[ad_1]
The MPF (Federal Public Ministry) requested yesterday in court the precautionary dismissal of the Minister of the Environment, Ricardo Salles. According to the agency, the removal is aimed at “protecting the environment from the practice of harmful actions, with irreversible results.”
In an appeal filed, the regional attorney of the Republic Ubiratan Cazetta requested reconsideration of the decision made by the rapporteur of the case, Judge Ney Bello, of the TRF-1 (Federal Regional Court of the I Region), who rejected the dismissal at the end of November. In the order, Bello considered the measure “extreme” and the Prosecutor’s Office did not provide “incontrovertible” evidence to justify it.
This is the sixth demonstration before the MPF justice since it filed a lawsuit against the minister. The request was attached yesterday to the lawsuit filed in July for “intentional alteration” of environmental policies; Since then, the case was sent to Santa Catarina, returned to Brasilia and has not yet been definitively tried.
In Cazetta’s opinion, the permanence of Salles at the head of the portfolio can bring risks of two types: to the advance of the action, due to the power to interfere in the instruction of the process, and to the environment, due to “harmful actions with irreversible results “. “.
“There are concrete indications that Ricardo de Aquinno Salles, Minister of the Environment, has practiced reckless management / deviation of purpose, by using the command power inherent in the political position he held to weaken the administrative structure of the protection bodies / federal environmental oversight and weaken the regulatory and institutional framework in force up to that time, allowing / encouraging practices that are harmful to the environment, ”says an extract from the document.
The prosecutor cites as an example the repeal of the Conama (National Environmental Council) resolutions that protect mangroves and other areas on the Brazilian coast. In October, the STF (Federal Supreme Court) Minister Rosa Weber suspended the decision (that is, provisionally).
‘Come and see judicial’
The appeal of the Prosecutor’s Office was presented after a “round trip” judicial action in the improbity action. Initially, the claim was referred to the 6th Federal Court of Florianópolis by judge Márcio de França Moreira, who indicated the jurisdiction of the Santa Catarina court to evaluate the prevention process; a similar civil action had been filed there against Salles.
The case files returned to Brasilia after federal judge Ney Bello partially complied with a request from the MPF, suspended the effects of the precautionary measure, and transferred the case back to the Eighth Federal Court of the Federal District. In November, the 3rd Panel of TRF-1 endorsed the decision by unanimously recognizing the jurisdiction of the federal capital court to judge and process the action.
In view of the mess, the minister’s request for removal on a preliminary (urgent) basis took three months before it was first evaluated. In October, Judge Márcio de França Moreira denied having removed Salles from the environment because he considered that deportation could only be determined if it was demonstrated that the minister is acting to hinder or hinder the collection of evidence, such as through obstacles to access to documents. or intimidation of witnesses.
Faced with the defeat, the MPF filed an interlocutory appeal, requesting the advance of the appeal, to try to reform the decision in the TRF-1, but Judge Ney Bello followed the understanding of the first instance, considering that the dismissal would be a measure exceptional. and for not foreseeing the existence of evidence that the permanence of the minister in office compromises the procedural instruction.
In the new appeal, the Prosecutor’s Office requests the reconsideration of Ney Bello’s decision or the presentation of the collegiate appeal.
The action in question was brought as a result of the minister’s statement at the April 22 meeting, made public by the STF, in which Salles argued that the government should ‘take advantage’ of the new coronavirus pandemic to go ‘passing livestock ‘in regulations. and environmental standards.
The minister is accused by the MPF of committing “intentional disorganization” and “emptying” of public policies to “favor interests that have nothing to do with the purpose of the portfolio.”
Defending
Salles qualifies the action of the MPF as “attempted interference in public policies.” “The action of a group of prosecutors brings positions with evident political-ideological bias in a clear attempt to interfere in the public policies of the Federal Government,” he said. “The complaints are a collection of several other processes already considered and denied by the Judicial Power, since their arguments are unfounded.”
In a statement sent to TRF-1, the AGU (Advocacia-Geral da União) stated that “it is not possible to conclude” that the increase in deforestation in Brazil is a reflection of the actions and acts of the Minister of Salles at the head of the Ministry of Environment.
For AGU, “there is no way to presume” that the negative results of illegal deforestation are related to Salles’ policy. The defense of the government points out that the increase in the scenario “has occurred since 2012 and the current management only began in 2019.”
“It is not possible to conclude that the results of deforestation in Brazil are due to actions of the current Minister of the Environment,” said the Attorney General of the Union, José Levi Mello do Amaral Júnior. “There are a variety of factors that influence deforestation, and the Minister of the Environment is not responsible for the result. In this circumstance, there is no domain of any causal chain of results harmful to the environment by the minister, even because their functions are not far from being executed acts ”, he concluded.
* With information from Estadão Content
