnation of formerPresidentLulageneratedsurprise,evenperplexity,becausetheevidenceoftheallegedcrimeswas not presented in the sentence. And this conviction can prevent the candidacy of thepopularfavorite.

Inthissense,itisimportanttogivevaluetothegoodbehaviorpatternofthemagistracyandtotakeintoaccounttheprevioussignsofabuse,inclinationandarbitrariness.Suchameasurewould avoid having to disqualify the product of the magistrate's work, that is, the laterdecision just published, asmany are doing, among them several authors of this collectivebook.

Forthenarrowspaceofthisarticle, Iwillanalyzeasingleandseriousactpracticedbythejudge who affronts the terms of sentence of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights,pronouncedininternationalcondemnationagainsttheBrazilianStateitselfinthe2009caseEscheretal203.Still inthe investigationphase,onMarch16,2016, inclearviolationofdueprocess,JudgeSérgioMororeleasedatelephoneconversationbetweenthethenPresidentoftheRepublic,DilmaRousseff,andformerPresidentLula.Againsttheclearletterofthelaw,themeasureexposedthepeopleinvestigatedandrecordedforpublictrial,whenthistypeofevidenceshouldremainconfidential.

On that day, in themorning, the court judge himself had decided to close the telephoneinterception, apparently becausehewould lose jurisdiction to the Federal SupremeCourtbecauseformerPresidentLulawasappointedministerofstate,havingaforumprerogative.TherecordingoftheconversationbetweenthethenPresidentDilmaandtheformerPresidentLulawasmadeat1:32p.m.At3.34p.m.,thejudgewasnotifiedbyaletterfromtheFederalPoliceabout the recording,andat4:21p.m.hedecided to raise theconfidentialityof theentireproceedings, including the conversationbetween the two, anddetermined itswidedissemination to the press. Without deadline, without hearing the parties, the peoplerecorded,orthePublicProsecutionService.

ThecaseresemblesineverythingthecondemnationofBrazilbytheInter-AmericanCourtin2009, in which the process of interception, monitoring and disclosure of telephoneconversationsofArleiJoséEscherandfourotherpersonsbytheMilitaryPoliceoftheStateofParanáwas examined.More specifically, the Escher case is inserted in a context of social

202 Corte IDH. Caso Castañeda Gutman Vs. México. Exceções Preliminares, Mérito, Reparações e Custas.Sentençade6deagostode2008.SérieCNo.184,par.141,eCasoYatamaVs.Nicaragua.ExceçõesPreliminares,Mérito,ReparaçõeseCustas.Sentençade23dejunhode2005.SérieCNo.127,par.192.203CorteIDH.CasoEscheryotrosVs.Brasil.ExceçõesPreliminares,Mérito,ReparaçõeseCustas.Sentençade6dejulhode2009.SérieCNo.200.

180

conflict relatedtoagrarianreform inseveralBrazilianstates, includingParaná.Thevictimswere members of two social organizations, ADECON (Community Association of RuralWorkers) and COANA (Avante Conciliation Agricultural Cooperative Ltda.), linked to themovementoflandlessworkers.IthappenedthatmembersoftheMilitaryPolicepresentedtoa judicialauthorityarequest for interceptionandmonitoringofa telephone line, installedinsideCOANA,allegingthatinsuchplacetheywereperformingcriminalpractices.Thisrequestwas answeredquickly. The victimshad their private conversations recorded, and someofthem,editedinabiasedway,weredistributedandbroadcastedinvariousmedia,amongthemintheprogramNationalJournal,RedeGloboTelevision.

TheCourtheldthat,withsuchmeasures,theBrazilianStateviolatedtherightstoprivacy,honorandreputationrecognizedinArticle11204oftheAmericanConvention,inrelationtoArticle1.1,indetrimentofthevictims,fortheinterception,recordinganddisclosureoftheirtelephone conversations. Furthermore, theStateviolated the rights to judicialguaranteesandjudicialprotectionrecognizedinArticles8(1)and25ofthesameinstrument,inrelationtothecriminalactionbroughtbythevictimsagainsttheformerSecretaryofStateSecurity,duetothelackofinvestigationoftheresponsiblesforthefirstdisclosureoftheconversations,andlackofmotivationoftheadministrativedecisionregardingthefunctionalconductofthejudge who authorized the telephone interception. It should be noted that this case alsooccurredintheStateofParaná,wheretheCourt'srulingwaswidelypublicized,whichiswhyitisbroadlyknownwithinthelegalcommunity.

TheCourtexaminedtheissueandassessedtheBrazilianlegislationasperfectlyharmonizedwith the American Convention. Both Article 5, XII205, of the Constitution, and Law9.296/96206,whichregulatedtheconstitutionalprovision,bothfullyinforcesincethefactsofthecasewithoutchange,areconsistentwiththeInter-Americannorm.

Thus,basedonthisbindingprecedentoftheInter-AmericanCourt,whichcorroboratedtheconventionality of the exceptional law,with the cautions that, since the law restricts theinviolabilityofcommunications,itmustbeappliedwiththeutmostcare,zealandparsimony,wecanobservethatseveralviolationsofdueprocesswereperpetratedcumulativelyinthecontextofthecriminalprosecutionofformerPresidentLula.Otherwiseobserve:i.Therewasnojudicialdecisionauthorizingthetelephonerecording,soitisanunlawfulmeasure(article1 of Law9.296 / 96), ii. The judgewas not competent to record andmuch less divulge a

204Article11.RighttoPrivacy1.Everyonehastherighttohavehishonorrespectedandhisdignityrecognized.2.Noonemaybetheobjectofarbitraryorabusiveinterferencewithhisprivatelife,hisfamily,hishome,orhiscorrespondence,orofunlawfulattacksonhishonororreputation.3.Everyonehastherighttotheprotectionofthelawagainstsuchinterferenceorattacks.205 CF, XII - The confidentiality of correspondence and telegraphic communications, data and telephonecommunicationsisinviolable,exceptaslastresource,bycourtorder,inthecasesandintheformestablishedbylawforthepurposeofcriminalinvestigationorcriminalproceduralinstruction;206Lawnº9.296/96:Article8°.Theinterceptionoftelephonecommunication,ofanynature,willoccurinseparatefiles,appendedtothe records of the police investigation or criminal process, preserving the confidentiality of the respectivediligences,recordingsandtranscriptions.Article 10. It is a crime to intercept telephone, computer or telematic communications, or break secrecy ofjustice,withoutjudicialauthorizationorforpurposesnotauthorizedbylaw.Penalty:imprisonment,fromtwotofouryearsandfine.

181

conversationofthePresidentoftheRepublic,bearinginminditsforumprerogative(article1),iii.itisunlawfultodisclosevoicerecordingsandtheirtranscriptions,whichareconfidentialasarule(articles1and10), iv.severalrecordingsofconversationsofdiversepeopleweredivulged,includingpersonalconversations,withoutanyuseasproof,thathadtobedisabledtoprotecttheintimacyofthesepeople(article9),v.aconversationofministerofStatewasrecorded and divulged, also with forum prerogative, for which the judge was evidentlyincompetent (article 1º), vi. It is illegal to publish mass recordings, since any breach ofconfidentialitymustbejustifiedandhaveanobjectiveauthorizedbylaw(article10).

Because it is so serious, both at the national and international levels, the breach ofconfidentialityandthedisclosureofdataobtainedbytelephonemonitoringinanimpropermanner isconsideredacrime,according to theprescriptionofart.10ofLawno.9296/96(article10. It isacrimeto intercepttelephone,computerortelematiccommunications,orbreaksecrecyofjustice,withoutjudicialauthorizationorforpurposesnotauthorizedbylaw.Penalty: imprisonment,fromtwotofouryearsandfine).Therefore,thejudge,evenintheexerciseofhisfunction,evenifhehasrenderedgoodservicestotheState,mustinvariablybehavewithin thestrict limitsofdueprocess,which iswhyheshouldnothavecontinuedleading the criminalproceeding. Therewere several subsequent steps that showeda veryunwiseandpolitical lineofconduct,demonstratingthat the judgedidnotpassthetestofimpartialityintheconcretecase,inanevident,unacceptableanddisproportionateviolationofdueprocess,guarantorofdemocracyandhumanrights.

IconcludewiththewordsIusedattheopeningoftheaforementionedConferenceonJudicialEthicsandCorruption,heldattheInter-AmericanCourtofHumanRightsinAprilthisyear:

Letmeconcludebyemphasizingtheneedtostrengthenexistingprinciplesinthecurrentlegalsystem,aswellastodevelopnewlegalstructurestopromoteanadequatejudicialethicsandtoimplementeffectivecombatingofcorruptioninpractice.TheselectiveandclearlypoliticaluseoftheJudiciaryasamechanismofpersecutionofcertainpoliticalgroupsisnotalegitimateinstrumentoffightingcorruption,butacorruptactinitself.

182

Lula’sconviction:Brazil’smoststrikingcaseoflawfare

RicardoLodiRibeiro*

Over the last fewmonths, theexpression lawfare,aportmanteauof lawandwarfare,hasbeenusedbyformerBrazilianpresidentLuizInácioLuladaSilva’sattorneystorefertothecriminalchargesthatarebeingfiledagainsthim.Thetermlawfareappearsinanenvironmentwhere legal institutions are being excessively used to harass political adversaries. It wasoriginallycoinedbyJohnCarlsonandNevilleYeomansin1975207,astheyconsidereditatacticofpeace,inwhichwarwasreplacedwithlegalbattlesandthe“duelisbetweenwordsratherthan swords.” US Air Force colonel Charles Dunlap208 spread the expression in 2001 as astrategy of misuse of law to accomplish an operational objective as an alternative totraditional military means. In the political realm, according to Jean Comaroff and JohnComaroff,209 ittranslatesintheprocessofusingviolenceandpowerinherentinthelawtoproducepoliticaloutcomes.Oneofthemostfrequentwaysithasbeenusedisbyshunninganadversarythroughtheexcessiveuseofthelegalsystemratherthanfollowingconstitutionalelectoralprocesses.

Harvard professor John Comaroff210 has been dedicated to researching the lawfarephenomenon,andhebelievesBrazil’sex-presidentdaSilvaisavictimofit,perpetratedbythe“OperationCarwash”(OperaçãoLavaJato)taskforceinCuritiba,ParanáState,andbyFederalJudge Sérgio Moro of the 13th Federal Court of Curitiba. The lawfare in this case wascharacterized since the aforementioned judge leaked to the press the contents of tappedphone calls between da Silva and the then-president Dilma Rousseff. After the episode,accordingtotheSouthAfricanresearcher,thelawfarebecamemanifestintheattemptstocreateapresumptionofguiltregardingdaSilva.

The reality is, it is imperative to acknowledge that, taking advantage of the mainstreammedia’smilitantsupporttotheLulaHunt,theso-calledRepublicofCuritibahasbeenforalongtimeusingthepublicopiniontoallegedly fightcorruption,creatinganatmosphereofanticipated conviction against the former Brazilian president. In this sense, the peculiarPowerPointpresentationmadebyFederalProsecutionServicetaskforcecoordinatorDeltanDellagnolwasquitesymptomatic.HedisplayeddaSilvaasthecenteroftheentireconspiracy,withoutpresentinganyevidenceofthiswhatsoever,butonlyafirmbeliefinhisallegations,ashimselfinfamouslydeclaredatthetime.Evidently,inadditiontoallproceduralerrorsmadetohavethe13thFederalCourtofCuritibaobtainjurisdictionoverthecase,regardlessoffactsthatwerespatiallyrestrictedtotheStateofSãoPaulo,overthecourseoftheproceedings,JudgeSérgioMorodidnot revealhimself tobean impartial trier topreside thecase,andseveral timesactivelyperformed the roleof aprosecutor.AndasHistory showshereand

*AdjunctProfessorofFinancialLawattheUniversityoftheStateofRiodeJaneiro(UERJ)UERJLawSchoolDirector207CARLSON,John;YEOMANS,Neville.InSmith,M.&Crossley,D.(eds.),TheWayOut-RadicalAlternativesinAustraliaMelbourne:LansdownePress,1975.208DUNLAP, JR.,Charles J.LawandMilitary Interventions:PreservingHumanitarianValues in21stConflicts.Humanitarian Challenges inMilitary Intervention Conference Carr Center for Human Rights Policy. KennedySchoolofGovernment,HarvardUniversity.Washington,D.C.,November29,2001.209:COMAROFF,Jean;COMAROFF,JohnL.LawandDisorderinthePostcolonybyReviewby:GiovanniArrighiAmericanJournalofSociologyVol.114,No.2(September2008),pp.562-564.210 http://www1.folha.uol.com.br/poder/2016/11/1829175-professor-de-harvard-ve-presuncao-de-culpa-contra-lula-na-lava-jato.shtml.

183

elsewhere,whentheboundariesbetweenprosecutionandjurisdictionareblurred,therightof defense becomes just a formality to make a previously agreed upon outcome seemlegitimate.

InthesentenceregardingthetriplexapartmentinGuarujá,SãoPauloState,theattackagainsttheprinciplesofnaturaljusticeanddueprocessoflaw,aswellasagainstthepresumptionofinnocence,isabsolutelycharacterized,leavingnodoubtthatformerpresidentdaSilvadidnotgetafairtrialandJudgeSérgioMorowasnotimpartial.

Inthispoliticalcontext,inwhichtheentiremediaandstateapparatushavebeendrivenforyearstowardsahuntagainstLula,fewconcreteresultshavebeenfound.Actually,sidebysidewiththepoliticalselectivitythatdrivesthemovementsagainstBrazil’sWorkerParty’sleader,theinevitablesideeffectsofarhetoricalmockeryofcoherenceagainstotherpoliticalforceswasfarmorelethal. Indeed,theconclusiontodrawfromthis isthatdaSilva’sbackgroundcheckcamebackclear,becausewithsomanyinvestigationeffortsgoingonforsolong,inanationallandscapewheresuitcasesfullofmoney,bankaccountsintaxhavens,andirrefutableevidenceofplunderingofpublicmoneyabound,notalotofexcitingfactsforhisexecutionerswerefoundagainsttheformerBrazilianpresident.

Butletuslookintoit.TheBrazilianFederalProsecutionOffice(MPF)broughtchargesagainstdaSilvaforcorruptionandmoneylaunderingforhisparticipationinthreecontractssignedwithconstructiongiantOASwhichwerehurtfultoPetrobras.So,accordingtotheMPF,daSilvawouldbetheheadoftheconspiracythatallegedlywouldhavehadhurtPetrobras,agovernment controlled company, through the aforementioned contracts. His share in thiswouldbethetriplexapartmentinGuarujáandarenovationcarriedoutbyOAS,thusallegedlyconstitutingthecrimeofcorruption.ThemoneylaunderingaspectofitwouldbedaSilvanottransferringthepropertytohimself.

