PGR will only analyze Toffoli’s request for suspicion if it is provoked
The Attorney General’s Office (PGR) should only evaluate the possibility of provoking an analysis of the suspicion of the Minister of the Federal Supreme Court (STF) Dias Toffoli in conducting the Banco Master investigation if it is provoked. To date, the PGR has not received any formal representation with this objective. Therefore, there is still no discussion of this topic in the PGR nor any movement in this direction.
The revelation that banker Daniel Vorcaro’s brother-in-law, Fabiano Zettel, made financial contributions through an investment fund in the resort belonging to Toffoli’s brothers has mobilized deputies and senators who defend the installation of a Parliamentary Commission of Inquiry (CPI) to investigate the case in Congress. For these parliamentarians, the magistrate should declare himself impeded or suspected in the face of a blatant conflict of interest.
Toffoli extends investigations into Banco Master for 60 days after request from the PF
The investigations seek to clarify the actions of executives, investors and businesspeople linked to Banco Master
Toffoli reduces the deadline for the PF to hear those investigated in the Master case to two days
Before the change, the PF had scheduled the depositions to take place between January 23rd and 28th
In theory, the Attorney General’s Office (PGR) could act on its own initiative. In general, however, the Attorney General of the Republic, Paulo Gonet, tends to adopt a procedure of analyzing legal measures only upon provocation from other public bodies or civil society actors.
Made for you!
Estadão found that the matter should only be analyzed if there is a formal provocation for the cabinet to comment.
This was also the procedure adopted in a recent case: the revelations that Banco Master hired the wife of minister Alexandre de Moraes. Gonet spoke only after a lawyer filed a representation, but decided to file it after saying that there were no signs of irregularities.
In the case of Moraes, the attorney general stated that he had not identified the existence of concrete evidence to investigate the suspicions that the Supreme Court minister had pressured the president of the Central Bank, Gabriel Galípolo, regarding the inspection at Banco Master.
“In a preliminary analysis, it is imperative to highlight the absolute absence of minimum evidentiary support to support the accusation formulated. Both the defendant and the president of the Central Bank denied, in a peremptory and convergent manner, the occurrence of any pressure exerted by the Minister on the interests of Banco Master. Despite the media repercussion of the case, the press vehicles did not present concrete elements or material evidence that corroborates the thesis of intimidation, leaving the narrative in the field of assumptions”, wrote Gonet.
