What led to the removal of Appio from conducting Lava Jato in Curitiba

The removal of Judge Eduardo Fernando Appio from conducting the Lava Jato proceedings at the 13th Federal Court of Curitiba, on the night of this Monday (22), occurred due to the suspected violation of a series of legal norms in accordance with the decision of the Court’s Council Federal Regional of the 4th Region (TRF-4) obtained by People’s Gazette (see in full).

In a long report, the Regional Corregidor of the Court, Cândido Alfredo Silva Júnior, explains each violation that would have been committed by Appio in an alleged telephone call made to João Eduardo Barreto Malucelli, son of the federal judge Marcelo Malucelli, on April 13, classifying it as a possible attempt at intimidation, threat or embarrassment based on confidential data to which he had access.

Barreto recorded the call received from a person who identified himself as a TRF-4 health worker. He identified the caller as possibly being from Appio, using a fictitious name. The recording was forwarded to a Federal Police expert, who said that the voice “strongly corroborates” with Appio’s.

“The voice present in the video that recorded the telephone call received by the son of federal judge Marcelo Malucelli was produced by federal judge Eduardo Fernando Appio, at level ‘+3’ (‘the result strongly corroborates the hypothesis’), on a scale ranging from grade ‘-4’ (‘the result very strongly contradicts the hypothesis (from different sources)’) and ‘+4’ (‘the result very strongly corroborates the hypothesis (from the same origin)’)”, says an excerpt from the expert report sent by the PF to the TRF-4.

In the call attributed to Appio, the interlocutor tries to obtain information about Barreto’s father based on a dialogue that he would have “values ​​to be returned”, and questioning whether he “has not been up to anything”.

In April, the judge Marcelo Malucelli asked to stay away from Operation Lava Jato cases at TRF-4 due to his connection with the family of Senator Sergio Moro (União Brasil-PR). Barreto is a partner of the parliamentarian and his wife, federal deputy Rosangela Moro (União Brasil-SP) at the law firm Wolff Moro, in Curitiba.

Since before taking over the Lava Jato processes in Curitiba, Appio was a critic of the operation. In an interview with GloboNews this Monday (22), he acknowledged that he used the acronym “LUL22” as an electronic identification in the Federal Justice system of Paraná, the so-called E-proc, between 2021 and the beginning of 2022.

He said that when he worked with social security matters, he used the acronym as an “isolated, individual protest against a prison that I considered illegal”.

Appio stated, as soon as he took over the works at the 13th Federal Court of Curitiba, that the then judge Sérgio Moro conducted the processes with a “judicial populism” and that “there were excesses” in the investigations.

Corregidor considers illegal connection

The TRF-4 inspector considers that Appio may have committed at least four offenses when contacting João Eduardo Barreto Malucelli, such as consulting restricted system data, making a phone call without caller ID, impersonating a third party and the very connection to the son of a judge who “figured as rapporteur in partial corrections that the magistrate suffered”.

“The phone call seemed quite suspicious, considering that:

• (c.1) was made with a blocked number;
• (c.2) the interlocutor justified that he was using the Skype system to save amounts from the Federal Court, when there is no such policy within the scope of the Federal Court;
• (c.3) the interlocutor used the name of Fernando Gonçalves Pinheiro and identifies himself as a public servant in the health area of ​​the Federal Court, but apparently there is no public servant with that name in the Federal Court of the 4th Region;
• (c.4) the interlocutor mentioned having consulted income tax databases;
• (c.5) the interlocutor addressed the judge’s son directly, although he stated that he intended to speak with him;
• (c.6) the interlocutor mentioned information that is not correct (saying that the cell phone number belonged to the judge, and later to his son)”, says the report of the magistrate Cândido Alfredo Silva Júnior.”

Also according to the report, the information collected by the technical department of the TRF-4 confirms the suspicion of restricted access to Barreto’s confidential data at the Federal Revenue Service. “The information displayed on the print could only have been obtained through a user logged in with the magistrate profile. This statement stems from the menu on the left, highlighted in yellow in the print below, have exactly the same sequence of resources as the magistrate’s profile, and only this type of user has the sequence shown”.

The image with the confidential data accessible only by judges was, according to the TRF-4 inspector, posted on Twitter on April 13 (look here), in an account supposedly belonging to lawyer Wilson Ramos Filho, who presents himself as a professor of Labor Law at the federal universities of Paraná and Rio de Janeiro.

The following day, the profile attributed to Ramos Filho posted another message on the social network showing the corporate structure of Barreto’s law firm with the Moro couple and what would be a description of José Eduardo’s salaries.

During the suspicious call, the interlocutor, who would be Appio, says that he has Barreto’s number as registered in the name of his father, Marcelo Malucelli, and that he would call him informing him of the alleged pending tax. However, he tries to extract information about the lawyer with the claim that he would not want to “bother” the judge in court.

“So I do this, I call your father directly and I do this, I just didn’t want to bother you, that there is your number, your name, your CPF and the question of past residues of medical expenses, the idea was not to bother you. But if you prefer it that way,” said the caller.

Shortly afterwards, the caller again says that he would call Barreto’s father to talk about the alleged pending tax, which is immediately allowed by the lawyer.