Whenthechargesweremadepublic,differentvoicesinthelegalworldrosetowarnthatthestorytoldinthecomplaintagainstthedefendantwasnotprovenbythedocumentsinsertedintherecord,nordiditvalidatethatPowerPointpresentationwhichpointeddaSilvaastheheadoftheconspiracy.Infact,whatwasthepointofsayingthatandnotfilingchargesagainsthimforconspiracytocommitacrime,ifnottoattackhisimageinfaceofthepublicopinion?

Nevertheless,despitetheovertrushtopresenttheaccusations,therewasthepossibilityofprovingthefactsclaimedinthechargingdocumentduringthepresentationofevidence.Butwhathappenedwasfarfromthat.Throughouttheentireevidentiarystage,dozensofdefenseandprosecutionwitnesseswereheard,hundredsofdocumentswerepresented,andexpertexaminationswereconducted,andtheprosecutionwasnotabletoproveitsversionwiththenecessaryelementstosupportitregardingthefactsattributedtodaSilva.Suchwasthecasethat Judge Sérgio Moro actually stopped working with the Prosecution Office’s theory,innovatingintermsofthedescriptionofthefactsinthecharges.Thatalonewouldbeenoughto prevent a potential conviction. But it came to a point inwhich, giving themotions forclarificationofjudgmentfiledbythedefenseagainsttheadversejudgment,herecognizedthemoneyreceivedbyOASfromPetrobrascouldnothavebeenusedtomakepaymentsfordaSilva’sownbenefit.Thatwouldinevitablydismisstheonlyconnection,eveniftenuous,tosetjurisdictioninCuritiba.

To constitute the crimeof corruption inwhich the former Brazilian presidentwould havegainedimproperadvantagesandtakenexofficioactiontofavorOAS,theprosecutionwouldhave to prove that da Silva acted while in office to benefit the company in exchange of

184

improperadvantages.However,aftertheproductionofevidence,daSilva’sinvolvementintheepisodewasnotsuccessfullyproven.MorothenfeltcontentedwiththepossibilitythattheformerpresidentcouldinfluencetheappointmentofPetrobrasdirectors,asifappointingsomeoneforapositioncouldmakethepersonwhoappointsthemresponsibleforallfutureillegal activities inwhich theappointeeengages.Regarding theallegedadvantagedaSilvawouldhavegained,thejudgmentpointstofactsthattookplaceentirely in2014,whendaSilvawasnolongerpresident.

The attempt to prove that the activities in which the president took part in 2009 weregradually paid off in improper advantages in 2014was successful, even though the greatdistance between the two aforementioned time frames required great effort ofargumentationanduseofevidence.Hence,thedefendant’sparticipationintheillegalactivitycouldnotbeproven,norcouldtheadvantageheallegedlygainedorthechainofcausationbetweenthetwothings.

Despite the testimonies of all defense and prosecutionwitnesses, JudgeMoro came to adecisionbasedonthe“informalcollaboration”ofLéoPinheiro,aformerOASpresidentwhosesurprisingchangeofdepositiongavehimstartlingadvantagesinhissentence.Thatis,afterspending more than a year denying da Silva’s involvement in the conspiracy, Pinheiro“informally”collaboratedwiththecourtandreceivedimmunity.Hedidnothavetogothroughthelegalproceedingsofapleabargain,nordidhehavetoprovehisclaims.Andtherewehavetheinstitutionofapleabargainwherethecollaboratordoesnothavetoproveanything.Justby changing his deposition, the construction executive managed to save himself fromspendingtherestofhisdaysinprison.

AsfortheallegedadvantagesofferedtoBrazil’sformerpresidentandfacedwithcompellingevidencethattheapartmentwasneverownedbydaSilvaorhisfamily,Morostretchedthefactstodecidethat,eventhoughthepropertywasnevertransferredtohim,hewouldbethe“de facto owner,” even though it was very clear da Silva and his family never had theproperty’stenure.Well,thetenureistheexternalization,onthefactuallevel,ofoneoftheowner’sfaculties.Ifhedidnothavethetenureof,didnotuse,enjoyedorhavethepropertyavailable,itisnotpossibletoarguehehadthe“factualownership.”

InthenarrativecreatedbyMoro,therewasnootherlegalreasonthatcouldpossiblyexplainwhyOASinsistedonofferingthetriplexapartmenttodaSilvaorwhyitwasrenovated.Thejudgewouldratherdrawtheconclusionthatitcouldonlybetheresultofacorruptionscheme.Theproblemwithaconvictionwithoutsupportingevidence,basedsolelyonajudge’sbeliefs,is thathe risksdisregardingothernarratives, including theonepresentedby thedefense,whichmaintainedthearrangementswereregardingBrazil’sex-firstladyMrs.MarisaSilva’snegotiationswiththepropertydevelopment’sformerowner,Bancoop,tobuyamembershipinterest.Notonlyisthedefense’snarrativemuchmorelikelythantheprosecution’s,itisuptothelattertoprovetheirversionofthefactsiscorrectbypresentingsupportingevidence.In any case, JudgeMoro’s conclusion that “the only possible explanation” for the triplexapartmentbeingofferedtodaSilvaandfortherenovationcarriedoutinitwastopaybribesseemstodemonstrateonething:evenwithoutenoughevidence,thejudge’sbeliefthatthedefendantisguiltywasunshakable,andthatwasapparentregardlessoftheoutcomeoftheproductionofevidence.

As for themoney launderingcharges,eventhoughthe factspresentedbytheprosecutionwere proven − which is not correct − what we have here is a legal impossibility.Money

185

launderingiswhensomeonetriestomakemoneycomingfromillegalactivitieslooklegal.Butwhenthatpersonreceivesassetsaspaymentfromactionstaintedbycorruption,thereisnoseparatecrime.Eveniftheownershipoftheassetisconcealed,wewouldbefacingaconductincluded in the definition of the crime that sanctions corruption itself. By accepting thejudgment’stheory,moneylaunderingwouldfollowanyillegalactivity,andthatwouldbeacompletelegalnonsense.

AsdaSilvawasclearlyconvictedwithoutevidence,onecannothelpbutpointingoutthatthelong history of affirming the Rule of Law is connected to the dedication to constitutionalprinciplessuchasdueprocessoflaw,presumptionofinnocence,andnaturaljustice.Theseprinciples are being relegated in the name of a discriminating, politically-driven fight oncorruption,which could risk producing very harmful outcomes to Brazil’s own democratichistory.Inthissense,ifsuccessful,thelawfarethatisnowtargetingdaSilvawilldefinitivelyoutline the ruin of the Welfare State − a ruin promoted since president Rousseff wasimpeached.ThecouppromotedbytheBrazilianparliamentbasedonverypeculiarfinanciallawcategoriesenabledthedismantlingofanembryonicsystemofsocialprotectiontothecountry’smostvulnerablepopulations.ButtheharassmentagainstdaSilva,whoisthefront-runner inthe2018elections,aimstomakehimineligibleandburythegreatestrisktothemarket society project, as suggested by Karl Polanyi211, inwhich the economic and socialsystemsseparateandthelatterissubjecttotheinterestsofthemarket,inapathpavedsinceDilma Rousseff was removed from office. Therefore, while the lawfare against presidentRousseffwasextremelyserious,asitmadeitpossibletoestablishanillegitimategovernmentthatwillbeinofficeuntil2018,theeffectsofthelawfareagainstdaSilvaareexpectedtolastmuch longer.Forthisreason,weconsiderthat,eventhoughthe impeachmentbecameanextremely powerful instrument to promote a blow against the institutions in order tooverthrowthecosmovisionschosenbytheBrazilianpeoplein2014,theLulaHunt,aimedattaintinghis imageandmakinghimunabletorunintheelections, is intendedtotakeawayfromvotersthepoliticaloptionsthatwerebetrayedbytheBrazilianCongressin2016.Letushopehighercourtsdonotallowit.

211POLANYI,Karl.AGrandeTransformação.Trans.FannyWrobel.2.ed.RiodeJaneiro:Elsevier,2012,p.45and77.

186

Julybonfires*

RosaCardosodaCunha

JulyhasalwaysbeenassociatedwiththetardybonfiresofSt.John’sfestivities.Nowwewillseeinitthefieryhatredofthesentencethatburnedpubliclythefreedomandassetsoftheformerpresidentoftherepublic,LuizInácioLuladaSilva.Thesparksofthishatredanticipateafire,thespreadofwhichisunpredictable,especiallyinthehighlypolarizedscenarioofsocialnetworks.

On July 12th Judge SérgioMoro condemned themost beloved and popular leader in thecountry'shistory,LuizInácioLuladaSilva,todeprivationoflibertyfor9yearsand6monthsofimprisonment,heavyfine,obligationtocompensateforthedamageatveryhighratesandrestrictionofpoliticalrights.SixdayslaterthepunishmentcontinuedwithR$606thousandfrozeninhisbankaccounts,theseizureof4propertiesandtheconfiscationof2cars.Thenextday9millionwerecommandeeredinhisprivatepensionplans.

ThejudgmentofJudgeMorocontradictsdominanttechnicalconceptionsregardingthecrimesinvoked and the evidence presented. In laymen’s terms it is counterintuitive, that is, itsconclusionsviolatethecommonunderstandingofthefacts.Thesentencealsoconsolidatesamovementaimedatthedevelopmentofa“Lavajatocriminallaw",whichisalreadyadvancedinthefieldofprocedurallaw.

It’snoticeable theextensionof the jurisdictionof thecourtpresidedoverby JudgeSérgioMoro-ofthe13thcriminalcourtofthefederalcourtofCuritiba-inrelationtotheprosecutionand judgment of controversial cases related to that criminal action, considered to be thefounderofthechainoflawsuitsthatconstitutelocaljustice(thefoundingcriminalactionwasbasedonamoneylaunderingoperation,whichwasconsummatedinLondrina/PR,thecasewasassignedtoJudgeSérgioMoroandhassincemadeupitsjudicialdistrictforcasesunderhisdecision).

Addedtothis,thereistheexpansionoftaskforcesledbyprosecutorsandthefederalpolicethatwereworkinginCuritiba,thecreationof"newparadigms"proceduresfortheimposition

ofprovisionalmeasures (Coerciveconduction (benchwarrant), temporaryarrests,pre-trialdetention)andtheencouragementofpleabargainsthroughtheuseofimprisonmentandthethreatoflongsentences.

ThesentenceimposedbyJudgeMorotoLuladaSilvaadvances,however,theperspectiveofthe development of Lavajato’s material criminal law, which refers to the definition andapplication of crimes and penalties. This condemnation loosens the primary concept ofsubstantivecriminal law, intermsofthe lawandtheconstitution,which isof the"typeofcriminaloffence".TheLavajatocriminallawrendersirrelevantthemeaningoftypeofcriminaloffence,thusinvalidatingtheprincipleoflegalityanditscorollaries.

*Thisisadivulgationtextontheconvictionsentence(218pages)thattheJudgeSérgioMorodeterminedtotheformer President of the Republic, Lula da Silva. It addresses the factual issues and legal provisions that theconviction invokes. It is intended for an audience thatwishes to have aminimumof information about thediscussionthathasbeenandwill remainontheagendaregardingthe interpretationand legalsolutiontobegiven to the case. It does not contain a technical analysis of the crimes attributed to the former President:corruptionandmoneylaundering.

187

The disqualification of the type of criminal offence as identification of a crime, given itsfunctionofguaranteeing thecitizenagainst thewillof theauthorities,and the fact that itcontainstheobjectivedescriptionofthewrongdoingprohibitedbylaw(themalaprohibita)equalsthechoicetonotusethecriminallawinplace,thatis,todenyit.Thisiswhathappened.

Intheconvictionsentenceunderanalysis JudgeSérgioMorocondemnedformerPresidentLuladaSilvaadoptingtoalargerextentthespeculativeversionofthefactscontainedinthecomplaint. The sentence's narrative is sinuous, acrobatic and foolish. However, evendismissingthefactsthatoccurredtotellwhatsupposedlyhappened, itdoesnotpresentastorythatfitsthecrimesattributedtoLuladaSilva:corruptionandmoneylaundering.

Itisworthrememberingsomenarrativedevelopmentsthatintendtojustifytheconvictionforthecrimeofcorruption:

1- In2009, theConstrutoraOASSA formalized threecontractswithPetrobras,agreeing inexchangetopayabribeintheapproximateamountofR$87,624,971.26.(Question:WhatisLula'sparticipationinthisagreementandwhatevidenceexistsofhisparticipation?);

2- Thisarrangementmadepossiblethecreationofa"generalcheckingaccountforkickbacks"between theOAS Group and agents of theWorkers' Party - PT (Question:What is Lula'sparticipationinthisagreementandwhatevidenceexistsofhisparticipation?);

3- The representatives of OAS and PT, Leo Pinheiro and João Vaccari, implemented anunregisteredaccountinginthescopeofthisaccount(Question:whatisLula'sparticipationinthisagreementandwhatevidenceexistsofhisparticipation?);

4- In 2009, OAS Empreendimentos SA, an OAS Group company, assumed an undertakinginitiated by BANCOOP (Co-op of the Bankers Union), regarding the construction of acondominiuminGuarujá, inwhichMrs.Marisa(andLula,asherhusband)hadquotasofasmallapartment.OntheoccasionofthetransferofthisundertakingtotheOAS,itspresident,Leo Pinheiro was informed about the shares owned byMrs.Marisa/Lula by Vaccari and,shortlyafterwards,thatatriplexapartmentshouldbereservedforthecouple;

5- Untiltheendof2013LeoPinheirodidnothaveconfirmationfromtheformerPresidentLula of his interest in the reserved property, which he andMrs.Marisa did not know. InJanuary of 2014 the couple visits for the first time the triplex and sugestadaptations/renovations thatwouldmake itsusepossible.The renovationsweremade tillmid-2014, in order to please and interest the couple in their acquisition, however formerPresidentLulaneverformalizedwithLeoPinheirothedecisiontooccupythebuildingorthecostsandlegalprocedurestoacquireit.

6- TheGuarujátriplex,throughanaccordbetweenVaccariandLeoPinheiro,whichtookplacein2014,waslinkedtothegeneralcheckingaccountofkickbacksdevisedin2009.ThereisnonewsofhowandwhenformerPresidentLulaexpressedhisopinionabouttheaccord,butLeoPinheirosaysheneverdealtwithhimaboutthisconnection.

Consideringtheissuesbeingpresentedhere,whicharenotexhaustive,werealizethatit istechnically unsustainable to claim that the fundamental requirements that characterizecorruptionhavebeenmet.Highlightingthreeoftheserequirements,namely,extortion,theofficialactandthe intentiontoreceiveorextortanundueadvantage. In relationto theserequirements,let’ssee,then,howtheyapplytoLula.

