Mário Frias tells the STF that amendments for NGOs were not for ‘Dark Horse’
Federal deputy Mário Frias (PL-SP) denied to the Federal Supreme Court (STF) that the amendments passed on by him to an NGO linked to the producer of the film about former president Jair Bolsonaro were directed towards the making of “Dark Horse”.
The response occurred in a preliminary investigation opened by order of Minister Flávio Dino, of the Federal Supreme Court, on parliamentary amendments sent by Bolsonaro deputies to the NGO. In addition to Frias, deputies Bia Kicis (PL-DF) and Marcos Pollon (PL-MT) also sent resources to provide information about the transfers. Frias asked for the case to be closed.
Valdemar: Flávio visited Vorcaro to ‘see if he could get the rest of the money’ for the film
Last Tuesday, Flávio stated that he was at the banker’s house to “put an end to this story”, in reference to the negotiation for payment for production
The three parliamentarians allocated, in total, R$2.6 million in Pix amendments in 2024 to an NGO chaired by the partner of the production company that made the film “Dark Horse”, which tells the story of Bolsonaro.
The investigation was opened based on a representation presented by deputy Tabata Amaral (`PSB-SP).
“The complainant maintains, in her petition, that public resources from Congressman Mário Frias’ parliamentary amendments would have been “triangulated” to finance the production of the private film “Dark Horse”, a biopic of former President Jair Messias Bolsonaro. Such a statement is absolutely false, devoid of any evidentiary basis and defamatory”, says the letter signed by Frias’ lawyers.
The statement states that the deputy transferred R$1 million in resources and says that the Budget and Financial Inspection Consultancy of the Chamber of Deputies certified the validity of the allocation. According to Frias, the amounts for the Instituto conhecimento Brasil (ICB) were directed to projects of “digital inclusion, literacy and entrepreneurship and sports for children and young people in situations of social vulnerability”.
“There is not a single piece of evidence in the file that these resources were diverted to any film production. The allegation is purely speculative and based on an alleged illicit association between legal entities that, according to the complainant, “share an address” — a weak, insufficient and legally irrelevant argument to support any irregularity”, says the defense in the statement.
