Dino votes in favor of approving the renegotiation of leniency agreements with Lava-Jato contractors policy

Dino voted in the ruling on the lawsuit brought by Psol, PCdoB and Solidaredade, which asked for the agreements reached in the process to be annulled. The judge had asked to reconsider the case in August.

The analysis will take place in the virtual general session of the court and will end next Friday (5). In this method, there is no face-to-face discussion, and ministers simply cast their votes. The score is 3 to 1. Ministers Nunes Marquez and Luis Roberto Barrosonow retired, follow the rapporteur’s vote, Andre Mendonça.

Dino partly deviated from Mendonça. He continued to vote on ratifying the approval of the agreement that benefits contracting companies, but he proposed new theses to guide future agreements.

The agreement helps Novonor (formerly Odebrecht), Andrade Gutierrez, Braskem, Camargo Korea, New Engifex, Maitha (formerly Organization of American States) and UTC Engineering. Companies, with the exception of Braskem, will be able to deduct up to 50% of the outstanding balance of agreements initially approved by Lava-Jato using tax loss credits from corporate income tax (IRPJ) or the negative calculation basis of social contribution on net profit (CSLL).

Regarding the criteria for the new agreements, Dino proposed maintaining Mendonça’s proposals so that only the judiciary would have control over the sanctions imposition measures taken by the state, whether at the administrative or judicial level, whether at the negotiating or contentious level.

It also adhered to the premise that audit tribunals can only investigate damage resulting from wrongful acts admitted by the company in the agreements and that audit tribunals will be able to access information contained in the agreements to verify the liability of those involved, as long as they commit to using it only to investigate potential damage to the public treasury.

Dinu agreed with the proposal that the CGU is responsible for signing leniency agreements within the scope of the federal executive and in proceedings against foreign public administration, but expanded the possibility of cooperation, so that the body could work with other institutions in addition to the AGU and the MPF in judicial accountability proceedings, with the aim of reaching a global solution to administrative and civil sanctions simultaneously.

Regarding the role of the AGU and the MPF, while Mendonça suggested that these institutions could sign civil agreements with companies not to file or terminate claims under the Anti-Corruption Law and the Violations Law, Dino suggested that the MPF could only file a lawsuit to apply administrative sanctions if there was an omission by the administrative authority.

Dino also voted to enable the CGU, AGU and MPF to sign separate agreements when they are in different areas (administrative, civil, environmental, competitive or criminal), as long as compensation is proportionate.

Finally, Dino understood that the values ​​agreed in the agreement must also take into account fines, compensation and loss of assets must take into account penalties already imposed by other authorities. In contrast to what Mendonça proposed, which set as criteria the fine, the amount necessary to fully compensate for damages, product losses or unjust enrichment.

the value Try contacting the companies mentioned in the report.