PGR contests filing of action against Alckmin on suspicion of slush fund in 2014

The Attorney General of the Republic, Paulo Gonetchallenged the decision of Minister Dias Toffoli, of the Federal Supreme Court (STF), to file an action of administrative improbity against the vice-president Geraldo Alckmin (currently at the PSB) and other defendants, involving suspected slush funds of R$8.3 million allegedly transferred by Odebrecht to the campaign for the São Paulo government in 2014. At the time, Alckmin was still at the PSDB.

Gonet argues that the case, originally handled by the 13th Public Finance Court of São Paulo, should continue.

Toffoli closed the case in October, claiming that all the evidence in the case was contaminated by Odebrecht’s leniency agreement, considered invalid by the STF. Before that, judge Luíza Barros Rozas Verotti had maintained the process, citing evidence “immune from contamination”, such as payment sheets and statements from whistleblowers. Gonet argues that the judge’s decision was well-founded and capable of guaranteeing the continuity of the action.

Last Friday (6), the Second Panel of the STF began analyzing Gonet’s appeal in a virtual trial. Toffoli maintained his position, and ministers Gilmar Mendes, André Mendonça, Edson Fachin and Nunes Marques will still vote.

Also read

Moraes votes to sentence Roberto Jefferson to 9 years in prison

The STF began judging, in the virtual plenary, the criminal action in which Jefferson is a defendant for the crimes of slander, homophobia, incitement to crime and attempt to prevent the free exercise of Powers

Gonet also questions the reporting of the case, pointing out that Fachin should be responsible, as he has already reported cases related to the action.

Alckmin’s defense considers Toffoli’s decision a confirmation that there were no irregularities and claims that the action represented an injustice to the vice-president’s honor. Despite this, Gonet maintains that there is not enough evidence to definitively close the case before the end of the investigation.

The case began with a complaint made by Marcos Monteiro, treasurer of Alckmin’s campaign in 2014, also a defendant in the action. Toffoli initially asked the São Paulo Court to assess whether the case was sustainable without the evidence annulled. Even after the judge’s positive response, the minister opted for definitive archiving.

Gonet, however, states that the intervention represents an anticipation of merit and an undue interference in the assessment of the evidence.

Alckmin denies the accusations, while Gonet may appeal if the judgment in the Second Panel does not reverse the filing.