RIO DE JANEIRO, BRAZIL – A group of attorneys last week initiated what they described as “the world’s largest action”. They are protesting against what they consider to be human rights violations supported by Brazil’s Federal Supreme Court (STF).
Leading the initiative is the Brazilian Attorneys’ Movement (MAB), which includes legal professionals, most of whom have a conservative profile. They are also strong advocates of Lava Jato, out of step with those attorneys who do not look favorably on ex-minister of Justice Sérgio Moro.
Launched on Tuesday, June 30th, the organization intends to send petitions to over a hundred institutions worldwide denouncing “the lamentable violations of fundamental rights” in Brazil. According to the MAB, there are approximately 7,000 attorneys engaged in the actions.
The recipients are public entities such as the OAS (Organization of American States), the Inter-American Court of Human Rights, the Court of The Hague and the United Nations, in addition to international legal bodies and media outlets.
The main target of the complaints is the fake news inquiry launched by the STF, which has mainly targeted cyber activists and entrepreneurs supporting President Jair Bolsonaro.
“Since its inception [the inquiry], several basic and universal human rights principles and rules have been violated on a daily basis,” reads a text by attorney Emerson Grigollette of Presidente Prudente, São Paulo, one of the movement’s organizers.
Questioned by the reporter, Grigollette refused to give an interview.
An online petition to support the action, which can be signed by anyone, was posted on the CitizenGo website, a Spanish platform for conservative petitions widely used by the Brazilian right-wing. By Monday evening, july 6th, it had already collected over 94,000 signatures.
The main points criticized by the attorneys are the same as those already addressed by opponents to the inquiry, launched last year to investigate online attacks directed at the Supreme Court.
The main controversy relates to the way the inquiry was initiated: on the court’s own initiative, without having been prompted by the Public Prosecutor.
Moreover, its rapporteur, Justice Alexandre de Moraes, was hand-picked by STF Chief Justice Dias Toffoli, and not by lot as is customary. The STF is in the unique situation of leading the inquiry and judging it, which raises questions regarding its impartiality.
That is not all, the attorneys say. “The rights of freedom of expression and free expression of thought have also been violated,” the CitizenGo petition says.
In other words, what the STF points to as fake news would simply be the exercise of the right of expression provided for in the Constitution. It is a recurring argument among the right-wing.
The petition also complains about the fact that the defendants’ attorneys had no access to the indictments against their clients and challenges the breach of their tax and banking secrecy.
Finally, it does not miss the chance to criticize the OAB president, Felipe Santa Cruz, who is charged with failing to stand up for the rights of attorneys who see their actions in the inquiry hindered.
“Responsible for the conduct and management of the highest body of defense of the rights of Brazilian attorneys, [Santa Cruz] has been proving to be hesitant, if not inert, in the defense of professional prerogatives,” the text says. Santa Cruz is currently a harsh critic of Bolsonaro.
The practical effects of the “world’s largest action” are difficult to know, not least because the STF overwhelmingly (10 votes to 1) ratified the fake news inquiry it inaugurated.
Nevertheless, it is a new and important front that conservative attorneys have set up against a judiciary viewed by them as activist, with no respect for freedom.
The petition’s signatories made a point of demonstrating that they do not intend to be mistaken for the most extreme fringe of Bolsonarist protesters who are calling for military intervention and the closure of Congress and the STF.
“We acknowledge the undisputed importance not only of the existence but also of maintaining and protecting a Supreme Court and the Legislative and Executive Branches. Therefore, we will never discuss or encourage any measure aimed at closing these bodies, which are essential to the very existence of the State,” they say.
Source: UOL