188

Asfortheextortion,itisnotknownifandwhenLulareceiveditorevenifherequestedit,sinceheneverdealtwithanyofthepeopledeposedintheprocess,orevenwithLeoPinheiroonthesubjectofacquiringoroccupyingthetriplex,withoutthepaymentofitscosts;

Regardingtheofficialact,itisnotclearwhichactLulapracticedtoconfigureit:ifitwasthefinalappointmentofDirectors forPetrobras,after thecommonappointmentmadebythepolitical parties that participated in the government, formalized by Petrobras’ Board ofDirectors,asthesentenceatsomemomentstates,itistechnicallyunacceptablespeculation.Infact,whatcanbededucedfromanappointment,whichisanactofregularoffice,practicedatthetimewhenLulawasPresidentoftheRepublic,whichcorrespondstoagraftinrelationto something that was only decided in 2014? How can you relate the appointment of aDirectortoatriplexthatonlycomesintoplayin2014and,atthattime,wasnoteveninLula’scontemplations?

Inrelationtothefraudofreceivingorrequestingsomethingillegal,weask:whatactionbyLula led to thisbeingdeducted?Atwhatpoint in theprocesswas thissubjectivequestiondiscussedandproven?

It is truethataportionof thepopulationagreeswithLula'scondemnationbyJudgeMorobecausetheywanthimtobepunishedforthetotalityoftheworkand,particularly,becauseofhispoliticalproject.

Considering,however,thatpartofthepopulation,favorableoragainstLula,butdisarmedofprejudicesinrelationtohisjudgmentasacitizen,thesepeopledonotunderstandhowanapartmentvisitedonlyoncebytheformerPresident(twicebyMrs.Marisa),andwhichhehadneverhadthekeysto,inwhichhehadneverstayedat,apropertythathasnotbeenregisteredashisproperty,canconstitutegroundsforaconvictionofundueadvantage.

Foralayperson,itisalsodifficulttounderstandthatfouryearsafterleavingthepresidencyquestionsrelatedtotheconditionsofLuladaSilva’sexistencecanbelinkedtohisstatusasapublicservant,relatedtohisformerpositionasPresidentoftheRepublic(emphasizingthatpassivecorruptionmustbepracticedbyapublicofficial).

Lastly,thewholespiderwebthatthesentencebuilttorelateLula'sconvictiontopastdealingsmadeatPetrobras,andanimaginaryslushfund,allofwhichLuladidnotparticipateinandfor which there is no proof of his complicity, everything is very fragile, improbable andartificial.Similarargumentsapplytothecrimeofcapitallaundering,embodiedintheso-called"triplexlaundering."Irefer,therefore,tothequestionthatifwedisqualifythefactthatthetriplexbelongstoLula,bothinfact(possessionofthetriplex)andinlaw(registrationofthepropertyofthetriplex),theconvictionthatMoroimposedonhimfor"laundering"thisgoodisvacated.Notethat it isMorohimselfwhoacknowledges in thesentencethat therewasneitherpossessionnorproperty.

Intheuniverseofcriminalpoliciesfacedbycriminals,Lula'sconvictionisstillassociatedwithacriminalpolicyknownasthe"enemycriminallaw".Initsorigin,thisrightcorrespondstoaproposal systematizedby theGermancriminal scholarGünther Jakobsandmadepublic in1999.Itproposesacriminallawmodeldifferentthantheonethatappliestothecitizen,onethatisdesignatedfortheenemy,thatis,toapersonwhoisconsidereddangeroustothestablefunctioningofsociety.

The citizen's right guarantees, among other things, the right to due process and ampledefense,andthepresumptionofinnocence.Fortheenemy,however,oneshouldimposea

189

restricteddueprocess,thepresumptionofguilt,secretinquiries,telephoneinterceptionsnotdeferredbytheJudiciary,illegalprisons,productionofillegalevidence,etc.

Inadditiontoothercharacteristics,theenemycriminallawreplacesthecorrelationbetweenconvictionandfact,validinthecriminallawapplicabletothecitizen,forthecorrelationauthorandconviction.Theenemyisthenjudgedforwhatheis,orforthestereotypesthatarebuiltabouthisimage,andnotforwhathehasdone.Theenemyisdemonized.

InBrazil,foravarietyofreasonstheproposaloftheenemycriminallawdidnothavegreaterprestigeinthefirstdecadeofthiscentury.Rightfromtheoutsetacriminallawfocusingontheimageofanenemywouldnotbewellreceivedafteradictatorshipthatlasteduntilthe80s.TheNationalSecuritydoctrinewasaimedatfightingheadontherevolutionarywarandthe internalenemy(thesubversive),whichcouldbeanypersonwhobyacts, ideologiesoropinionscontradictsestablishedpoliciesorauthorities.Brazil,too,didnothaveanyterroristattacksatthebeginningofthiscentury,suchastheUSAandEuropeancountries,toadopttheenemycriminallawtheory.

Leadingfromthelavajatocriminallaw,initsCuritibaversion,thefightagainstcorruptionandacoupleofothercrimesarticulatedtoitspractice,assumesafundamentalistnatureandthepurpose of redeeming the moral integrity of the country. Aside from incorporating thecharacteristicsof theenemy criminal law, the lavajato’s justice is accredited to the ItalianexperienceoftheCleanHands,withadjustmentspromotedbytheAmericanintelligenceandtheglobalizationoperatedininternationalforumsforcooperation.

In thisversion, legaloperators seek tocreateadirectand immediateconnectionwith thepublic opinion and, thus, bring the suspects and accusations into themainstreammedia’sspotlight,evenagainstlegalnormsandinstitutionalhierarchies.

Identifiedthemainenemytobecondemnedanddemoralized–InthiscaseLulaandthePT–alliedpoliticalforcesprotectthemselveswhiletheystillcanfromtheanti-corruptioncrusade.Andthen,lavajatogetstoitspoint:toremove,destroyandtoincineratethehead,theLEADER.That'swhatwe'rewatching.

190

Punitivepowerandthemanifestspeechofpunishment:averticaldecisionofpower

RubenRockenbachManente*

Thepresentarticleaimstoanalyze,fromtheperspectiveproposedbycriticalthinkinginthecriminalfield,thedecisionpronouncedbythe13thFederalCourtofCuritiba/Paraná,onJuly12, 2017, which declared as partially founded the complaint filed by the Federal PublicProsecutor'sOffice,withintheframeworkoftheso-called"OperationCarWash",tocondemn,amongothers,theformerPresidentoftheRepublicLuizInácioLuladaSilva(a)foracrimeofpassivecorruption(article317oftheCriminalCode)forthereceiptofanundueadvantagefrom the OAS Group as a result of the contract of the CONEST/RNEST consortium withPetrobras;and(b)foramoney-launderingcrime(article1,caput,itemV,ofLawNo.9.613/98)involvingtheconcealmentanddissimulationoftheownershipofthe“triplex”apartment164-A, and for being a beneficiary of the reforms carried out (item No. 944 of thecondemnatorypenalsentence).

Itshouldbenoted,atfirst,thatthisanalysisdoesnotintendtopersonifythecriticismsoftheaforementionedjudicialdecisioninthepersonofthemagistratewhorenderedthissentence,but rather, in view of the theoretical framework that guides our action, to question thelegitimizingdiscourseofpunishmentunderstoodastheofficialtheoreticalfoundationofthepointsofmeaningofcriminalpenaltythatservedasthebasisfortheFederalJusticeofParaná,beingajudicialagencyofthepenalsystem,tojustifythepunishmentofnineyearsandsixmonths of imprisonment, in an initial closed regime, for crimes of passive corruption andmoneylaunderingtoLuizInácioLuladaSilva(item948ofthedecision).

Amodelthatrepresentsaverticaldecisionofpowerthatisnotwillingtosolveconflicts,ie,that itdoesnot intendtoavoid,reduce,repairorrestorethedamagecausedbysomeone(despitethefactthatthemediastrategyusedbythe"CarWashTaskForce"sellustheideaofthepossibilityofeliminatingcorruption).Onthecontrary,asarule,onesimplydeterminesthe incarceration of the criminalized person for a certain period of time, whereas thebehaviorsthataretheobjectof"combat"continuetooccurnormally(seetheexampleoftheconsequencesofthewarondrugsandterror.Or,theveryimpeachmentofPresidentDilmaRousseffto"return"thegovernabilitytotheCountry).

Thegreat"trap"promotedbythepunitivemodelispreciselytohidewhatinterestsitmost:the exercise of vigilance and control over all of us. Although their legitimating (manifest)speechesaffirmthatpunishmentistheonlywayoutoffightingtheemergencyandtheenemy("corruption"andtheWorkers'Party,respectively),thefactisthatthenarrativeitselfservesasajustificationforcreatingastateofcollectiveparanoiathatauthorizestheunlimitedandunrestrainedexerciseofpunitivepower(latentpurpose).

It isenoughtoseethatallpromisestoprotectsocietyagainsttheenemyandtheircrimeswere not fulfilled by state coercion, on the contrary, served as a basis for increasing therestrictionof freedom,ofcriminalizedsubjectsornot,deepeningsocialverticalizationandflexibilityofconstitutionalguarantees(selectiveleakageofsensitivedataandunrestricteduseof"award-winningcooperationagreements",forexample).

*DoctorofJuridicalandPoliticalSciencesbyUniversidadPablodeOlavide–UPO(Seville/Spain)andProfessorofCriminalLawatFaculdadeCESUSC(Florianópolis/Brazil).

191

However,inspiteofthenon-fulfillmentofallthepromised,punitivepowercontinuestoexistandisincreasinglystrengthenedasaninstrumentofregulationoftheconflictsexistinginthesocialfabric.Thepunitivemodeldoesnotneedto"deliverusfromevilandsinners"forustobelieveinitsexistence.Itexistsbecauseitgivesushope;becausewithiteverythingbecomeseasiertosolve.

In his eternal journey through the "sertão"212 Riobaldo already knew of these pitfalls ofdiscourseintryingtoexplainthedifferencebetweenGodandthedeviltohisinterlocutor,theoutsider.Inoneofhisdialogues,the“sertanista”wanders:howcouldGodnotexist?!WithGodexisting,everythinggivesushope.Amiracleisalwayspossible,everythingissolved.ButifthereisnoGod,wewillbelostinthecomingandgoingoflife,andlifewillbedumb.AndwithGod,itislessseriousifyouneglectthingsalittle,becauseintheenditworks.Don'tyousee?WhatisnotGod,isademonstate.Godexistsevenwhenheisnot.Butthedevildoesnothavetoexisttobe-weknowhedoesnotexist,that'swhenhetakesovereverything.213

InRiobaldo'swords,thepunitivepowerdoesnothavetoworktoexist,weknowthatitdoesnotwork,butthenittakesovereverything,afterall,asthecharacterconcludes:"thedevilinthestreet,inthemiddleofthewhirlwind".214

The punitivemodel, both in the example brought from the literature and in the reflexesproducedaftertheattacksofSeptember11 intheUnitedStates,215becomesthemotorofhumanrelations,replacingdemocraticandpoliticalactionsasmanagersofthesocialfabricbya permanent state of police with a clear tendency towards absolutism. Such a device ofvengeanceisinstrumentedbytheStatethroughagenciesofthepenalsystemthatdealwiththeexerciseofpunitivepower,actinginaspecificornonspecificwayonit.

This is because the speeches that justify the penalty are put into practice by severalagencies/judicialinstitutionsofthepenalsystem(police,penitentiaryservice,criminalcourts,amongothers),inourspecificcase,the13thFederalCourtofCuritiba/Paranáinthecriminalaction No. 5046512-94.2016.4.04.7000/PR that culminated in the conviction of formerPresidentLuizInácioLuladaSilvaforcrimesofpassivecorruptionandmoneylaundering.

Theinstitutionalcomponentofrights,JoaquínHerreraFloresteaches,isveryrelevant,sinceevery institution is the legal, political, economic and/or social result of a certain way ofunderstanding social conflicts. For this reason, "we understand institutions as spaces ofmediation in which the ever-provisional results of social struggles for dignity arecrystallized,"216without forgetting, of course, that speaking of "institution" is the same asdealingwiththerelationsofpowerthatexcelintheconcretehistoricalmomentinwhichwelive.

Similarly,wemustnotforgetthatthecriminalsystemisthesetofagenciesinvolvedinthecriminal issue, that is, a system in the sense of a set of entities and their relations both

212ROSA,JoãoGuimarães.Grandesertão:veredas.RiodeJaneiro:NovaFronteira,2001.213Idem,p.76.214Idem,p.27.215Inthissense:ZIZEK,Slavoj.Bem-vindoaodesertodoReal:cincoensaiossobreo11deSetembroedatasrelacionadas.TranslationbyPauloCezarCastanheira.SãoPaulo:Boitempo,2003.216HERRERAFLORES,Joaquín.Areinvençãodosdireitoshumanos.TranslationbyCarlosRobertoDiogoGarcia;AntonioHenriqueGracianoSuxberger;JeffersonAparecidoDias.Florianópolis:FundaçãoBoiteux,2009,p.128-129.

192

reciprocallyandwiththeenvironment,or,inZaffaroni'swords,“itisnotasetoforgansofthesame tissue that converge in a function (…) each of these agencies has its own sectoralinterests".217Thus,eachagencyhasitsownsectoralinterestsanditsownqualitycontrolsinitsoperations,afterall,"theyhavediscoursesoutward,whichhighlighttheirnoblestmanifest(official) purposes and discourses inward, which justify for their members the disparitybetweentheirmanifestpurposesandwhattheyactuallydo(latentpurposes)".218

Such "sectoral interests" are clearly present in the condemnatory decisionunder analysis,sinceitsofficialdiscourse(outward)againstcorruption(initem961ofthecriminalsentencethejudgeusesthesaying"nomatterhowtallyouare,thelawisstillaboveyou")legitimizesitsmanifestpurpose(inward)ofunrestrictedexerciseofpunitivepowertojustifythemeritsof the accusation that the ex-President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva would have consciouslyparticipated in the criminal scheme, including knowing that Petrobras' Officers used theirpositionstoreceiveanundueadvantageinfavorofpoliticalagentsandpoliticalparties(item07ofthedecision).

Theaforementionedundueadvantagewouldhavebeenembodiedintheprovisiontotheex-Chairmanofthe164-A"triplex"apartmentatCondominiumSolarisinthecityofGuarujá/SP,withoutpaymentofthecorrespondingprice(item12)underthecentralargumentthat"thecriminalschemethatvictimizedPetrobrasandinvolvedfraudulentbiddingadjustmentsandthepaymentofundueadvantagetoPetrobrasagents,politicalagentsandpoliticalpartieswasproven”(item835),andthat, inthiscriminalarticulation,“theformerPresidentLuizInácioLuladaSilvahadarelevantroleinthecriminalscheme,sinceitwasincumbentuponhimtoindicatethenamesoftheOfficerstoPetrobras'BoardofDirectorsandtherequestsoftheFederalGovernmentwereanswered"(item838).Theevidencewhichleadsthemagistratetocondemnationisastoundedatthefactthat"itseemsalittlestrangethat,giventhemagnitudeofthecriminalscheme,illustratedbythefactthatPetrobrashadrecognizedaboutsixbillionreaisInaccountinglosseswithcorruptioninthebalancesheetof2015,theex-Presidentdidn'thaveanyknowledge,especiallysincethecriminalschemewouldalsohaveinvolvedtheuseofkickbacksincorruptioninPetrobrastofinanceelectoralcampaigns,includingtheWorkers'PartybywhichtheformerPresidentwaselectedandelectedhissuccessor"(item801).