“So I’ll call, I say that I spoke with you, I say that I spoke with you and that you authorized me to call him, bother him in court”, reinforced the caller.

Barreto asked him to confirm the supposed name given:

“Oh, you can talk. Bother you! What is your name yourself? Fernando Pinheiro Gonçalves, right”, he questioned and was confirmed by the interlocutor.

In the end, the supposed public servant in the health area of ​​the TRF-4 asks: “and are you sure that you haven’t been up to anything”, being answered by Barreto that “ah, that’s right now, that’s right. Ready?”.

The call ends abruptly at this point. See below the full dialogue recorded by João Eduardo Barreto Malucelli. On the same day, Marcelo Malucelli took the fact to court, which ordered the investigation of the case by the Permanent Security Commission with the urgent assistance of the Federal Police.

Appio will have 15 days to present a defense

Appio is temporarily away from duty to ensure that the information currently available in the Federal Justice systems is not damaged and affects the investigation. The internal affairs department also gave the magistrate a period of 15 days to present a defense.

“Ensure the production of evidence that carries a risk of not being able to be produced again or that may become unrepeatable, imposing that, in a precautionary manner, the magistrate is prevented from accessing the dependencies of the Federal Justice and the court in which jurisdiction, as well as being prevented from accessing the electronic systems linked to his performance as a magistrate (suspension of access to the login on the Intranet and the systems that are linked to it and to the E-Proc, as specified below) – means by which he could come to the object of the evidence to be produced perish”, said the inspector in the report.

What was said in the recording to Barreto

See below the full connection between the alleged TRF-4 server and João Eduardo Barreto Malucelli, son of federal judge Marcelo Malucelli, on April 13:

• Voice 1: Fernando Gonçalves Pinheiro [nome usado pelo suposto servidor]you can call us again, there is no problem at all, I just need you to pass eh… the phone number or contact Doctor Marcelo Malucelli regarding the income tax extracts for the children , it’s a thing of the past, it’s a residue of the past, which he has a credit that he can deduct from the income tax, he can compute in favor.
• Voice 2: ‘Hum’ I understand, but look, I’m sorry…
• Voice 1: (Incomprehensible)
• Voice 2: I’m sorry, sir, you’re calling with no caller ID, I “num” “num” have no idea who it is.
• Voice 1: ‘Ah’ but the… the sir, it’s ok. But you are listed here as one of the children and your number is listed here. So we’re calling that.
• Voice 2: ‘Hum’ but like, I don’t eh… this story is really strange, see? I’m sorry, with all due respect, but eh… if Marcelo…
• Voice 1: How would I get your phone number here eh… it’s just a matter of income tax. Ah, if you want, I’ll call your father directly, no problem, I’ll call (incomprehensible)…
• Voice 2: (Incomprehensible)
• Voice 1: No problem at all.
• Voice 2: So, I think it’s better for you to do this, right?
• Voice 1: So I do this, I call your father directly and do this, I just didn’t want to bother you, that here is your number, your name, your CPF and the question of past residues of medical expenses, the idea was not to bother you . But if you prefer it that way, call… we’re only using a system here via Skype to save Federal Justice fees. No, there isn’t, there isn’t… if it doesn’t show up, that’s why. But I call him directly, there is no problem.
• Voice 2: Yes, yes, you called and said…
• Voice 1: (Incomprehensible)
• Voice 2: You called and said, I would like to speak with Marcelo Malucelli, now you are saying that it appears that I am a son. So, it’s kind of ambiguous, right? Until ah…
• Voice 1: Yeah… the contact I have with Doctor Marcelo Malucelli must be an old contact, your phone number appears, so that’s why I read it… we are calling…
• Voice 2: No, that number never belonged to Marcelo Malucelli, sir, forgive me. And also, like, uh… it’s been a long time since I don’t have any kind of cooperation agreement with the federal court because of uh… server dependency. I’ve been of legal age for a while and I don’t have any health insurance.
• Voice 1: No, yes, yes, but here… yes, yes, this is an old date, eh… you are twenty-eight years old, this must have been done over ten years ago, with sure, ten, fifteen years ago. At least here the dates referred to here, two thousand one, two thousand and two, this is old stuff.
• Voice 2: Ah, then it’s good. So you get in touch with him, okay?
• Voice 1: But if you prefer I call your father directly, I just don’t want to bother him, that’s all.
• Voice 2: Okay, sure. You can call then. Do whatever is best.
• Voice 1: So I’ll call, I say that I spoke with you, I say that I spoke with you and that you authorized me to call him, to disturb him in the court itself.
• Voice 2: Ah, you can speak. Bother you!What is your name yourself? Fernando Pinheiro Gonçalves, right?
• Voice 1: That’s it.
• Voice 2: Oh, yeah.
• Voice 1: You can call here in the health sector that we are here.
• Voice 2: Health sector.
• Voice 1: (Incomprehensible)
• Voice 2: Health sector, Fernando Pinheiro Gonçalves. Are you sure that’s your name?
• Voice 1: I’m absolutely sure.
• Voice 2: So it’s good.
• Voice 1: And are you sure you haven’t been up to anything?
• Voice 2: Ah, now, that’s right. Ready?
• Voice 3 [que surge ao final, mas que não é identificado]: My God! Li…