STF advances judgment that disputes Lava Jato leniency agreements

The Federal Supreme Court (STF) has postponed the judgment of revision of the terms of leniency agreements signed by companies investigated during Operation Lava Jato. The analysis, which was scheduled to start this Friday, 8, in virtual plenary, should be rescheduled for August 15, from 11am.

Minister André Mendonça, rapporteur of the case, issued an order signaling that the process was ready for trial. The magistrate requested that the president of the Supreme Court, Minister Luís Roberto Barroso, guide the action “due to the urgency characterized in the present case and the relevance of the issues dealt with therein”.

The action was filed in March 2023 by PCdoB, PSOL and Solidarity, which question the agreements signed before the formalization of the Technical Cooperation Agreement (ACT) in 2020, which systematizes rules for the procedure.

TST will spend R $ 1.5 million on exclusive VIP room for ministers at Brasilia airport

Space will have a private car to the aircraft; Court justifies measurement for security reasons

STF approves budget from R $ 1 billion to 2026 with more security spent

Forecast will be sent to the executive to compose a proposal of the Union

The subtitles still point to a “state of unconstitutional affairs” in Lava Jato and claim an alleged abusive performance of the Federal Public Prosecution Service (MPF) in the negotiations.

The Lenience Agreement is a negotiating legal instrument signed between the Public Administration and a legal entity, which contributes freely by providing information and evidence on irregularities it has committed, and assumes the responsibility of the acts.

The agreement seeks to recover lost public money, protect the company and its employees, prevent new crimes from happening and encourage a culture of honesty and rules within the company. As a result, the company receives smaller punishments because it helped investigations, as the law allows.

In the parties’ view, however, the leniency agreements signed during the operation were harmful to the accused companies and evidenced a “punitivist and unconstitutional character of laundry”.

In 2024, the Supreme Court opened a deadline for companies that signed these agreements and public agencies negotiate a consensual solution. The order complied with the request of the Attorney General of the Union (AGU).

The agency said that, although the final proposal offered in conjunction with the Union Comptroller General (CGU) was accepted by the companies, final negotiations on the remaining debt payment deadlines are still lacking in the leniency agreements.