General Braga Neto’s defense submitted an appeal to the Federal Supreme Court, on Monday (12/1), asking Minister Alexandre de Moraes to reconsider the decision that convicted the soldier on charges of attempted coup.
If a retraction is not possible, the defense requests that the ban be submitted to the plenary session of the court (where all ministers consider the case), according to the dissenting vote – by Minister Louis Fox, the only judge who voted in favor of acquitting the accused.
Read also
-
Brazil
The allies submit a request for the humane detention of Bolsonaro to the Special Forces
-
Brazil
Heleno acknowledges her illnesses upon hearing, but does not mention Alzheimer’s to STF
-
Brazil
Braga Neto’s defense confirms that imprisonment is “completely unfair”
-
Brazil
In the last ban, Braga Neto’s defense requested that the operation be annulled
Based on Fox’s vote, the general’s defense points to five questions for reconsideration of the decision:
- Insufficient jurisdiction of the Special Court and, instead, the first body to adjudicate the case.
- Restrict defense by Unpacking documents (Dumping a huge amount of documents, files and evidence in the process, making analysis difficult and potentially damaging to the broader defense).
- Dropping the charge of armed criminal organization.
- The charge of attempted coup was dismissed.
- The accusation of crimes of qualified damage and deterioration of listed property is unfounded.
Of the five ministers who formed the first committee at the time, four of them voted in favor of convicting the army general. Braga Neto is serving a 26-year prison sentence, initially in a closed system in the Army’s 1st Division, in Vila Militar, in Rio de Janeiro (RJ).
3 photos
Conditional closure.
1 of 3
General Walter Braga Neto
Reproduction TV Justiça2 of 3
STF Minister Luiz Fuchs, the only judge to vote to acquit Braga Neto
Hugo Barreto / Metropolis @hugobarretophoto3 of 3
Minister Alexandre de Moraes, rapporteur of the criminal action that convicted Braga Neto in the STF
Vinicius Schmidt/Metropolis @vinicius.foto
The defense questioned Minister Alexandre de Moraes’ decision to issue an order to implement the sentence without knowing the ban imposed by the defense.
Moraes considered that they would only delay, as for the minister, violating the ban would not be acceptable unless there were two votes in favor of acquitting the defendant. In 2018, when ruling on a criminal case, the Supreme Court set the requirement of two unsuccessful votes to accept this type of ban.
The General’s Defense refutes this understanding and argues that the STF’s bylaws do not indicate the minimum number of dissenting votes to allow violation of the prohibition against a decision of the Committee, but rather state only that the prohibition of violation against a “non-unanimous decision of the plenary or committee” is applicable.