Thedisparitybetweenthemanifestandlatentpurposesofpunitivepowerisprojectedagainintheconvictionatthetimeofthefirstphaseofthedosimetryofthesentence(article59ofthe CP) of former President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva, in relation to the crime of passivecorruption,219whenthebasicpenaltyisfixedinfiveyearsofimprisonment(3yearsabovethelegalminimum)duetothree(oftheeight!)"negativevectorofspecialdisapproval",oneofthem being " negative analysis as a personality "(item 948). That is to say, although thecriminal record, social conduct, motives and behavior of the victim are favorable to theaccused (although the term used in the sentence was "neutral"), the basic sentence isincreased by three years in total discrepancy with the provisions of law, dogmatics andjurisprudence.

217ZAFFARONI,EugenioRaúl.Manualdederechopenal.BuenosAires:Ediar,2011,p.10.218Idem,p.10.219Punishedwithimprisonmentfrom2to12yearsandfine.

193

Thesentencethusrevealsthatthepunitivemodelisadiscursiveinstrumentthatprovidesthebasisforcreatingastateofcollectiveparanoiathatservesforthosewhooperatethepowertoexerciseitwithoutanylimit.

194

Thecriminalsentenceandtheagnostictheory

SergioF.C.GrazianoSobrinho*

The themeproposed in this article is the content of the condemnatory criminal sentencehandeddownintheproceedingsoftheCriminalActionnumber5046512-94.2016.4.04.7000/PRthatprocessin13thFederalBranchofCuritiba,delimitedinappearanceofitsevidentiarycontent,namely,tounderstandthemechanismsbywhichthesentencingmagistrateformedhisconvictionandattributedtoEx-PresidentLuizInácioLuladaSilvathepracticeofcrimesofpassivecorruptionandcapital(money)laundering,condemninghimtoasentenceof9yearsand6monthsofreclusion(incarceration).Thecentralobjectiveofthisarticle isgothrough,from the point of view of the grounds of the sentence, which connections – principle ofcorrelation–wereestablishedbythemagistrateamongfacts,accusatorynarrativeandtheevidenceproducedbytheprosecutionandtheactualcondemnationto,afterall,minimally,tounderstanditsfinalcontent.

Itisimportanttoanalyzethepointatwhichthemagistrateusesargumentstosubstantiatehis conviction, in particular, that Lula practiced criminal offences for having participatedconsciouslyofthecriminalschemeinwhichPetrobrasDirectorsusedtheirpositionstoreceiveundueadvantageinfavorofagentsandpoliticalpartiesand,beyondthat,hewouldalsohavereceived, the accused himself, values embodied in the provision of an apartmentwithoutpaymentofthecorrespondingprice.Hereisafirstpointthatmustbeilluminated,avoidingasubliminalobscurity,otherwiselet’ssee:theterminology“Availability”isusedbeginninginthejudicialsentence,sothatattheend,thereisunderstanding,commonsense,betweentheimputation made by the prosecution (Public Ministry) and the condemnatorysentence(Judge).

Theargumentanditspresentationformaresophisticated,butattentionisneeded,becausethe judgebecomesagnostic in relation to the law itself, thisbecausehepositionshimselfindifferentlytothenormativetext,becauseheignoresandexemptshimselffromtheminimaldogmaticreflection;withthefirmintentionofwieldinghisargument,andadequatesittotheelementsofthecriminaltype“corruption”.Thesophisticationoftheargumentisinthesetwopoints: a) There is no a generic type “corruption”, but two criminal types, the passivecorruption(317 article from Penal Code, practiced by public official) and the activecorruption(333 article from Penal Code, practiced by individuals); b) both criminal types,passive and active corruption, do not have the terminology “available”, since the actionsforeseeninthesetypescontainfiveconduits:requestorreceiveundueadvantageandacceptpromise of advantage(passive corruption) and offer or promise undue advantage(activecorruption).Lulawasaccusedforthepracticeofpassivecorruption,thatis,heshouldhaverequestedorreceivedanundueadvantage,orhaveacceptedapromiseofundueadvantage.Accordingtothesentence,thecompanyOASwouldhaveleftatthedisposalofLulaembodiedvaluesinthetriplexapartment,howeverhesaid“no”,fortothisdaythisapartmentisnotinhisname,neitherisheundueitspossessor.

Itisworthmentioninganotherhistoricalpassageofthelegalartifactproducedinthatcriminalprocess,whichclarifies–fromthedogmaticpointofview,butnotthepoliticalandideologicalpointofviewofthesentence–ourdiscussioninthisarticle.Letussee: intheDeclaratory

*Doutor emDireito, professor do PPG emDireitoAmbiental daUniversidade de Caxias do Sul (RS). e.mail:graziano@grazianoerizzatti.com.br

195

EmbargoesproposedbythedefenseofEx-PresidentLula,thejudge(court)askedtoexpresshis(its)viewsontheevidenceinthefileandtherelationshipbetweenthecomplaintandthejudgment,clarifies:“ThisjudgmentneverstatedinthesentenceoranywherethatthevaluesobtainedbytheContractorOASinthecontractswithPetrobraswereusedtopayanundueadvantagetotheEx-President.”

Forthepurposesofthisdebate,thedecisionintheDeclaratoryEmbargosisrevealing,thisexplainswhy,forexample,ifOASmadeavailablethetriplexapartment,renovated,furnishedanddecoratedtotheofthefamilyofEx-PresidentLula,thiswouldbesufficienttocharacterizethe crimeof corruption(generic,whichdoesnotexist).However, this same judgmentalsorecognizes,forexample,i)thatPetrobrasdidnotsufferanylossfromcontractsenteredintowiththeCompanyOAS;ii)thattheamountsreceivedbyOASinconnectionwiththe(legal)contractsentered intowithPetrobrasdidnotservetopay illicitadvantagetoEx-PresidentLula;iii)thatEx-PresidentLuladidnotcommitthecrimeofpassivecorruption,becausethiscrimerequiresthatthepublicofficialsolicit,receiveoracceptpromiseofillicitadvantage,however,asseen,noneofthisexisted.

Finallyfromadogmaticpointofview,itshouldalsoclarifiedthatifthecompany’sdirectorsmadethetriplexapartmentavailableforanyillegalpurpose,theycouldhavecommittedsomecrime,butitisneitherautomaticnorobligatorythatthesupposedbeneficiarytowhomwouldhave made available the apartment has committed the crime of passive corruption, thisbecausetheexistenceofacrimedoesnotnecessarilypresupposetheexistenceoftheother.Offering money (active corruption) to the policeman to avoid a traffic ticket does notautomaticallyandcompulsorilymeanthatthepolicemanhascommittedthecrimeofpassivecorruption , as itwouldonlyoccur if itwereonly if thepolicemanhad received thevalueoffered.

Tofinish,somereflectionsonthepointsraisedhere.Inaveryclearwayitmustbesaid,firstofall,thatthisisonlyapointofviewonataleofalongsentence.Longsentence,whichissmaller in content andhigher in ostentation.Deep, it is shallow. In its completeness, it isempty.Itwasanattemptatapieceofworkbutitwasnomorethanadraft.Itwantedtostayregisteredgotintothetrashofhistory.Itdidnotaggregate,butitlaceratedbodiesandminds.Itwillbeproscribedsoon.Possiblewillbequicklyforgotten,itisenoughthatsomemovementsgiveitthekick itdeserves.Tryingtoerasethebrightenessofastar istheplagueroundbythosewholiveindarkness,or,asMárciaTiburisays,thejudgeinCuritibaismoreof“adullself”thatsurvivesbytryingtoerasesomeoneelse’s.”

ThecondemnatorysentencehandeddownagainsttheEx-PresidentLuizInácioLuladaSilvacan be analyzed in several other aspects including the psychoanalytic one, especially itsnarcissistic content,were it not for our scenario of hatred against the less favored socialclasses. Certainly this judicial decision came in the midst of the democratic excess thatoverflowedthechaliceandauthorizeitbypublicacclamation,althoughitwasmanipulatedinakindofcollectiveunconsciouscompletelyintoxicated.

Thecreationofanewtypicalelement inthescenarioofpenaldogmatic isabsurd,yettheutilitarianthoughtinwhichtheendsjustifythemeansisinthelogicoftheoverflowofwatercontainedinthechalice.Thisisoneofthemostfrequentvectorsinthecriminaljusticesystem,whichindicatethelowdegreeofdemocratizationofasociety,especiallysincethefrequentfailuretoobserveviolationsoffundamentalconstitutionalguaranteesrevealstheinstitutionalfragilitythatweareexperiencingdaybyday.InthewakeofsaysJoãoRicardoDornelles“we

196

live a great historical challenge(…) Contemporary fascism is infinitely more complex andsophisticated.”Letusprepareourselves,fortherewillbealonghistoricalperiod.Wemustresist.

197

AnallisfairgametocondemnLula:LéoPinheiroandthecaseoftheinformalaward-winningcollaborator

TaniaOliveira

Adoptingnewmechanismsforthepreventionandrepressionoforganizedcrime,theBraziliancriminalprocedurallawincorporatedthefigureofthewhistle-blower,whosecreationhasasitsmainpurposethefacilitationofinvestigationsofthecriminalfactinallofitscomplexity.Althoughitappearsinseveraldiplomas,theprizeawardiseffectivelyoutlinedintheBrazilianLawNo.1.850/2013,alsoknownastheCriminalOrganizationsLaw(COL)220.

Fromatheoreticalpointofview,whenorganizingtheCOL,theBrazilianlegislatorchosetocreatethefigureoftheaward-winningcollaborationasameansofproofforanykindofcrime-afactthatraisesdebatesinthelegalenvironmentquestioningthewholeessenceoftheRuleofLawinBrazil.Mainlybecause,inthesecases,theStatetransfersthedutyofinvestigatingthecrimeand starts to relyon thewordsof thosewhocommit such illegal actions,oftenofferingwaiversordiscountstopossiblefuturesentences. Ithappensthat,atthemomentwhentheStatewasgiventhemonopolyofthecriminalpersecution,itmustbepreparedtosucceedinsuchtask.Itsfailurecannot,underanycircumstancesneitherunderanypretext,becompensatedbythebargainingfortheallegedelucidationofcrimes.

Withtheoutbreakoftheso-called"CarWashOperation"bytheBrazilianFederalPolice inMarch2014,theagreementsrelatedtothecollaborationsbecameoneofthemostdebatedissuesinthepublicspheres,andalsoamonglawyers.Thecriminalprocedureassociatedtothisoperationseemstohavebeentransformedintoadangerousgamewherenooneknowswherethesearchfortruthstartsorends,whoownstheresponsibilityforinvestigation,andwherenooneiscapabletocorrectlypointoutthosewhoamongthecollaboratorsarebluffingand thosewho are not. The accusatory frenzy turned the investigation into a truemediaspectacle,withselectiveleaksofconfidentialtestimonies,makingimpossibletofullyrelyontheirveracityortheirlimits.

Theprofessedconfidentialityoftheagreementsrelatedtothecollaborators’testimonieshasbecomeatrap,inwhichpeopleare"notified"oftheirpresence'sintestimoniesbythepress,andcannotdefendthemselvesonceunfamiliarwiththecontentofthe"accusations."Ontheotherhand,peoplewhoareaccusedinthosetestimonieshavebeenofficiallydeniedaccessto the contents of the accusations, in clear violation of the full defense right, and also,maculatingtheadversarialprinciple.

Fromapracticalpointofview,basedonprecedentfindingsintheBraziliancriminalprocedure,testimoniesprovidedbycollaboratorsundertheseoranyotheroperationdonotserveasanonly evidence in a plea for guilty. It should be considered a support to the criminalinvestigationoncewhatisaffirmedbythecollaboratormightbetrueornot.Itisthereforeimperativethatthecollaboratoralsoprovidesfurtherelementsthatcanbeconsideredproofsandsupporttheinformationprovidedintestimony.Withoutfurtherelements,atestimonybecomesamerestatementwithnolegalvalidity.Thequestion,asitappearsinthecaseoftheCarWashOperation,isthatitthoseinvolvedintheinvestigationsmustbereallycarefulwhen analyzing the veracity of the testimonies, andmust findways to dealwithwhat is,

220 Originally “Lei das Organizações Criminosas”, in Portuguese, and available at:http://www.planalto.gov.br/ccivil_03/_ato2011-2014/2013/lei/l12850.htm

198

afterwards, interpreted as fake information.When convictions are built on the basis of astatementofapersonwhowaspreviouslyaccusedofmisconduct,corruptionorcommittingacrime,andseescollaborationasameanstogetawayfromacriminalconviction,deviationsmayariseandthecollaborationinstituteisthenmisused.

ThecaseofbusinessmanJoséAldemárioPinheiroFilho,alsoknownasLéoPinheiro,isaspecialchapterintheCarWashOperationnovelanditsonlyapparentlylegalcollaborations.Thefactsshow that themisuseof the collaboration-tools goesbeyond imagination, andworse, theactorsinvolvedintheinvestigationswhoarepartoftheCarWashOperationdisregardtheabsenceofcharacteristicsthatthesecollaborationsrequireinordertobeconsideredlegallyvalid.

Indeed,LéoPinheirotestifiedtoJudgeSérgioMorointhecaseoftheCriminalAct5046512-94.2016.404.7000/PR, on April 20, 2017. In the condition of co-defendant, he had noobligationtospeakthetruth,inthemidstofapossiblefutureagreementthatwouldleadtoanaward-winningcollaborationwiththeBrazilianFederalProsecutionOffice221withintheCarWashOperation.

ThelawyersofformerpresidentLulasubmittedarequesttoJudgeSérgioMorosothattheFederal Prosecution Office could clarify the status of the negotiations related to thecollaboration agreement of Jose Adelmário Pinheiro Filho and Agenor FranklinMagalhãesMedeiros,aswellasthebenefitsofferedtoboth.Inrejectingthedefense'sclaim,thejudgestatedthatthematterhadalreadybeenthesubjectoftheinterrogationhearingsinwhichthedefendantsstatedthattheyweretryingtoconcludeanagreementbuttheprocesswasnotfinalizedyet.Therefore,JudgeMoroarguedthatoncenobenefitcouldhavebeenofferedatthatpointhewoulddenyLuizInácioLuladaSilvaandhisdefendersaccesstoevidencealreadydocumented.

