TRE orders newspaper to publish Marçal’s right to reply – 10/01/2024 – Power

The Electoral Court granted the right of reply to Pablo Marçal (PRTB) against Tabata Amaral (PSB), because of the candidate’s statements during an interview with the YouTube channel of the newspaper O Estado de S. Paulo.

In the excerpt in question, the federal deputy states that Marçal committed several crimes, such as money laundering and murder.

“Marçal finances his campaign illegally, and the courts have not been able to respond to this, but the good thing is that the people decide,” said Tabata during the interview, broadcast three weeks ago.

The decision determines that the newspaper publishes the response within one day after Marçal’s campaign presents the material to be broadcast. The deadline, he says, occurs because of the proximity of election day.

In another excerpt, she also states that the influencer is “a liar” and “scumbag”.

Tabata Amaral’s campaign says it has already appealed the decision.

The lawyer for O Estado de S. Paulo Afrânio Afonso Ferreira states that the newspaper will also appeal. In the section contested by the influencer’s campaign, says the lawyer, the journalist who conducted the interview intervened and corrected the statements.

“It’s even a recent decision by the Supreme Court that has general repercussions and says that the journalistic company should only be held responsible if it failed to emphasize the inaccuracy. And the journalist did exactly that, saying at the time that the information she said was not included in the processes.”

In the first instance, the request for the right to reply had been denied. This Tuesday (1st), however, the judges of the TRE (Regional Electoral Court) of São Paulo unanimously decided to grant the candidate’s request.

According to rapporteur Regis de Castilho, the candidate’s statements went beyond the right to freedom of expression, constituting an offensive personal attack. “There is no doubt that it ended up affecting the prohibited figure contained in the caput of article 58 when outlining such phrases.”

Regarding the removal of the interview, however, the court denied the request and maintained permission for the content to remain available.

The interview in question aired on September 13, 2024.