Toffoli displeases PGR and BC in the Master affair. To understand

In addition to the fact that Toffoli’s decision is taken ex officio, that is to say without a request from the PGR or the Federal Police, responsible for investigations in the investigation into Banco Master, the agreement between the members of the Prosecutor’s Office and the BC is that it would be necessary to advance further in the investigation before the confrontation phase. On Wednesday evening, the Attorney General of the Republic himself, Paulo Gonet, requested the suspension of the confrontation, on the grounds that the hearing would be “premature”.

The STF ministers describe the decision of their colleague Dias Toffoli as “unusual”, but avoid directly criticizing the judge’s determination, knowing that the minister is acting within the framework of his powers. For a wing of ministers, the call for confrontation launched by Toffoli at this stage of the investigation is not common, even if it is possible. These magistrates point out, however, that the entire case involving the Master presents its own and somewhat “unprecedented” characteristics.

Another wing of STF ministers defends Toffoli’s autonomy to act in this matter “as the best judge” and believes that the call for confrontation was probably based on solid elements. For this group, the minister must already be aware of the entire process and therefore understand that the measure was necessary.

A comparison is used to compare the versions. The three will be heard because Vorcaro tried to sell Master to BRB Bank, a state bank owned by the Federal District (DF) government, in a deal that BC vetoed in September. Two months later, Vorcaro was arrested and the BC decreed the liquidation of Master amid suspicions of fraudulent operations worth around 12 billion reais. Until then, the case was in the first instance of Justice. At the end of November, the banker was released and the defense requested that the investigation be handed over to the STF. The measure was decided by Toffoli on December 3 after the PF found a document reporting a real estate negotiation between Vorcaro and a federal deputy.

The STF having resumed the investigation less than a month ago, investigators believe that the ideal would be to gather more elements before confronting the parties involved.

According to STF interlocutors, Toffoli wants to clarify whether there was a delay in the decision to liquidate the bank, when the BC became aware of suspicions about Master’s operations, what measures were adopted to monitor the bank securities market and identify those responsible for failures in the process.

Last week, the president of the BC, Gabriel Galípolo, declared that the institution was at the disposal of the Tribunal. Aquino, the director who will be heard, is not under investigation.

According to a former director of the BC heard privately on the blog of columnist Míriam Leitão, the confrontation is “totally unreasonable”, because it exposes the director of the monetary authority, can embarrass and intimidate the technical work of the inspection and places the supervisee and the inspector on an equal footing.

According to Gustavo Sampaio, professor of constitutional law at the Federal University of Fluminense (UFF), Toffoli’s decision has legal support, but there is controversy because it is not yet a criminal procedure in the strict sense, with an accepted complaint, but an ongoing investigation. At this stage, the judge would act more as responsible for supervising and controlling the legality of investigative acts rather than directing requests for the production of evidence. In any case, he sees no illegality:

— For many jurists, there is a legal basis for this action, since the magistrate is the final recipient of the evidence and can determine measures when he understands that the elements collected are not sufficient to clarify the facts.