TheBindingPrecedentnumber14oftheBrazilianSupremeCourtisunquestionableontherightofdefense:"Itistherightofthedefender,intheinterestofthedefendant,tohavefullaccesstotheevidencethat,oncealreadydocumentedinaninvestigativeprocedurecarriedoutbyabodywithcompetenceofcriminalpolice,arerelatedtotheexerciseoftherightofdefense."222

Itbecameclearthattheabovementioneddefendantsnamely,PinheiroandMedeiros,gavetestimonyso that the investigativebodiescouldcheckwhether therewasan indicationofmisconductspotentiallyattributabletoformerPresidentLulaandthosewouldbeaconditiontounlocktheagreementswiththeFederalProsecutionOffice-whichwereundernegotiationforseveralmonths.Thus,LéoPinheiro'stestimonywastheconditioningfactortoadjustthepact. That leads us to the conclusion that the "information" he provided about formerpresidentLulawouldqualifyhimtoreceivethebenefitsoftheagreement.Theparadoxisthat,notbeingcommittedtospeakthetruth,testifyingundertheconditionofdefendant,Pinheirowouldnotbe chargedwith any crimes in casehedidn’t actwith veracity.While lying, he

221 In Brazil, the Federal Prosecution Office in known as “Ministério Público Federal”. More informationavailable,inPortuguese,at:http://www.mpf.mp.br/222AvailableinPortugueseat:http://www.stf.jus.br/portal/jurisprudencia/listarJurisprudencia.asp?s1=14.NUME.%20E%20S.FLSV.&base=baseSumulasVinculantes

199

soughttolegitimizehimselftoobtainthebenefitsofthecollaborationagreementwiththeFederalProsecutionOffice,withouttheriskofjeopardizinghisowndefenseprocess.

Despitethisfact,Pinheiro'sdefenseclaimed,intheopportunityofthepresentationoflegaldocuments223relatedtothecurrentinvestigationonbothPinheiroandFormerPresidentLula,thecognitionofthevalidityofhiscollaborationandtheapplicationofthepertinentcriminalprovisionsrelatedtoobtainingbenefits,andfurtheraskingtoreducingthepenaltiesbytwothirdsandachangetoamorefavorablecriminalregime.

Duringthe218pagesofthesentencecondemningformerPresidentLulato9andahalfyearsinprison,JudgeSérgioMoro,makesfirstallsortsofconsiderationsjustifyingwhyhewouldnotbeabletoconsiderthetestimonyofLéoPinheiroasaward-winningcollaboration.Buthefurtheraffirmsinhissentencethat:

"Althoughlateandwithouttheformalizationoftheagreementofcollaboration,itisnecessarytorecognizethatthecondemnedJoséAdelmárioPinheiroFilhocontributed, inthiscriminalaction,totheclarificationofthetruth,providingbothtestimonyanddocuments.

(...)

"Being his testimony consistent with the rest of the evidence, especially inregard to the documentary evidence produced and having it, the testimony,evidentiary relevance for the trial, the granting of legal benefits is thusjustified."(pages209-210oftheCase’sSentence)

ThejudgefurtheraffirmsthatwhiledecidingwhetherPinheirowouldbenefitfromhis(non-binding) collaborationornot,he reliedon theparametersof thecollaborationagreementmadebetween theFederal ProsecutionOfficeandMarceloBahiaOdebrecht, PresidentofOdebrecht.HewasdoingsoonceheconsideredthatbothOdebrechtandPinheiropracticedverysimilarcrimesunderalmostthesamematerialandpersonalconditions.

Thereareseveraltypesoferrorsanddistortionsintheprocessofconsideringwhatkindof“evidence”wasobtainedwiththetestimonyofLéoPinheiro.

Firstly,whatcanbeunderstoodofthisexperienceisthatbothJudgeMoroandtheFederalPublicProsecutorhaveacknowledgedanawardtoadefendantwhowasneverconsidered,bearinginmindtheformalitiesneeded,acollaboratorandtheabsenceofasignedagreementbetweenpartsisanadditionalproofofthat.

They further agreed to grant Léo Pinheiro other benefits by the very moment Pinheiroaffirmedthataproperty located in thecityofGuarujá, in thecostof theSaoPauloState,belonged to formerPresident Lula224.Bydoing so, theyhave,beyond the knownBraziliancriminalprocedures,createdaninexistentfigureoftheinformalaward-winningcollaborator.Additionally, they have also openly ignored the provisions of art. 6, of the Brazilian Lawnumber12.850/2013thatregardstoaward-winningcollaborations.

223 Full content is available in Portuguese at http://politica.estadao.com.br/blogs/fausto-macedo/wp-content/uploads/sites/41/2017/06/A-TROCA-.pdf224AlsoknowninBrazilasthe“TriplexCase”.Triplexmakesreferenceinportuguesetoathree-floorapartment.

200

Onthe211thpageofthesentence,JudgeMoromanagestointroduceargumentstojustifyhisinnovativemeasures.Whilereaffirmingoverandovertheobvious-thefactthatgrantinganawardtoacollaboratormustbedirectlyrelatedtotheconfirmationoftheappealingcourt-inhisownterms,heensuredtheclosecollaborationofPinheiro,aswellashisobligationofspeakingthetruth.

"The granting of awards is still conditional to the continuity of thecollaboration,onlyalongwiththetruthoffactsinallothercriminalcasesinwhichtheconvictiscalledtotestify.

In case it is observed that there is either a lack of cooperation or that thecondemned person is noticeably absent from the truth, all benefits thecondemnedhasbeenawardedwithshouldberevoked."(myemphasis)

TherewasadeliberateconfusionpromotedbyJudgeMoroinhissentence,whenturningatestimonyfromadefendantthatdidnoteffectivelycommittospeakthetruthnorhassignedanycollaborationagreementwithanyofthepartsinvolvedintheprocessinanaward-winingcollaboration. The act of only demanding that the defendant, and later condemned,Mr.Pinheiro commit to speak the truth in future interrogations is simply absurd.Bydoing so,JudgeMoromanagedtodeviatefromthemostbasicprinciplesofthecriminallawinBrazil.

If there was ever a disagreement that interrogations are procedures that are consideredmeans of defense, is its absolutely unquestionable that every person who is underinvestigationhasboththeconstitutionalrighttoremainsilentandtherightnottoproduceevidenceagainsthimorherself.

LéoPinheirowasalreadysentencedbyJudgeMoroto16yearsand4monthsofimprisonmentinanotherlawsuitforactivecorruption,moneylaunderingandcriminalorganization.Hewasarrested for the first time inNovember2014,andputunderhouse-arrestby theBrazilianSupremeCourt.Hehasalsotestifiedmanytimes.

Duringalmost3yearsofinvestigation,healwaysdeniedanyinvolvementofformerPresidentLula in the case of the three-floor apartment the Federal Public ProsecutionOffice said eowned.Duringtheseyears,LéoPinheiro'sintentionstoformalizeaward-winningagreementswere successively rejected for failing to mention the former president in any form. InSeptember2016,15daysafterthePublicProsecutionOfficedeniedadealontheagreementbecauseofthe lackof"useful" information,PinheirowasarrestedbyJudgeMoroandtwomonthslaterhereceivedanewsentencedwherehiscriminalpenaltiesincreasedin10years.

InApril 2017,more than two years after his first arrest, Pinheiro decided to provide newinformationtoFederalProsecutorDeltanDallagnolwithanewtestimonythatbothDallagnolandJudgeMoroconsideredafullcollaborationwiththeworkoftheBrazilianJustice.Inhistestimony,hereaffirmedDallagnolandMoro'sthesisthattherealownerofthethree-floorapartmentinthecoastofBrazilwasPresidentLula.AndhesaidhebelievedthatLulawastheowneroftheapartmentbecausehehadprobablyreceivedthatapartmentasbriberyfromthecompanyLéoPinheirowasaformerdirectorof,theOASBuildingCompany.

OneofthemaincharacteristicsofthestorythatLéoPinheirotoldthejusticeyearslater,in2017,isitsunlikeliness.OnemustnotforgetthatthislastcooperationcameafteryearsofLéoPinheirobeingunderpressure,whilearrestedandwithhiscriminalpenaltiesincreasedin10years,awhilebefore.Itmaysoundabitawkwardthatthetestimonyoftheother73witnesses

201

thatwereheardin24sessions,alongwiththedocumentationprovidedbyPresidentLula'slawyers,weresubjectofanalysisinonly29paragraphsofJudgeSérgioMoro'ssentence.

Judge Moro clearly stated that Léo Pinheiro's words should be understood as a fullcooperation with investigations - and reaffirmed that it is absolutely out of question itsabsenceofcharacteristicsthathavepermittedittobeconsideredlegallyvalid.ButifwealltookintoaccountthetestimonyprovidedbyLéoPinheiro,wecouldbeseducedtousethesame criteria of the abductive logic adopted by Deltan Dallagnol in the final allegationspresentedinthisverysamecriminalprocedure.Whatarethefactualhypothesesthatexplaintheevidence?WasPinheiro'sstatementfabricated?WasitaresultofanagreementbetweenthepartswhowantedtocondemnformerPresidentLulainthis“allisfair”game?Wasthecreationofthefigureoftheinformalaward-winningcollaboratorbuiltuponlytosupportthecondemnationoftheformerPresidentLula?Areallanswersabovecorrect?

“-Elementary,mydearWatson”.

202

Moro’ssentence:“checkmate”&bouncedcheck

TarsoGenro*

Those who read Judge SérgioMoro’s sentence convicting former Brazilian president LuizInácioLuladaSilvawithoutthehighpassionsofthecurrentpoliticaldisputeofwhichitispartmayunderstandthesupportivecomplimentssomeofhiscorporatepeershavepaidhiminunusualpromptness.Buttheywouldhardlybeconvincedthatsuchadecisioncouldprosperinaneutralcourt,withoutusing“exceptionalreasons,”whichhavebeenguiding–sofar–thecriminal claims against Brazil’s former leader. Lack of logical basis, inductive-analyticalreasoningintheexaminationoftestimonieswithoutcollatingthemwithsupportingevidence,the selection of relevant and irrelevant facts according to an already defined option forconviction, and, of course, a political bias, followed by a media massacre consistentlysponsoredbymostofmainstreamoutlets−actuallypromotedtotheconditionof“exofficio”prosecutorthrougharbitraryheadlines.

Adoptingthismethodandcriminal-proceduralvision,alldefendantswhowereallowedpleabargains–Imeanthoseaccusedofgainingfinancialbenefitsfromtheconstructionfirms–,regardlessofthedefensetheypresent,shallbeunappealablyconvicted.Thereasonforthatissimple:thejudge’sbeliefnolongerneedstobebasedontheproceedings,butmayemergefromaprogrammedorvoluntarybeliefthatisnotintherecords,andthereforeisinformedby the realm of politics and partisan contestation. This is the same for any party or anycompany deemed as corrupt. However, Brazil’s Federal Supreme Court (STF) signalssomething different. As proceedings unfold against the protagonists of the coup and the“advocates” of reforms, the country’s highest court revalues principles of presumption ofinnocence,fulldefense,andnon-exceptionaldueprocessoflaw.

ButthosewhothinkJudgeMoroisadilettanteinthelegalmatter,whowas“mistaken”inanimportantjudgment,arewrong.Hiselectionbythemediaoligopolyasfirstmanofthelaw,pressing the STF to change historical interpretations on constitutional guarantees – tosuperimposeapoliticalprocess’needsovertheguaranteesoftheRuleofLaw(because“thecountryurges”tofightcorruption)–allowedMorotohavethepoliticalstatusto“checkmate”thecountry.Andsohedid,becauseallthealternativesconveyedinhis judgmentwhetherprolongBrazil’scurrentcrisisormakeimmenseroomforimpunity,orevendelegitimizeevenfurtherthepoliticalsphereiftheymakedaSilvaunabletorunforpresidentin2018.

On the first hypothesis, they “prolong” the crisis through a crisis in the Judiciary, as hisdecisions to maintain endless arrests start to find echo in other instances, thereforedemonstratinghowdiscriminatingtheyare.Onasecondhypothesis, theymake“immenseroomforimpunity,”becausetheHighCourtofJustice(STJ)andtheSTF’seventualrebuttal–to re-establish the guarantees of presumption of innocence and the res judicata for theexecutionofthesentences–shalldirectlybenefitthenextgenerationofdefendants,whethertheyareguiltyornot–comingfromthecoup–,whoarealreadybeingreleasedorhavenotfacedtrialyet.Onthethirdhypothesis,ifdaSilva’sexclusionarysentenceissimplyconfirmedor appealedagainst,whoever is electedpresident in 2018will haveno legitimacy to rule.Therefore,whatever thedecisionsofhigher courts (because theentireprocesswas just a

*HasheldthepositionsofGovernoroftheStateofRioGrandedoSul,MayorofPortoAlegre,MinisterofJustice,MinisterofEducation,andMinisterofInstitutionalRelationsofBrazilTranslatedby:RaneSouza

203

seriesofexceptionsandselectivity) fromnowown–whether theyconfirm the judgment,overrideittoacquitdaSilvaorincreasehissentence–,theywillaggravatethepoliticalcrisis,shake the trust in the justice system evenmore, escalate the extremism in the country’scurrentclassstruggle,andenableamediaoligopolytocontrolthenationalagenda.Thatistheverymediaoligopolywhichproduced the fascist incrimination– inabstracto –ofpoliticalpartiesandpoliticians,treatinghonestones,theoneswhocommittedthepervertedbetrayalofusingslushfunds,andtheoneswholivedandsurvivedtheschoolofbriberyandcrimeasiftheywereallthesame.

Moro’ssentence–weakanddamningwithnoevidence,previouslydecidedintherealmofinformationspreading–“checkmates”aRepublicthatdoesnothaveapoliticaleliteintheparliamentabletoresistthedecaythattwopartiesspecially,thePMDB(BrazilianDemocraticMovementParty)andthePSDB(BrazilianSocial-DemocraticParty),havebeenpromotinginourdemocracyincrisis.Butthesentenceisalsoabouncedcheck,payingforaservicetotheright-wing liberalism protecting the reforms, as its majority in Congress may fall on theunpredictablegallowsofunlawfulprocessesorthetrialofthesovereignpeople,deceivedbythemtopassthereforms,asiftheywereactuallyconcernedaboutcorruption.A“checkmate”mixedwithabouncedcheckrepeatingas farcetheBerlusconiera’s“cleanhands” in Italy,whichwereonlyabletomakethosehandsevendirtier.

204

TheconvictionofPresidentLulaasaviolationofinternationalhumanrightslaw

TatyanaScheilaFriedrichLarissaRamina

"Justice,blindtooneside,isnolongerjustice.Itmustlookequallytotherightandtotheleft."

(RuiBarbosa)

Theneedtoestablishaminimumofrightsandguaranteestoindividualsregardlessoftheirorigin,nationalityor linktoaspecificcountryconsolidatedtheInternationalHumanRightsLaw. The atrocities committed by the Nazi-fascist regimes have shown that the rightsenvisagedinternallywouldnotbesufficientbecauseanarbitrarystateauthoritycouldappearatanymomentandsimplywithdrawalltherightsofthepopulation,duetoapersonalformofthoughtandjustification.Thus,aftertheWorldWarII,thatlegalbranchhasbeenaffirmingitself,fromthestruggleinvolvingpeople,organizationsandstatesengagedinitspromotion.

