Bolsonaro’s appeal against face-to-face testimony remains in the hands of Minister Marco Aurélio Mello | Politics

This is due to the fact that the case reporter, Minister Celso de Mello, is on sick leave until the 26th. Celso de Mello had determined that the testimony be taken personally.

In Andréia Sadi’s blog, Marco Aurélio Mello said that he will take the case for analysis in the STF plenary. Bolsonaro’s testimony was initially scheduled for the 21st, 22nd or 23rd.

“I am averse to autophagy. We cannot override the decisions of our colleagues. I would never do that. If I really like him, I will take him to the plenary session, “Marco Aurélio Mello told the blog.

The Supreme Court applied the legal provision for the replacement of a minister in case of dismissal.

This rule establishes that the rapporteur, in case of leave of absence, is replaced by the prime minister of the collegiate. The collegiate, in this case, is the plenary session of the STF itself, where the inquiries against the President of the Republic are analyzed.

After the Federal Police summoned Bolsonaro to testify in person next week, AGU appealed to the Supreme Court. The General Counsel asked:

• In-person testimony decision is reconsidered and written testimony allowed;
• if there is no reconsideration, the full STF will judge the appeal;
• the deposition is suspended until the plenary has defined the deposition procedure.

In the appeal, the AGU argues that the Supreme Court needs to confer an isonomic treatment to Bolsonaro in relation to that of former president Michel Temer, who, when he occupied the Planalto Palace, gave written testimony.

Minister Celso de Mello ordered to testify personally because written explanations are allowed to the heads of the three powers of the Republic who present themselves as witnesses or victims, not when they are investigated or accused.

In this case, Bolsonaro is being investigated. The investigation, opened in May, is based on accusations by former Justice Minister Sergio Moro. Bolsonaro denies interference with the FP.

When determining the testimony, Celso de Mello stressed that the Constitution provides for testimony made personally.

“Can the head of state, under criminal investigation, choose to answer your questions in writing? I understand that no, because the prerogatives attributed to the President of the Republic, when subjected to acts of criminal prosecution, are only those granted by the Constitution and the laws of the State, and among these, when he is presented as investigated, There is no prerogative to respond to the interrogation, which is usually governed by the principle of orality, in writing, ”Celso de Mello wrote.

The minister’s understanding contradicts the opinion of the Attorney General, Augusto Aras. In early July, he asked the president to choose whether to testify in writing or in person.

The deposition should be one of the last steps before the PF concludes the investigations. The delegates are still analyzing data from the investigations and the FP itself, as well as information about the name changes of Bolsonaro’s personal security in Rio de Janeiro.