The former naval commander seeks acquittal and doubts the competence of the special forces in the coup plot policy

Lawyer Demosthenes Torres filed so-called “contrary rulings,” which call into question non-unanimous Supreme Court decisions. However, the court’s jurisprudence is that this type of appeal only applies where there are two differences in the decision, which was not the case in the conviction against Garnier. There was only disagreement on the part of Louise Fox, who suggested that almost all the accused should be acquitted.

The defense used arguments used by Fox to ask for the conviction to be reconsidered. One of them is that the Supreme Court does not have jurisdiction to analyze the case. “The accusatory narrative describes conduct that was allegedly carried out outside the exercise of institutional functions and without a causal relationship with the powers of the court,” he says.

If the incompetence of the special court is not recognized, the defense requests that the procedure be analyzed by the plenary session of the court, and not by the first body. “Only the Plenum, as the highest example of constitutional uniformity, has the necessary authority to rule on issues of this kind, especially when the process has direct repercussions on the institutional structure of the Republic.”

The lawyer also stated that there is no evidence that Garnier joined a criminal organization. According to him, the complaint filed by the Public Prosecutor’s Office (PGR) did not properly identify the conduct of the accused.

The admiral is accused of offering naval forces to support the coup attempt that Bolsonaro will lead. Garnier is responsible for the display of armored cars at Praça dos Três Poderes on the same day as the printed vote in the Chamber of Deputies.