InternationalHumanRightsLawconsistsofthreeverybroadstrands,includingInternationalHumanitarianLaw,whichdealswiththeprotectionofpersonsinsituationsofarmedconflict,InternationalRefugeeLaw,whichseekstoprotecthumanbeingswhoarepersecutedandfitintotheconceptof"refugee"andInternationalHumanRightsLawitself,whichencompassesawiderangeofindividualandcollectiverights,bothinthefieldofcivilandpoliticalrightsandinthefieldofeconomic,socialandculturalrights,inadditiontothoserelatedtobioethics.The third strand includes rights related to the subject of justice, including the proceduralsafeguards related to personswho are subject to administrative and judicial proceedings,whicharerelevanttothepresentstudy.

Regardingthesituationsinvolvinglegalproceedings,thecentralprinciple,whichgivesrisetoall theguaranteesofthe jurisdictionandthatthereforemustberespectedbyall involved,includingthejudgingauthority,istheprincipleofdueprocessoflaw.Itincorporatesthevaluesthat are essential to any judgment: ample defense, contradictory, double degree ofjurisdiction, legal reasoning, natural judge, parity of resources, presumptionof innocence,prohibitionofillicitevidenceandrealtruth.

ThesentencehandeddownbyJudgeSérgioMoroofthefourthbranchoftheFederalCourtofCuritiba inJuly2017, inthecase inwhichformerPresidentLuiz InácioLuladaSilvawasfound guilty and sentenced to nine and a half years for passive corruption and moneylaundering,presentsseveralinconsistenciesandseriousviolationsofthisbasicprincipleanditsdimensions,providedbothininternationaltextsinforceatregionallevelandinthoseofauniversalcharacter.

The topic of human rights has always been a concern in the Americas, where the firstinternationalhumanrightsdocumentemerged:theAmericanDeclarationoftheRightsandDutiesofMan,promulgatedinApril1948,atthetimeofthecreationoftheOrganizationofAmericanStates itself.TheUniversalDeclarationofHumanRightswasadoptedby theUNGeneralAssemblyafewmonthslater,inDecemberofthesameyear.AccordingtoLindgrenAlves,

“TheAmericanDeclarationdiffersfromtheUniversalDeclarationintermsofcontentbecauseit is not just abill of rights. It establishesnotonly the rights inherent in all humanbeingsendowed with innate attributes of dignity, freedom and equality. Because of the equally

205

congenitalattributesof reasonand consciousnessof thehumanperson, it alsoestablishescorrelateddutiestotheserights.

AccordingtothesecondparagraphofitsPreamble:"Ifrightsexaltindividualfreedom,dutiesexpressthedignityofthatfreedom."Thus,thedocumentisadaptedtothetraditionallegaldoctrineaccordingtowitchtoeachrightcorrespondsaduty.”

Regardingaccesstojustice,theAmericanDeclarationstatesinitsarticle18that"Everypersonmay resort to the courts to ensure respect for his legal rights. There should likewise beavailabletohimasimple,briefprocedurewherebythecourtswillprotecthimfromactsofauthoritythat,tohisprejudice,violateanyfundamentalconstitutionalrights.”Subsequently,article26dealswiththepresumptionof innocenceoftheaccusedandwithprinciplesthatmustgovernthetestimony,thetrialandthedeterminationofthesentence,asfollows:

“Article XXVI. Every accused person is presumed to be innocent until proved guilty. Everypersonaccusedofanoffensehastherighttobegivenanimpartialandpublichearing,andtobe tried by courts previously established in accordancewith pre-existing laws, and not toreceivecruel, infamousorunusualpunishment.”Atthispointthe irregularities inthewholeprocesscanbeverifiedatthetestimonyofFormerPresidentLula,forexample,whenvideosshowedthejudge'sactionswithstrongbias,badwilltowardshisdefendersandinterruptionsoftheinterventions.Thesentenceimposed,ofnineyearsandsixmonths,canbeconsideredinfamous,sinceitiscommonknowledgetheironyofthatjudgetocall,intheprivatesphere,thedefendantbythedenominationof"nine",inreferencetothefactthatLulahasonlyninefingersduetoaworkaccidentinthepast.Arealaggressiontothehonorofthehumanbeing.

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights was adopted at the UNGeneral Assembly onDecember10,1948,anddealtwithhumanrightsinacomprehensiveway,withthemeritofbringing together civil and political rights aswell as economic and social rights,within anuniversalistandindivisibleconception.

InthesamedirectionastheAmericanDeclaration,article10oftheUniversalDeclarationdealswithlawrelatedtojudicialprocess:"Everyoneisentitledinfullequalitytoafairandpublichearing by an independent and impartial tribunal, in the determination of his rights andobligations and of any criminal charge against him." The following article deals with theprincipleofindubioproreo.

“Article11.1Everyonechargedwithapenaloffencehastherighttobepresumedinnocentuntilprovedguiltyaccordingtolawinapublictrialatwhichhehashadalltheguaranteesnecessaryforhisdefense.”

Thejudge'sattitudesinthemedia,priortothesentence,hispublicstatements,thepresenceandmanifestationinvariouseventstotalkabouttheprocess,theproximitytothemembersofthePublicProsecutioninvolvedinthecase,thephotosdepictingpersonalrelationshipwithPresidentLula'spoliticalopponentsandthefactofhavingdirectfamilymemberslinkedtoapolitical party that always made electoral and governmental opposition to the FormerPresidentwerestatementsthateasilyleadtotheperceptionofexistenceofanintentiontoconvict the defendant, by personal motivation, independent of the process records. Thisentirecontextbreakswiththerequirementofindependenceandimpartialityofthejudgeandwiththepresumptionofinnocence,foreseeninthearticlestranscribed.

IntheareaofHumanRightsConventions,asinternationaltreatiesratifiedbyStates,thereforebinding,proceduralprinciplesarealsoenvisaged.TheUniversalDeclarationhasalwaysbeen

206

aworldreferenceintermsofhumanrights,butinordertoovercomeitslackoflegality,twotreatiesweresignedin1960undertheauspicesoftheUN:TheCovenantonCivilandPoliticalRights,addressedtoindividuals,therightsholders,andtheCovenantonEconomic,SocialandCulturalRights,addressedtotheStatesParties,whichundertaketoprovidepositivebenefitsinordertoimplementthem.

TheInternationalCovenantonCivilandPoliticalRights(NewYorkPact)establishesinitsart.14,§1,that"Allpersonsshallbeequalbeforethecourtsandtribunals".Onthisequality,itisimportanttodemonstratethepartialityinthesentencebynottreatingPresidentLulaequallyand,onthecontrary,increasingthepenaltyforbeingaFormerPresidentoftheRepublic.

AttheOrganizationofAmericanStates,ResolutionIIIoftheFifthMeetingofConsultationofMinistersofForeignAffairsoftheAmericanStates,heldin1959,recommendedtotheInter-AmericanCouncilof JuriststhedraftingofaConventiononHumanRightsandasystemofProtectionofHumanRights.Thus,theInter-Americansystemceasedtobemerelydeclaratoryand becamemore effective with the emergence in 1969 of the American Convention onHumanRights,whichcameintoforcein1978.Amongthevariousrightsprovidedfortherein,article8thstates:

“Article8.Righttoafairtrial.1.Everypersonhastherighttoahearing,withdueguaranteesandwithinareasonabletime,byacompetent,independent,andimpartialtribunal,previouslyestablishedbylaw,inthesubstantiationofanyaccusationofacriminalnaturemadeagainsthimorforthedeterminationofhisrightsandobligationsofacivil,labor,fiscal,oranyothernature.2.Everypersonaccusedofacriminaloffensehastherighttobepresumedinnocentsolongashisguilthasnotbeenprovenaccordingtolaw.(...)”

Regarding the first part of the article, the guarantee of a "competent, independent, andimpartial tribunal", ithasnotbeenobserved in thecaseanalyzedhere.The jurisdictionofJudge SérgioMorowas questionedby thedefense in viewof the fact that he is pursuinginnumerableactions thatwouldnot fallwithinhis competence,which shouldbeattachedspecificallytothecaseofPetrobras.Then,thereisacleareffortbytheaforementionedjudgetolinkdisconnectedfactstoPetrobrasissuesandthustopersonallyjudgethecaseinvolvingFormerPresidentLula.

Therequirementwritteninthesecondpartofarticle,relatedtotheinnocencepresumptionsolongasthe“guilthasnotbeenprovenaccordingtolaw”isanothercriticalpartofJudgeSérgioMoro'sdecision,sincePresidentLulahasneverhadownership,possessionoreventhekeyofthetriplexapartment(objectofthecase).Likewise,thereisnoproveneconomicbenefitderivedfromthisgoodand,withoutit,itisnotpossibletosetupanactofcorruptionormoneylaundering.

Thus, the principle of the natural judge exists in order to avoid bias in the decisions, byexcludingthepossibilityofthepartiesandtheirlawyerspersonallychoosingthejudges,andbyexcludingthepossibilityforthejudgestoinitiatethecasesthatconcernthem,withouttheinitiativeoftheparties.

The "Rome Statute", an international treaty that created the International Criminal Court(ICC),signedin1988inRome,enteredintoforceonthe1st.July2002,afterthe60thdepositoftheinstrumentofratification.Itwasamilestoneinthehistoryofinternationallawbecauseforthefirsttimeaninternationalcourtwasestablishedtotrywarcriminalsandperpetratorsofgenocideandcrimesagainsthumanitywhentheyarenottriedbytheirnationalcourts.

207

Finally, the world was ready to create a permanent tribunal and get rid of the courts ofexception,stablishedbythevictorsinthepostwarperiodorbytheUNSecurityCounciltotryspecific situations. Brazil ratified the Treaty of Rome and deposited the instrument ofratificationin2002.

InthetextoftheStatute,thereareseveralproceduralprinciples,referring,forexample,totheguaranteesofa fair trial recognizedby international law,asdescribed inarticle17,2.Article66bringsthepresumptionof innocenceandits item3, isveryclear:“3. Inordertoconvict the accused, the Court must be convinced of the guilt of the accused beyondreasonabledoubt.”Thedoubt,thedebate,theexistenceofdifferentpositionsbetweenthejudges,therefore,mustleadtotheinnocenceofthedefendantandnottohiscondemnation.

Thisextractofthesentenceshowsthatarticle66.3hasnotbeenrespected,asitstatesthattherearesomedoubt inBrazilian judicialdecisionsregardingtheneedofanexofficioact,whichPresidentLulaneverdid.“InBrazilianjurisprudence,theissueisstillsubjectofdebates,butthemostrecentjudgestendtoacceptthattheconfigurationofthecrimeofcorruptiondoesnotdependonthepracticeoftheactofofficeandthatthereisnoneedforaprecisedeterminationofit.”(p.866)

Inviewofalltheabove,itisdemonstratedhowJudgeSérgioMoro'ssentenceviolatesseveralinternationalhumanrightsprovisions.AsapublicagentoftheBrazilianState,asaprofessionalof the Judiciary Power and as a citizen, the judge has the obligation to respect them,guaranteeinghumandignity.Sincethishasnothappened,hissentencemustbereviewed.

InthewordsofAntonioAugustoCançadoTrindade,theBrazilianformerPresidentoftheInter-AmericanCourtofHumanRightsandcurrentjudgeattheInternationalCourtofJustice,

“It is,of course, for thedomestic courts to interpretandapply the lawsof their respectivecountries,withinternationalbodiesspecificallyexercisingtheiroversightfunction,withintheterms and parameters of themandates assigned to them by the respective human rightstreatiesandinstruments.However,itisalsoincumbentupondomesticcourtsandotherStatebodiestoensuretheimplementationofinternationalstandardsofprotectionatthenationallevel, which highlights the importance of their role in an integrated system such as theprotection of human rights, in which conventional obligations shelter a superior commoninterestofallStatesParties,theprotectionofthehumanbeing.”

Thecourtofappealmustruleadecisiontoguarantee“theprotectionofthehumanbeing”,quoted above, reviewing the unreasonable decision that violates procedural principlesprovidedbyInternationalHumanRightsLaw.

208

ConvictionsprevailinLula’sguiltysentence

ValeirErtle

Brazilhasflabbergastedlywitnessedthediscourseofprevalence,whichisthenewargumentusedbytherulingclasstodictatetheirpoliticalandeconomic interests,such interestsareagainstconstitutionalandlegalguarantees.Inthelaborrealm,theprevalenceofnegotiatedtermsoverlegislatedoneswasusedasthebackbonetopassbackward-lookinglaws,whichconfrontrightsconqueredinBrazil’slongandunfinishedcivilizingprocess.

In the criminal realm, in this specific case, there isprevalenceof convictionson individualrightsandconstitutionalguarantees,aswellas,politicalandideologicalconvictions.Thebest,themostpopular,andthemostwidelycelebratedPresidentofBrazil,LuizInácioLuladaSilva,wasconvictedwithoutproofofcrime.Suchconvictionshowshowinnocentsmaybefoundguilty due to the prevalence of political-ideological convictions over the presumption ofinnocence,unlessprovenguilty,whichisforeseenintheBrazilianlegalframework.

Thestrategicallianceofagroupofprosecutors,powerfulmediacompanies,andpoliticalpartyfactionswithapoliticallyengaged judgehas led to thedestructionofBrazilian companiesworkingatcoredomesticsectorsandinnocentswronglyconvicted,whileactualcriminalsarebenefittedbypleaagreementswithnoevidence.

BigHousemastersrelyontheenemy’scriminallawasafundamentalreference.TheideasofGerman indoctrinator, Günter Jakobs, have been spreadworldwide for over twenty yearsnow.Basedonsuchideas,LulahasbeenregardedastheenemyoftheState,and,assuch,istreatedinadiscriminatoryandunequalfashion.However,Lulaisaninnocentvictim.Insteadofbeingconvicted,heshouldbedecoratedforthepublicpoliciesimplementedandprovidingsuppliesandstrengtheningtheBrazilianFederalPoliceduringhistermsinoffice.

Former President Lula is not regarded as a citizen with rights. In spite of the persistent,emphatic, and systematic campaign against his accomplishments and renowned politicalleadership carried out byRedeGlobo – articulatedwith persecutors and the judge SérgioMoro,pollsrankhimfirstplaceinthepresidentialrun.Lulaistreatedasanenemythatmustbeannihilatedtomakesuretherulingproprietaryclass,whichisgreedyandsubmissivetointernationalcapitalinterests,keepsitsposition.Extremistright-wingintellectualshavefoundasourceofinspirationforactionsagainsttheirrivalsintheenemy’scriminallaw.Whattheworldhaswitnessed inBrazil isnootherthanthe implementationofthisbiasedandNazi-inspiredtheory.

