Opposition parliamentarians expressed their regret over the death of businessman Cleriston Pereira da Cunha, one of the defendants of January 8, who died in Papuda, this Monday (20). On social media, messages of solidarity with the victim and condemnation of Minister Alexandre de Moraes, of the Federal Supreme Court (STF), were published for not having accepted the request for provisional release, presented by the Attorney General’s Office (PG).
“Even in the face of the PGR’s demonstration for provisional freedom with the use of an ankle bracelet, as he suffered from hypertension and diabetes, Minister Alexandre de Moraes did not even comment on the request”, said the leader of the Opposition in the Chamber, deputy Carlos Jordy (PL -RJ).
Deputy Nikolas Ferreira (PL-MG) cited the case of Cleriston and other prisoners who already have a favorable opinion from the PGR for the revocation of preventive detention”, and added that the opposition bench will prepare “a series of measures to clarify the occurred.”
Federal deputy Carla Zambelli (PL-SP) also highlighted that “Cleriston was one of the prisoners from 08/01, and should have been free since September, when the MPF was in favor of his release”.
“My office is working together with the entire opposition bench to investigate the facts related to this unfortunate news,” he said.
For deputy Eduardo Bolsonaro (PL-SP), the defendant’s death is “endless evil”. “If he had stolen, killed, trafficked, he would certainly have been released at the custody hearing,” he declared.
Senator General Hamilton Mourão (Republicanos/RS) pointed out that Cleriston’s death “materializes the absurdity of the absence of due legal process and the bureaucracy that has been restricting the rights of those arrested for the acts of January 8”. He demanded a “thorough investigation so that this very serious fact can be clarified”.
The president of the Public Security Commission, deputy Sanderson (PL-ES), demanded accountability from those involved in the prisoner’s death. “Primary offense. No individualization of conduct. Someone will have to be held responsible for this,” he said.