CNJ forms majority to remove Marcelo Bretas, judge of Lava Jato do Rio – 02/28/2023 – Power

The CNJ (National Council of Justice) formed a majority this Tuesday (28) to remove from office Judge Marcelo Bretas, responsible for Operation Lava Jato in Rio de Janeiro, for alleged irregularities in the conduct of processes.

In a confidential session, the directors jointly analyze three complaints made against Bretas. Two have as their origin plea bargaining by lawyers who reported alleged irregular negotiations by the magistrate in the conduct of proceedings.

The third refers to a complaint by the mayor of Rio de Janeiro, Eduardo Paes (PSD), of alleged political action in the 2018 election in favor of former judge Wilson Witzel, victorious in that dispute and removed two years later.

Corregidor Luiz Alfredo Salomão, rapporteur for the cases, voted for the removal of the magistrate until the conclusion of the PAD (disciplinary administrative process) to be instituted. He was joined by seven other councilors—forming a majority of 8 of the 15 board members.

Counselor João Paulo Schoucair voted to open the proceedings, but without removing the magistrate. He was accompanied by two other advisers. There are still four votes to go.

Bretas became responsible for Lava Jato in Rio de Janeiro in the first instance in 2015, acting in cases involving corruption at Eletrobras. He also took over the cases concerning the corruption scheme of former governor Sérgio Cabral, whom he had arrested and sentenced to more than 400 years in prison in more than 30 criminal actions.

The unfolding of the investigation into Cabral led to the arrest of a series of businessmen, such as Eike Batista, and a network of more than 50 money changers.

The magistrate, however, has been questioned in higher courts since 2021. Several cases were removed from his hands by decisions of the STF (Federal Supreme Court) with the understanding that the connection between them is not enough to keep them mandatorily under the responsibility of the magistrate.

Overexposure alongside politicians also marked the trajectory of the magistrate. Images of Bretas with the then governor Witzel on a jet, at parties and at Maracanã became common. He was even punished by the TRF-2 (Federal Regional Court) for participating in an inauguration of public work alongside former president Jair Bolsonaro and then mayor Marcelo Crivella (Republicans).

Award-winning pleadings signed with the PGR (Attorney General’s Office) also pointed out alleged irregularities by Bretas in conducting the processes.

One of the complaints analyzed by the CNJ refers to a representation made by the Federal Council of the OAB (Order of Lawyers of Brazil) based on a report published by Veja on the plea bargaining of lawyer Nythalmar Dias Ferreira Filho.

The lawyer sought out the PGR after being the subject of a search and seizure in an investigation by the Federal Public Ministry on suspicion of influence peddling and prestige sales in attracting clients.

He reported alleged agreements made with the judge before sentencing with the involvement of prosecutors. One of the cases refers to the alleged negotiation with Bretas and a prosecutor from the Rio de Janeiro task force about how the confession of businessman Fernando Cavendish in an interrogation would affect the plea agreement still under debate.

A second representation analyzed by the CNJ refers to a correction made by the Internal Affairs of the body in the 7th Federal Criminal Court of Rio de Janeiro, commanded by Bretas.

The inspection was motivated by the award-winning denunciation of lawyer José Antônio Fichtner, who claims to have received offers of advantages and pressure from Nythalmar when he was the subject of an investigation under the magistrate’s responsibility.

The representation presented by Eduardo Paes questions the fact that the magistrate subsequently marked, during the 2018 election campaign, interrogations of his former Secretary of Works Alexandre Pinto, at the time a confessed defendant of the accusation of receiving bribes during the Paes administration.

The fourth and final hearing was held three days before the first round. After three interrogations without involving Paes in acts of corruption, Pinto said for the first time that he learned of a bribe by the mayor, who denies the accusation.

“The damage that resulted to the electoral campaign of the petitioner is intuitive, culminating later in the election of Mr. Wilson Witzel”, says Paes’ representation.

After the election, Bretas showed off his close relationship with Witzel by accompanying him by jet to Jair Bolsonaro’s inauguration and attending the state government box at Maracanã.

That year, Paes had also been heard as a witness in the process about the alleged payment of bribes to members of the IOC (International Olympic Committee) for the choice of Rio de Janeiro as the host of the 2016 Olympics.

During the act, Bretas asked questions unrelated to the criminal action, questioning the mayor about alleged payment of bribes or electoral slush funds to him in works of the municipality for the Games.

“This additional concrete evidence makes even more consistent the demonstration that the judge used his jurisdictional powers to persecute and harm Eduardo Paes and favor Wilson Witzel, acting with partiality and in blatant disregard for the dignity, honor and decorum of his functions.”

The punishment for Bretas is added to the one already applied to the former coordinator of the Lava Jato task force in Rio de Janeiro, prosecutor Eduardo El Hage, by the CNMP (National Council of the Public Ministry).

The Council decided in December to suspend the prosecutor for 30 days for allegedly disclosing confidential data about an investigation against former Senator Romero Jucá, who was the target of a complaint. This Tuesday, the CNMP began the judgment of an appeal by El Hage, interrupted by a request for review.

The disclosure questioned by the CNMP took place through an official note published on the MPF website and followed standards adopted by the PGR itself. The result of the judgment collided with the report of the Prosecuting Commission, which opined that the accusation was unfounded.