STF concludes voting and makes Carla Zambelli defendant for armed persecution

The Federal Supreme Court (STF) made, by 9 votes to 2, deputy Carla Zambelli (PL-SP) defendant for illegal possession of a weapon and illegal embarrassment with the use of a weapon. The Court analyzed in the virtual plenary the complaint presented by the Attorney General of the Republic (PGR) against the parliamentarian for drawing a gun and chasing a man in São Paulo, on the eve of the second round of last year’s election.

The rapporteur of the case, Gilmar Mendes, voted in favor of receiving the complaint and was followed by ministers Alexandre de Moraes, Cármen Lúcia, Cristiano Zanin, Dias Tófoli, Edson Fachin, Luís Roberto Barroso, Luiz Fux and Rosa Weber

“Even if the accused carries a weapon, using it outside the limits of personal defense, in a public and ostensive context, even more so on the eve of the elections, in theory, could mean criminal responsibility”, said the rapporteur in his vote.

As the Court accepted the complaint, the process will begin with the collection of evidence and the testimony of witnesses for the defense and prosecution.

Ministers André Mendonça and Kássio Nunes Marques were the only ones to open disagreement. In the understanding of Mendonça and Nunes Marques, the STF does not have the competence to judge the case, which should be referred to the Justice of São Paulo. He argued that the episode has nothing to do with the deputy’s mandate.

Nunes Marquês wrote, in his opinion, that “the circumstances of the accused being in the exercise of the office of federal deputy and that there was a discussion related to the elections, by themselves, are not enough to justify the competence of the Court.”

The lawyer, Daniel Bialski, responsible for Zambelli’s defense, stated that “on the date of the facts, the deputy was having lunch with her son when she was cursed, offended, vilified, affronted and threatened by a third person who is even being investigated by these facts”.

Bialski emphasized that “she only acted within the regular exercise of her right” and that the deputy “had a registration and carried a weapon, granted by the public authorities, carrying it on that date due to the dozens and various death threats, as well as threats to her physical integrity and that of the child”.