In the current civilizing stage, those who cultivate Democracy and the Rule of Law are well aware of the indispensability of due legal process, – and among its components are broad defense and publicity -, in the face of the occurrence of subversive facts, such as those consummated on the day January 8, 2023.
The care taken by Justice increases significantly when, in the case of January 8th, some of the accused were cautiously arrested, shortly after the criminal actions that violated the Constitution and the laws, with proven invasions and property damage to the seats of the three powers of the Republic.
With the investigations came evidence regarding the authorship and materiality of the crimes.
The investigations led to the Attorney General’s Office the necessary elements to seek, through a proposed criminal lawsuit, the accountability of the accused.
The Federal Supreme Court (STF) made a mistake when placing the procedural phase of receiving complaints for examination in a virtual session.
Since the re-democratization there have been no facts more gave than what happened on the 8th of January last.
The virtual session reduces the role of technical defenders and prosecutors. Ministers do not debate and defenders are deprived of the tribune. As a result, deprived of protests for questions of order and clarifications derived from factual mistakes.
The social response at this stage and the aforementioned guarantee of broad defense are demanding a face-to-face plenary session.
All with oral arguments and debates, with ample clarification on the competence of the STF and the establishment of the guarantee of the natural judge, also called the constitutional judge. That is, the judging body pre-established by law. Finally, the publicity motivated the decision on preliminary issues, removing spaces for screeching, internal and international, and suspicions of forming an exception judgment: ad-hoc (for what happened on January 8).
The STF makes mistakes and worries.
And the murmurs of dealing with the receipt of the complaint in a simple phase are not convincing, where the rule of “in dubio pro societatis” prevails: in case of doubt, a decision is made in favor of society.
It’s not like this. At this stage, the examination of just cause is essential. Even more, if the complaint individualizes the conduct and points out the violations.
It is expected that the sensitivity of some minister of the Supreme Court (STF) will forward, as a matter of order, the procedure to the so-called face-to-face Plenary.
The phase is important. The imputations of the Public Prosecutor’s Office may become criminal proceedings. And the accused will become defendants, if the complaint is received.
Attention, and I stress again. The facts were extremely serious. Bolsonarist fanaticism and fascism almost won. And full defense is necessary to demonstrate the importance of the rule of law, even when facing defendants of crimes against the country.
In this case, and due to the legal priority given to the accused arrested, the accusations will be analyzed in slices.
The first procedural slice concerns 50 defendants. They were denounced for inciting the Armed Forces. This was to promote a coup d’état and, as a result, revoke the mandate of President Lula, who was legitimately elected. The accused were camped in front of the Army headquarters and did not participate in the invasions and damage.
The second slice in virtual appreciation is about the invaders. They are accused of being members of a criminal association. Also coup acts aimed at the abolition of the rule of law, with invasions and property damage to the headquarters of the STF, National Congress and the federal Executive.
#Historical #process #coup #détat #bad #start