Basedonthattheory,punishmenttotheenemyisanticipated,forthisreason,punishmentissupportedbyconvictions,notbyevidence;itisdisproportional,andstemsfromsuppressingjudicial guarantees.Therefore, the systematicuseofarrestsprior to trial andblackmail toforcepeopletonegotiatepleaagreementswhosebenefitsaredirectlylinkedtoandreliantonmeetingtheneedsofthepoliticalandeconomicforces.ThoseforcesintendtodestroyLulasothathedoesnotrunforpresident.Insuchacontext,thedifferencesbetweeninvestigatorsandjudgesiscompletelyeliminated,theformerisnearlyinchargeofleadingthelatter.

Inthisscenariosupportedbypolitical-ideological interests,mediaengagement iscore.Thepersecutionmotivatedbyaconvictionwithoutproofofcrimepriortotrialservesthepurpose

.Translatedby:RaneSouza

209

ofdestroyingtheenemy,sociallyandpoliticallydismantlinghim.InacountrywheretheBigHousegrowsricherbyusingtheState,whererulingclassthievesandthecorruptelitefacenopunishment,commonsenseisaneasypreytoauthoritarianattackswidelysupportedbytheBrazilianmedia.

Americans have long been resorting to the enemy’s criminal law to justify their attacksworldwide. The Guantanamo Bay Detention Camp is one example, among many others.Militarydictatorshipsusedandabusedof thatpeculiarwayofoverlooking themostbasicrightsofahumanperson.TheystatethatacertainhumanbeingistheenemyoftheStatebasedonpoliticalconvictionsandpolitical,ideological,andfinancialinterests,andthemostelementarylegalguaranteesaresuppressed.

TheattempttosendLulatojailandthewaytheprocessesagainsthimhavebeenconductedshowwideadherenceofprosecutors,judges,themedia,andright-wingpartyfactionstothattheory.SuchtheoryisusedinanefforttargetedatdestroyingandblockingLula’sprospectsofrunninginthenextpresidentialelectionsbecausetheright-wingiswideawareofLula’sprestigeandofhowharditwouldbetodefeathimattheballot.

FederalPoliceoperationnamesresembleadvertisingcampaigns.Lula’ssentenceto9andahalf yearswithoutproofof crime looks likeagreat fit for thecommunicationactions thatfollowedsuit.Itisnotacoincidencethat,onsocialmedia,thereareplentyofjokesthatrelatethesentencetohowmanyfingerstheex-presidenthasgot.

During the Inquisition, he who did not comply with the State and the Church rule wasconsideredanenemy.Similarly,inNaziGermany,Jewishpeoplewerearrestedandsentencedtodeath.MilitarydictatorshipsinLatinAmericawerenodifferentastheyallowedformilitantsfightingtheregimetobearrested,tortured,andmurderedbecausetheywereregardedasenemiesoftheState.Thus,Lulahasfallenpreytoarelentlesspersecutionbysectorsoftherulingandbusinesseliteandpoliticalpartiescapturedbytheright-wingthatdonotwantaleaderwhodoesnotbelongtotherulingclasstotakeofficeasPresidentofBrazil,especiallyanironworkerfromNortheasternBrazil,whohasdonemoreworkforthepeopleandBrazilthanallotherpresidentsbeforehim.

Therefore, thepersecutionandunfair condemnation isarticulatedwith the soft coup thatousted Dilma Rousseff from the presidency and has put in her place a legion of corruptpoliticians, who, in spite of being accused, denounced in plea agreements, and furnishedabundantevidenceoftheircrimesarestillfreeandundamaged.ThepartialityofsectorsoftheJudiciarybranchisappalling.ThejudgeSérgioMoroisanexampleofsuchpartialityashedoesnotpunishpeopleagainstwhomthereisplentyofevidence,however,hehassentencedLulaonthegroundsofpolitical-ideologicalconvictionswithnoproofofcrimewhatsoever.TofriendsandLula’srivals,thepresumptionofinnocenceisagiven;toarespectedcitizenwhois regarded as his enemy of social-economic class, persecution, duress, attacks to one’sreputation,resortingtostrategiesofuninterruptedwaruntildefeatingtheenemyforgood.

Another significant aspect as regards Lula’s persecution is how swiftly proceedings arehandled.Proceedingskeeppace,inanabsolutelyandcontrolledfashion,withthecalendarandtheagendaofright-wingparties.Lulawasconvictedwithnoproofofcrimeinthecaseofanapartmentthathasneverbelongedtohim.Nevertheless,anupcomingsentenceistoallowLulano time,noteven to catchhisbreath. It is not anoperation; it is anactualwarwithsuccessiveattacksbecauseitismeantnotonlytopunish,butalsotodismantlewhoLulais,

210

whathehasdone,andwhathewouldbeabletodofortheBrazilianpeople.TheaimistopreventLulafromrunningforpresident.

We are confronted by a process which is not meant to restore the social order and putcorruptiontoanend; it ismeanttotreatLulanotasaright-holderhumanbeing,butasathreattobeextirpated.Hence,investigators,judges,themedia,andpoliticalpartiessupportthesentence;theyhavepairedasiftheywereasinglearmy.SucharmyislargelysimilartoDOICODI(DepartmentofInformationOperations-CenterforInternalDefenseOperations:Brazilianintelligenceandrepressionagencyduringthemilitarydictatorship(1964-1985))orHitler’sSSS(ProtectionSquadron)inGermany.Withinsucharmy,theaimisnotadoptingtheelementsofcriminallaw,tellinginvestigatorsapartfromjudges.Allranksaremixedandtheyreporttoasinglecommand.

Thecurrentcontext,markedandinstructedbytheenemy’scriminallaw,inwhichfactsarenot investigated and evidence is not collected. There is prior conviction themoment theenemy is established.Upon settingwho theenemy is, thenext step is to complywith anagenda that meets the political needs of tarnishing Lula’s image and dismantlingaccomplishmentssupportingLula’srecognitionandleadership.Everydaywearingmayleadtoone’sphysicaldestruction.Thereissystematicaccusationandnoevidenceisfurnished.Thedefendanthas toprovehis innocence,howeveralleffortsaremadetooverlook furnishedproofof innocence, suchwas thecaseof theapartmentand thecroft trials.The Judiciarybranch is subordinate to the logic of conviction prior to trial, therefore it resorts to theenemy’scriminallawtosentencepeople.

Ultimately,thefalsepresuppositionthatthemoreprominenttheleader,theharderitistofind proof of crime is used to decide on sentences based on conviction. Yet, such falsepresuppositiononlyappliestofoes.ThereareplentyofevidenceagainstcorruptpoliticiansandbusinesspeoplewhobelongtotheBigHouse,however,thereisnopunishmenttothem,notevenwhenproofofcrimeisfurnished.Inthosecases,political-ideologicalconvictionsareusedforotherpurposes.

Historyhasalreadyacquittedmanydefendants,suchasLula.Sooneror later,thefactthatLula is innocentwillbeacknowledged. It isup to theBrazilianpeopleandtruedemocracyadvocatesinthecountrytoattainsuchacquittalassoonaspossiblesothatLulahasthetimetorunandwinthenextelections.HiswiniscrucialtoenabletheworkingclassandBraziltoresume the path towards sustainable development with income distribution, equality ofrights,andopportunitiesforall.

211

Convictionforrealpropertyownership:withoutpossessionortitle

WeidaZancaner*CelsoAntônioBandeiradeMello**

1.Anyonewhoreadsthedecision issuedby JudgeSérgioMorowillbestartledbyhowheattacksandseekstobelittletheattorneysforformerpresidentLula,withtheclearintentofdefendinghimself,asmaybeseenmostnotablyinitems105to148ofsaidtext.

Bypersonalizinghisdecision, the judgeplaceshimself in the roleofoneof thepartiesbylitigatingasifhewereanattorneyinthecase.Hebreakswiththeprincipleofimpartiality,violatestheprincipleoflegality,andtaintstheauthoritywhichhehasbeenentrustedwith.

The guarantee that a case will be judged according to the laws and the Constitution isdependentontheneutralityofthejudgeinvolved.Thepossiblelackofneutralityisaddressedinarticles144and145oftheCodeofCivilProcedure,concerningdisqualificationforbiasandrecusal,andthemannerinwhichajudgemayberemovedfromacaseisregulatedinarticle146ofthesameCode.Notonlythetextofthedecision,butthewholemannerinwhichthiscasedevelopeddemonstratedamanifestpartialityonthepartofthejudge.

ThosethatbelievetheprincipleofimpartialityistobefoundoutsideoftheConstitutionaremistaken.Thoughitisnotexpresslymentioned,theformerisgroundedinthelatteralongtwolines: a) as a general principle of law, in accordance with article 5, paragraph 2, of theConstitution;andb)asoneoftheaspectsoftheprincipleofequality,afundamentalpreceptoftheruleoflaw,providedforinthemainclauseandsectionIofarticle5;themainclause,sectionII,andsectionXXIofarticle37;andarticle175.

Thegeneralprinciplesoflawconstitutethesubstrataofthecultureofhumanity,whichimpliesthatanyfailuretoobservethemrepresentsanaffronttothelegalsystemitself,asEduardoGarciadeEnterríateaches:

"Itisworthrecallinginthisregardthatthegeneralprinciplesoflawareacondensationofthegreatsubstantivelegalvaluesthatconstitutethesubstrataofthelegalframeworkandofthereiteratedexperienceofthelifeofthelaw.Thus,theyarenotanabstractandindeterminateinvocation of justice or moral conscience or of the discretion of the judge, but rather anexpressionofsubstantivelaw,technicallyspecifiedasafunctionofconcretelegalproblemsandresultingfromtheverylogicoftheinstitutionsinvolved.”225

Moreover,article5,sectionLXXVIII,paragraph2,providesthat“TherightsandguaranteesexpressedinthisConstitutiondonotexcludeothersderivingfromtheregimeandfromtheprinciplesadoptedbyit,orfromtheinternationaltreatiestowhichtheFederativeRepublicofBrazilisaparty.”

Brazil is a signatory of innumerable treaties, such as the Universal Declaration of HumanRights,theInternationalCovenantonCivilandPoliticalRights,andtheAmericanConventiononHumanRights(PactofSanJosé,CostaRica), inwhichtheimpartialityofajurisdictionisestablishedasafundamentalrightoftheaccused.

*SpecializationandMaster'sDegreeinAdministrativeLawfromthePontificalCatholicUniversityofSãoPaulo**ProfessorEmeritusofthePontificalCatholicUniversityofSãoPaulo.225 GARCIA de ENTERRÍA, Eduardo e FERNÁNDEZ, Tomás Ramón. Curso de Derecho Administrativo. Vol. I,reimpressão3ªed.Madrid:Ed.Civitas,1981,p.400.

212

Anaffronttothefundamentalrightoftheaccusedtobejudgedimpartiallymaybeshowninseveralways:fromthejudge’suseofdisrespectfulwordsorbodylanguage;theadoptionofanintimidatingoraggressiveposturetowardsaparty,witnesses,ortheattorneys;aswellasbyissuingunjustifiedreprimandsofthelawyers,makinginsultsandinappropriatecommentsregardingthelitigantsandwitnesses,andmakingstatementsthatbelieaprejudgmentofthecase226,etc.

Theotherlineonwhichtheprincipleofimpartialityisgroundedistheprincipleofequality,ofwhich it is but one aspect. Thus, José Afonso da Silva is correct when he states thatjurisdictional equality arises from the principle of equality before the law,as an inviolateconstitutional guarantee connected with democracy227. Without impartiality, judges andcourtsbecomedictatorialandtheprincipleoflegalityisobscuredthroughneglectbytheverybranchchargedwithapplyingit.

The principle of legality does not simply seek the mere formal structuring of the stateapparatus, itsorganiccomposition,anditsmeansofoperation.Whatallevidencesuggestswasandisthegoalisabovealltoestablishprotectionsandguaranteesforallofthemembersofthebodypolitic.Strictlyspeaking,itseekstogivethemadoubleguarantee,thatis:

(a) Ontheonehand,thatnostateactionmayimposeanylimitationon,harmto,oronusonitscitizens,withoutsuchrestrictionsorimpositionsbeingpreviouslyauthorizedbylaw,nordeprive them of or reduce any advantages or benefits towhich theywould otherwise beentitledunderthelaw,wereittobeobserved;and

(b) Ontheotherhand,thatallcitizensbeguaranteedequaltreatment,suchthat,ifthelawisviolatedorisitselfunconstitutional,theyareassuredofthepossibilityofrecoursetoanindependentandimpartialjudgetodecidetheconflict.

2.Indeed,thoughthepointisobvious,itisworthrememberingthatlegalitywasestablishedasacharacteristicof the ruleof law,aboveallas themostadequatemeansofpreservinganothervalue;preciselythatwhichwasintendedtobeconsecratedaboveallelse:equality

ItwasnotbyaccidentthatthemottooftheFrenchRevolutionwas“Liberty,Equality,andFraternity”,insteadof“Liberty,Legality,andFraternity.”

Theruleoflawabhorsself-interestedactsandviolationsofequalitybecausethoseattackattherootofthebasicobjectivewhichtheprincipleoflegalityseekstopreserve.Indeed,whatthatprincipleisafterisasinglerulethatappliestoallwhoarecoveredbyitsscopeandeffects,thusimpedingpersecutionandfavoritismbyanybranchofgovernment,aswellas,itisworthnoting,thearbitrarinesswhoseeliminationispreciselythemaximumobjectiveoftheruleoflaw.

Inshort,aviolationoftheprincipleofequality,ipsofacto,goesagainsttheveryreasontheprinciple of legality exists, as Black has stated in his monumental “Handbook on theConstructionandInterpretationofLaws:“Itisaruleofconstructionthatwhichisimpliedina

226ComentáriosaosPrincípiosdeBangaloredeCondutaJudicial.TraduçãodeMarlonS.MaiaeArianeE.Kloth.Brasília:ConselhodaJustiçaFederal,2008.P.69,ApudROCHA,SílvioLuísFerreirada.AImparcialidadedoJuiz,inOCasoLula.Obracoletiva,coordenadoresCristianoZaninMartins,ValeskaTeixeiraZaninMartinseRafaelValim.EditoraContracorrente,p.178.227SILVA,JoséAfonsoda.CursodeDireitoConstitucionalPositivo.6ed.revistaeampl.2ªtiragem.SãoPaulo:EditoraRevistadosTribunais,1990,p.194.

213

statuteisasmuchapartofitaswhatisexpressed”228.Thus,thatwhichisimplicitinaprincipleisasmuchapartofitasthatwhichisexplicit.

3.Indeed,thisvalue–equality–thatthelegalorderseekstoshelter,isimprintedinthetextoftheNationalConstitution,notonly implicitly intheprincipleof legality,butexpresslyso,bothintheopeningtextofthetitleon“FundamentalRightsandGuarantees”(article5),aswellasaqualityofthebasiccanonofthestate.Itconstitutesanindependentgroundsfortheprotectionofthegovernedand,thus,asufficientbasistosubjectivelyjustifythosewhohavesufferedharmarisingfromitsviolationbysomegovernmentalactandwhothereforeseektochallengesaidabuse.

