STJ analyzes the decision of the Justice that exempted Dallagnol in the daily rates case

This Wednesday (1), the Special Court of the Superior Court of Justice (STJ) analyzes whether it maintains the decision of the Justice in favor of the federal deputy elected by Podemos in Paraná, Deltan Dallagnol, in the case of daily rates and tickets paid to the attorneys who acted at Operation Lava Jatocoordinated by him between 2014 and 2020.

Receive the main news from Paraná by WhatsApp

The request for annulment of the sentence, handed down at the end of last year, is from the Attorney General’s Office (AGU). On December 6, 2022, federal judge Augusto César Pansini Gonçalves, from the 6th Federal Court of Curitiba, annulled the judgment of the Federal Court of Auditors (TCU) that condemned Dallagnol to pay R$ 2.8 million used during the force -assignment to cover the attorneys’ travel expenses.

In addition to Dallagnol, the effects of the TCU judgment, voted in August 2022, also extended to the former attorney general Rodrigo Janot and the former head of the Federal Public Ministry (MPF) in Paraná João Vicente Romão. The decision pointed out that the three shared the value.

Based on the AGU appeal, therefore, the STJ analyzes whether to reverse the decision of the Federal Court of Paraná suspending the injunction and annulling the sentence, at the opening of the judicial year.

Gazeta do Povo sought out the AGU to question the arguments for the request for annulment of the sentence and to clarify what the lawyers should do in case there is a denial by the STJ. AGU did not respond to the report.

Is it possible for Dallagnol to be ineligible?

If the decision is for annulment, Dallagnol could become ineligible, since the TCU’s conviction, again validated, would place him in the Clean Record Law.

The law establishes that “those who have their accounts related to the exercise of public offices or functions rejected for incurable irregularity that constitutes a malicious act of administrative impropriety, and by an unappealable decision of the competent body, unless it has been suspended or annulled by the Judiciary.

However, the decision is only part of the way, as the former prosecutor can still appeal the decision (Check out what Dallagnol’s defense says at the end).

Possession

Also this Wednesday (1) the parliamentarians elected in 2022 take office. Dallagnol will be one of the 513 federal deputies elected to be sworn in. Deltan Dallagnol was the most voted federal deputy in Paraná, being elected with 344 thousand votes.

case history

In August 2022, the ministers of the Second Chamber of the TCU unanimously voted to condemn Dallagnol, Janot and Romão. At the time, the justification was that the model adopted for work during Operation Lava Jato, with personnel moving to Curitiba, did not follow the principles of economy.

For the agency, the attorneys involved in the task force moved to Curitiba for years, which would configure the need to move to the capital of Paraná during the operation. And since the work model had not been revised at the time, Dallagnol, as coordinator of the task force, should return the value to the public coffers, jointly with Janot and Romão.

Dallagnol’s defense filed an appeal and, the following month, a new TCU analysis decided to uphold the conviction and fine. In the same trial, the agency accepted Romão’s appeals and acquitted the former head of the MPF in Paraná of ​​compensation.

After the TCU’s decision, the Federal Public Prosecutor’s Office (MPF) opened an investigation into the case, which, days later, was archived. The MPF justified that it found no evidence of administrative impropriety in the former prosecutor’s conduct, since Dallagnol’s conduct did not show “a free and conscious will to cause damage to the treasury, nor its actual occurrence”.

The annulment of the TCU judgment came in December, when the decision of the Federal Court of Paraná fully complied with the topics of Deltan Dallagnol’s defense, which justified the inclusion of the former attorney in the process as being improper.

When Dallagnol was appointed to join the task force, the work structure was already defined and authorized by the Attorney General’s Office, supported the defense – and, therefore, he would not be a legitimate party to respond, since he neither received nor ordered the payment of per diems.

Before the elections, Dallagnol’s candidacy for the Chamber of Deputies was the target of requests for opposition, which had TCU’s decision among their justifications. But, in October, the Regional Electoral Court (TRE) approved the candidacy, and the questions were automatically invalidated when the Federal Justice of Paraná issued the decision to annul the effects of the court’s judgment.

What does Dallagnol’s defense say?

The defense of Deltan Dallagnon, through a note from his press office, reported this Monday (30) “to be confident that the Special Court will analyze the case in a technical way and that, for that very reason, it will be recognized that the suspension of an injunction does not fit in the case, since the process has merely individual repercussions on the plaintiff and in no way can the injunction granted be considered of manifest public interest or capable of violating the order and legal values ​​protected by Law 8.437/92”.

Regarding a possible annulment by the STJ of the judgment of Judge Augusto César Pansini Gonçalves, the defense of the elected deputy reports that “Wednesday’s decision has no impact on the judgment on the merits handed down. The suspension of security seeks to suspend the effects of the injunction granted at the beginning of the processing of the case to suspend the process at the TCU. Therefore, the effects of the STJ’s decision in Wednesday’s judgment will fall exclusively on the effectiveness of the injunction granted in the first instance. In a favorable case by Deltan, it will be recognized that it is not a case of suspension of the injunction and the injunction will again be fully effective, suspending the processing of the process at the TCU until the final judgment of the case. In the event of a negative decision, the administrative process at the TCU will resume. In the latter case, we will have a deadline to file an appeal with suspensive effect. Once the appeal is filed, we will have to wait for the opinion of a new technical area (the Secretariat of Appeals – Serur) and then the analysis and judgment of the case under the Rapporteurship of a new rapporteur, not being able to speak of the existence of a final decision carried over in judged on the matter”.

Eligibility and tenure rights are assured, says defense

Also according to the defense, “the effects of an unfavorable decision only affect the possibility of the administrative process at the TCU returning to processing. There is no impact on eligibility or right to take office”.

Questioned about the possibility of the elected deputy being included in the Clean Record Law, in case of a decision favorable to the AGU, Dallagnol’s defense informed that “the clean record law always links ineligibility to final and final convictions. The TCU process has not come to an end. There is still an appeal with suspensive effect, which will lead to a new judgment by the Court. That is, there is no way to indicate that the case conforms to any of the ineligibility provided for in the current wording of Complementary Law 64/99, even after the amendment of Complementary Law 135/2010. Therefore, even if the STJ’s decision is not favorable, Deltan’s eligibility will not be reached”.