Justice removes president of the BB employees’ pension fund from office – 05/26/2023 – Market

The 1st Federal Civil Court of the Federal District removed João Fukunaga from the position of president of Previ, the pension fund for Banco do Brasil employees). He was the target of criticism on social networks and among retirees from the institution, who pointed out a lack of experience in the area.

This Thursday’s decision (25) was in response to the request of state deputy Leonardo Siqueira de Lima (Novo-SP), author of a popular action questioning the executive’s qualifications.

In a note, Previ stated that it would not comment on the court decision because it was not officially notified and that the appointment was made “respecting the rites of governance, with collegiate decisions from both Banco do Brasil and Previ, meeting the requirements set out in the Eligibility processes of both institutions”.

Fukunaga was appointed to the post at the end of March. He has been a BB employee since 2008 and also has a career as a union leader in his curriculum —he joined the board of directors of the Bank Workers Union of São Paulo, Osasco and Region in 2012.

The executive was appointed to lead Previ at the end of March, replacing Daniel Stieler, who had been in charge since June 2021 and retired.

Fukunaga was endorsed by Previc (National Superintendence of Complementary Pensions), the sector’s regulatory body, which issued the director qualification certificate.

The representative of Novo in the Legislative Assembly of SP filed a lawsuit with the Federal Court on the grounds that the president of Previ did not carry out an activity that qualified him to perform the functions.

According to the legislation cited in the lawsuit, the candidate for the position would need at least three years of experience in activities in the financial, administrative, accounting, legal, inspection, actuarial, social security or audit areas.

In the statement sent to the report, Previ highlighted that the appointment was duly authorized by the regulatory body, “which attests to compliance with regulatory requirements and the compliance required for the exercise of the position”.

Substitute judge Marcelo Gentil Monteiro, however, accepted the arguments of the state deputy and understood that the qualification should be considered null for not fulfilling legal requirements.

“It is imperative to recognize the nullity of the Qualification Certificate”, said the magistrate, since the requirements established by the legislation were not met, so that its maintenance represents a violation of morality”.