Votes differ on Moro’s spending, security and impact of fame

The 1-1 score at the Regional Electoral Court of Paraná (TRE-PR) reveals two different paths for votes in the Sergio Moro trial (União-PR), which began in Curitiba last Monday (1st). The senator is on trial for alleged abuse of economic power in the 2022 elections, when after pre-candidacy for the Presidency of the Republic with Podemos, the former judge won the Senate election in the state of Paraná for his current party.

Receive the main news from Paraná via WhatsApp

If on the first day of the trial, the thesis of the sum of the campaigns, authored by the PL and the PT-PV-PCdoB Federation, was rejected by the rapporteur of the case, Luciano Carrasco Falavinha Souza, on the second day of the trial, the vote of judge José Rodrigo Sade, welcomed the opinion of the Public Electoral Ministry (MPE) which considered that there was an injection of around R$ 2 million in the pre-campaign, presenting an interpretation contrary to the rapporteur’s vote on several points, such as security, the impact of Moro’s fame in the pre-candidacy and even the jurisprudence of the case of former senator Selma Arruda.

Appointed in February by President Lula (PT) and sworn in at the beginning of March as holder of the jurist chair at TRE-PR, Sade points to a “mismatch between the concept of ‘moderate spending’ in the pre-campaign and the gigantic contributions of resources ” with the aim of boosting Moro’s image and candidacy. “What is concrete is that the amount invested is magnificent, easily exceeding the amount invested by the majority of his opponents in the campaign, as recorded by them in their accounts”, stated the judge.

After the vote for the impeachment and ineligibility of the former Lava Jato judge, the dean of TRE-PR, Cláudia Cristina Cristofani, asked for the trial to be suspended until next Monday (8), citing the contradictory lines presented in the first two votes in the Court requiring analysis and study of the case. The trial is expected to be completed by Tuesday (9). There is still an appeal to the Superior Electoral Court (TSE).

The pre-campaign and the percentage of expenses allowed with the Electoral Fund is a nebulous topic within electoral legislation without defined regulations, which causes disagreements in the premises adopted for the assessment of each case.

Check out the main points of contradiction between the votes of the process rapporteur and judge Rodrigo Sade.

By overturning the thesis of “downgrading”that is, the sum of Moro’s pre-campaign as presidential candidate with the electoral campaign period in Paraná, rapporteur Falavinha stated that only R$ 224,778.00 can be considered as Moro’s pre-campaign expenses, value compatible with the Senate race. Furthermore, he argues that even if the amount spent during the period in which Moro was a pre-candidate for president was taken into account, the sum would be R$854,791.00, below the R$2 million figure calculated in the opinion of the MPE, which partially accepted the revocation request.

The new judge of the Court argued that it cannot be said that the expenses incurred in the pre-campaign are accessible to the “average candidate” or are “not very significant” as they correspond to 45.65% of the ceilingand the office of Moro’s deputy, lawyer Luis Felipe Cunha, issued an opinion limiting spending at 30%.

“There was a breach of the equality of the claim, compromising its fairness and legitimacy, so that the practice of abuse of economic power must be recognized, since conduct capable of characterizing it was proven to be carried out”, he argues in the vote. “Although the presidential campaign is modest, its pre-campaign tends to work with values ​​that are unimaginable for a Senate campaign”, he adds.

While the case’s rapporteur stated that it would be necessary to prove Moro’s initial intention to run for the Senate and use the pre-candidacy for president as a way to increase exposure and investments in the campaign as senator, Rodrigo Sade considered this point as “irrelevant” and stated that the damage to the normality and legitimacy of the elections must be measured objectively.

“In a public and notorious scenario of polarization that has been in force since the beginning of the 2021 presidential election, the investigated Sérgio Moro took a real risk in launching himself and starting to spend as a presidential pre-candidate, thus deliberately exposing himself to seeing his candidacy challenged on charges of abuse of economic power”, he counters. Still according to Sade, when trying to participate in three different elections, Moro “tipped the balance in your favor” the election to the Senate in Paraná.

• Impact on the electorate of Paraná

In addition to intentionality, rapporteur Luciano Carrasco Falavinha also argues that Moro’s pre-campaign acts as presidential candidate should have been directed to the state of Paraná to support the supposed advantage in the Senate election. In his vote, he also recalls that an appeal by the PT at the Regional Electoral Court of São Paulo (TRE-SP) prevented the transfer of Moro’s electoral domicile to the neighboring state after joining União Brasil, leaving the former judge to fight as candidate for senator from Paraná.

At this point, Sade also contradicts the rapporteur by arguing that the reach of social networks and the high propagation of current media go beyond geographic limits, with campaign acts no longer concentrated in the local square.

“In the records, there is overwhelming evidence that those investigated and, in particular, Sergio Moro, had at their disposal a strong scheme for producing material for the internet and using social networks, with which there was a potentialization of all their acts, regardless of where they were carried out.”

• Fame of the former Lava Jato judge

Sade also rebuts in the vote the defense of the senator who argues that the pre-campaign for President of the Republic did not benefit the image on display of the former judge, who was already nationally known for fighting corruption during the Lava Jato operation, which was also quoted by the rapporteur who used the expression: “even the stones know Sergio Moro”.

In the assessment of the electoral judge who voted this Wednesday, the argument “is nothing more than rhetoric”. “If this fame was enough to, in itself, elevate him to the desired position, it would not make sense for the parties to allocate the absurd amount of money they invested to his pre-candidacy, simply waiting for the elections. The fame of the person being investigated is a broad concept, which does not necessarily contain only positive references, hence why he evidently decided that it would be necessary to build his character as a politician seeking elected office”, analyzes Sade.

• CCP threat and security

In his vote, the judge recalls that the defense supports the thesis that the expenditure on private security and Moro’s escort would be considered as “electoral indifference”an argument accepted by the rapporteur who disregarded the amount paid for the service in campaign expenses on the grounds that the former judge and former Minister of Justice were being threatened by the Primeiro Comando da Capital (PCC).

According to Sade, the investigation raised a total of R$535,185.22 spent on the service in the pre-campaign phase. “The decisive basis for including such expenditure as a campaign expense stems from the testimony given by the investigated Sergio Moro. He recognized that, far from being an electoral indifferent, his strong security scheme financed with public money was, in reality, an essential condition for carrying out his campaign”, he points out.

Pre-campaign spending limits are considered a “gray area” in the Electoral Court and the jurisprudence can be used as a guide in court decisions. Therefore, the impeachment of former senator Selma Arruda for spending on advertising during the pre-campaign was widely remembered during Sergio Moro’s process. However, Falavinha and Sade also disagree on the issue in the first two votes of the trial.

The rapporteur rejected the comparison and called the parallel a “strong narrative created”. The judge states that there are “points of rapprochement” in both cases and that the situation is “quite similar”. “The former judge who enters politics, competes for a seat in the Senate and makes use of large financial contributions in the pre-campaign, anticipating electoral expenses. In the present, the situation is even more serious, since the expenditure ceiling has also been exceeded, an issue that was not configured in the previous case”, compares Sade.