ThedecisionconvictingformerpresidentLulaisshockingonitsface,notonlybecauseitdoessowithoutanysupportintheevidence,butalsobecauseitrunsheadonagainstthelaw.Itattemptstojustifythatconvictionbyimaginativelyattributingtitletoagivenpropertywhilethere is in fact no document attesting to said title or even possession. Moreover, theattribution of title to the former president ignores the legal norm according to whichownershipofrealpropertyisdemonstratedbyreferencetothetitlerecord.Inthefaceofsucharecord,clearly,titlemaynotbeplaceduponanothersimplyduetothedesireoftheaccusertodoso,inthiscasethejudge,withoutviolatingthelaw.

Itwasnotonlythejudge,butalsoapartyturnedstate’sevidencewhoascribedtitletothepropertytotheformerpresident.ItisunheardofthatthemerestatementofXorYindividualissufficienttograntsomeoneownershipofathing.Thisisevenlesssowhenthestatementin question is made in the context of a plea bargain agreement, that is, one without acommitment to tell the truthandmotivatedby thedesire to improve the standingof thedefendantmakingit.Thewordofsuchanindividualisalreadyunburdenedbyanysupposeddisinterestednessora trueand faithfuldesire tocollaboratewith theadvancementof thelegalorder.Rather,attheveryleast,itcomesimbuedwiththesuspicionofanulteriormotive.

Nor was sufficient evidence provided, or even an attemptmade to so provide, that saidpropertywasthefruitofabribepaidtofacilitateatransactionwithPetrobras.

Inthecircumstancesalludedtoabove,itisclearlythecasethattheevidencementionedmaynotingoodconsciencebetakenastrueandsufficientgroundsforanyconclusion,muchlesssointhecontextofalegalproceeding,nottospeakofwhenthesubjectisacriminalmatter.Thisistruefortheconvictionofanydefendant,butisallthemoresowhenthepartyhas,asinthiscase,atrackrecord,ahistory,whichincludesnumeroushonorarydoctorates(27inall),titles that it iswell knownareonly conferredafter a thoroughanalysisof thepersonandconduct of the recipient. Those doctorates have been granted by Harvard University, theUniversityofSalamanca,andtheUniversityofCoimbra,tomentiononlythemostprestigious.

Itisintuitivethatifonehadtorelyonthewordofaconfessedcriminal,apersonmorethanalittleinterestedinstatingthatwhichhebelieveswillpleasethosesittinginjudgmentofhim,oronthewordofamanrepletewithnationalandinternationalhonors,manyofwhichwereconferredwhenhewasalreadyoutofpublicoffice,onewouldchoosetorelyonthatofthelatter.Thiswasnottheunderstandingofthejudgeinthiscase,however,who,accordingtothefactsthatareknown,chosetoconvicttheformerpresidenteitheroutofanextremely

228BLACK,HenryCampbell.HandbookontheConstructionand InterpretationofLaws.WestPublishingCo.,SaintPaul,Minn.,1896,pág.67)

214

peculiarsenseofjusticeoroutofacompletelackofimpartiality.Apparently,itwastheresultofapreconceiveddesiretoharmonewhowasrelyinguponthepresumedfair-mindednessofhewhowastojudgehim.

215

ThelawinBrazilhasdied.

WilsonRamosFilho*RicardoNunesdeMendonça**

Sometimeago,morepreciselyfromthebeginningoftheyear2015,westatedthattheLawhaddied.“Murdered”.

SérgioMoro'sjudgementintheCriminalDocketno.5046512-94.2016.4.04.7000/PR,isthelatest expression that the promises of constitutionalism and the postwar “guaranteeism”,transferredtoBrazil,havebeendissolved.

There will be, definitely, more qualified people to perform technically the criminal andcriminalprocedureanalysisofthejudgementpassedbythe"omnipotent"magistrateofthe13thFederalCourtofCuritiba,althoughtheoffensesagainstprinciples,concepts,rulesandelementarycategoriesstriketheeyeofanylegalprofessionalwhoisminimallyawareoftheguaranteessetforthintheBrazilianFederalConstitutionandinHumanRightsTreatiesthatBrazilisasignatoryof,suchas:i)dueprocessoflaw;ii)adversarialprocessandfulldefense;iii)respectforthenaturaljudge;iv)prohibitionofthecourtsofexception;v)presumptionofinnocence;vi)distributionofburdenofproof;vii)non-useoftheprocessasatoolforpoliticalpersecutionandpracticeoflawfare,etc.

Theanalysisofthejudgement,however,willnotbeattachedtothefieldofCriminalLaw.Infact, it will not even be attached to the field of law. Andwhether themost famous andcelebrityBrazilianjudgelikesitornot,hissynthesisinthe“triplexcase”willbetheobjectofthorough analysis of sociologists, historians, communicators, trade union leaders andrepresentativesoforganizedcivilsociety,amongothersthatareconcernedwithDemocracyanddonotbowtothehegemonicpowerofcapital.

Forallthosewhoarecommittedtotheinterestsofthevictimsofthehegemonicsystemandwith Human Rights as processes of struggle for dignity229, Sérgio Moro's judgement is achapterof the class struggle andof theparliamentary, judicial andmassmedia coup thatbeganin2015.Thisisnotameretechnicalactthatendsastageofacriminalaction,butapoliticalactdisguisedasajurisdictionalactthathasasscopetomeetpowerfulinterestsinsideandoutsideBrazil.

Inthismatter,theSentenceisthehighpointofasordidjudicial-politicalcampaigninordertoattackthegreaterpoliticalleadershipoftheBrazilianleft,theformerpresidentLula.

Itisaninseparablepartofthecoup.ItisyetanothercomponentofthisprocessofannihilationofliberaldemocracythathadpreviouslyexistedinBrazil-yes,theverbisconjugatedinthepasttense-inwhichashamelesseliteimposes,daybyday,byforce,inaStateofException,

*PhDinLaw,professoratUFPR(doctorate,masterandlawschool)andMaster/DoctorateinHumanRights,InterculturalityandDevelopment(UPO/Spain).**MSc.ProfessorinlawschoolatUNIBRASIL(onleave),currentlydevelopingaresearchprojectintheadvanceddegreeinHumanRights,InterculturalityandDevelopmentatUPOinSeville,Spain.229 HERRERA FLORES, Joaquín. “La Reinvención de los Derechos Humanos”. Andalusia: Ed. Atrapasueños.Libreríaasociativa-editorial-materialesdidácticos.p.22.

216

thegreatestattackontherightsoftheBrazilianpopulation,inparticularthepoorestpartofit,accordingtotheUN230.

Lulasymbolizeswhatthiseliterejects:theworkerwhostruggles,daily,fordignity.Theunionleader,who,oncePresidentoftheRepublic,transformedtheBraziliansocialrealityandforthefirsttimeinhistoryremovedthecountryfromtheworldhungermap.

ThePresidentwhoincludedthepoorinthepublicbudgetandwhoextendedtheaccessofthehistoricallyexcludedtodirectsalaries,throughstatepoliciesofincentivetofullemployment,andindirectsalaries,throughpoliciesofincomedistributionandaccesstohousing,educationandhealth,suchasminhacasa,minhavida,bolsafamília,FIES,ciênciassemfronteiras,etc.

A President who tried to fulfill, albeit in part, the constitutional duty to promote theprogressiveeradicationofmiseryandpoverty,withthereductionofsocialinequalities.

Currently, perhaps the only political leader capable of reversing the framework ofdeconstructionofsocialrightsinBrazil.

Forthesereasons,itisnecessarytoremovehimfromBrazilianpubliclifeforgood.Defeatedinthelastfourpresidentialelections,thenationalright-wingdoesnotadmittheideaofthe“latheoperator”toreturntothemostprominentpositionoftheRepublic.AsLulasaid,thecoupdoesnotconcludeifhecanrunforthenextpresidentialelectionin2018.

And the judgewho (i) constrained theex-president's freedom inmanifestly illegal forcefulcoercion;ii)violatedthephoneconfidentialityoftheaccused'slawyer;iii)authorized-inanunconstitutionalandirresponsibleway,accordingtotheSupremeCourt-thepublicationofprivate conversationsofa formerPresidentof theRepublicand the thenPresidentof theRepublic,withtheclearpurposeofsettingthecountryonfireandalsotocurryfavourwithapublishedopinion,oligopolizedandviscerallycommittedtothecoupinprogress;isawarethatLula'spresenceinnationalpolitical life isanimmenseobstacletotheconcretizationoftheconservativeandcapitalistpoliticalprojecttowhichhehasadhered.

Forthatreason,afteralltheplotofabuseoftheprocesswithaclearpoliticalendthatwasobserveduntil thedeliveryof the sentence, therewasnodoubt that SérgioMorohadnoalternativebuttoconvictLula.

Inhisdecision,thejudgeofthe13thFederalCourtofCuritibaconfirmedhiscommitmentwiththe Brazilian right-wing to annihilate the PT231 and avoid the risk of Lula thwarting socialretrogressionplanswithanewvictoryinthe2018elections.

AswellquotedbyJesséSouza,SérgioMoro“(...)representstheincorporationofthespeechthatwas lacking for theprotestersof June2013 ignitedby themedia.Theanti-corruptionabstractflagsofthatJunedaysbecameconcretewithOperationLavaJato.NowtheelitePartyarticulationwascomplete:ThePartyofeconomicpreynotonlyhaditsusualarmsinthemediaandinCongress,butithadanengagedandmotivatedsocialbaseandapowerfulandconcretespeech(...)”232,thatis,theolddiscourseon“fightingcorruption”.

230 In this regard, see the article published on the website of the British newspaper The Guardian,https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/dec/09/Brazil-austerity-cuts-un-official,accessedin20/7/2017.231NT:Worker’sParty(InPortuguese:PartidodosTrabalhadores).232SOUZA,Jessé.Aradiografiadogolpe:entendacomoeporquevocêfoienganado.RiodeJaneiro:LeYa,2016.p.119.

217

SérgioMoropersonifiedthecharacterofthe“heartthrob”and“soapoperahero”that“willrefoundBrazil”,“nomatterwhoithurts”233.WiththisstatusandinthepositionofleaderoftheBrazilianright-wingandyetasthegreatopponentofLula,hecouldnotactinadifferentway,underpenaltyofsufferingallthehatredandviolenceofthosewhowouldfeeldeceivedby him. Itwould be something likevenire contra factumproprium, given themagistrate’sconduct throughout the entire process of lawfare he has undertaken and continues toundertakeagainstLula.

Conviction,therefore,isnotsurprising,sinceitwaslongoverdue.Infact,itisnotthefirsttimeinthehistoryofmankindthatundertheaegisofaviolatedconstitutionalorder,partoftheJudiciaryservesinterestsoutsideofthosewhoshouldmoveit.

Wehavesaidonotheroccasionsthatthesamepoliticalforcesthatpromotedthe1964Couphavenowrediscoveredthemselvesinordertoattackdemocracy,andamongthem,therehavebeen,asnow,noshortageofjudicialactorscommittedtotheprojectofseizureofpowerindefaultofthewillofthepeopleandtheballotboxes.

Moreover,itisnot,asMorosuggestsinhislong-windedandtiresomeattempttojustifytheunjustifiable, "mere diversionism" of the defense, but of legal-political objection to theobvious and undeniable conduct of political-jurisdictional warfare, which he set out toconduct.

Infact, ifthereissomeonewhouses"diversionism"incriminalproceedings, it isthejudgewho,in218pages-adissertation-couldnotobjectivelyindicateandwithoutappealingtofantasies and poor legal sophisms the supporting evidence that confirm the thesis of theFederalProsecution.Itshouldbenotedthateventhetraditionalmediathatsupportshim,andthatarethemostinterestedinLula’sconviction,couldpointwhatthesupportingevidenceofthecrimehewouldhavecommitted.Wewonderwhy.

MoroandtheprosecutorsthatarepartoftheLavaJatooperationdonothidethattheyhavetheir side in theclassstruggleand it isnot theworkingclassone.Theyare in tunewithacorporatediscourseononeside-andnotall,obviously-fromnativeservantsandmembersoftheBrazilianmiddleandupperclasseswho,desperate,realizedthatattheballotboxestheywouldnotwinandthattheywerealreadytiredofonedefeatafteranother.

Unlikewhattheychantintheirblatantspeeches,theyarenotimpartial.Infact,nooneis.Thedifferenceistobeornottobeawareofitand,aboveall,nottodeceiveortolieforpurposesotherthanwhatoneclaimstopursue.

Therefore, the conduct of Sérgio Moro throughout the process belies all the discourseembodiedinhissentence.Thewayhecontinuestoact,mediaticallyandpolitically-becausethere is no doubt that he is part of a politicized judiciary that sits in spheres beyond hisconstitutional competence - leaves no doubt that he has taken, on his heart, the role ofcommandingactorof theBrazilian right-wing in thisprocessof capital conflictwith liberaldemocracy.

Moreover, there isnodoubt that this sentence isof concern toevery jurist committed tohumanrightsinBrazil,becauseitmeansthepeakofthedeconstructionoftheconstitutional

233SOUZA,Jessé.op.cit.120.

218

guarantee.Fromnowon,nooneissafefromarbitraryconvictionorcanbelieve,withsomesecurity,inthefalsepromiseofcivilandpoliticalrightsandguaranteesopposabletotheState.

Exceptionaljudgmentsthat,attherequestoftheprosecutors,usecontestedandheterodoxmethodsofrestrictingfreedom-sharedcriticism(onlytoday,itistrue)evenbytheMinisterGilmarMendes234-thatconfuseLawandMorals(andacertainmorality,importanttosay),thatappealtotheCriminalLawoftheEnemyandrelyontheopinionpublishedtojustifytheirarbitrariness, who abuse lawfare, who believe they have power for everything includingpubliclytalks,asdidthethenpresidentofthesupremecourt(inlowercase)MinisterRicardoLewandowskiinalecturegiveninCuritiba,atUnibrasilUniversity,“thatthe21stcenturyisthecenturyoftheJudiciary,”despitetheundemocraticandnon-republicannatureofsuchanassertion,convictwithoutsupportingevidence,asdidSérgioMoro,leadustobelievethat,unfortunately,theLawhasdied.Murdered.

Nevertheless,associal tensionsarenotnullandvoid,onthecontrary,theyformtheclassstruggle,thischapterofcombatdoesnotendtheconflict.Thereis,andalwayswillbe,hopeandstruggle.Inaddition,historywillberelentlesswiththosetryingtodeconstructdemocracyandhumanrightsinBrazil.Weconsciouslywillcontinueontherightsideofhistory.

234See,forexample,thefollowingjournalisticarticlewhoseheadlineis,inEnglish,"STFhastodiscussprisonsthat Moro has determined, says Gilmar Mendes”, available on the internet,http://www1.folha.uol.com.br/poder/2017/02/1856558-stf-tem-que-discutir-prisoes-que-moro-determinou-diz-gilmar-mendes.shtml,accessedin20/07/2017.

219