PSOL, PCdoB and Solidariedade asked yesterday (31) that Minister André Mendonça, of the Federal Supreme Court (STF), forward to the office of Minister Gilmar Mendes the action in which the three parties ask for the suspension of the fines provided for in signed leniency agreements by contractors within the scope of Operation Lava Jato. Leniency agreements are like a kind of plea bargain, in which legal entities assume responsibility for illegal acts and pay fines so that they can continue negotiating with the government. The parties argue that Mendes should be the rapporteur of the action because he already reports another process, a writ of mandamus, on the subject. For the subtitles, this means that the minister must be chosen for prevention, a principle by which actions on the same subject and with similar requests must be with the same rapporteur, so that conflicting decisions are not produced, for example. The action was filed with the Supreme Court already with the request for distribution to Gilmar Mendes, who is critical of the agreements closed within the scope of Lava Jato. The request, however, was ignored, and the process ended up being distributed to Mendonça, by lot. Mendonça, in turn, already worked in the negotiation of leniency agreements when he was a member of the Attorney General’s Office (AGU). Before joining the Supreme Court, the minister did a doctorate in the area of recovery of assets diverted by corruption, being requested by federal public administration bodies to assist in projects on the subject. There is no set deadline for the minister to decide on the report. Understand The parties of the government’s allied base filed this week an action of non-compliance with a fundamental precept (ADPF) in the Supreme Court, in which they ask that the payment of fines, which exceed R$ 8 billion, be suspended for jeopardizing the continuity of the operation of companies, which would harm economic interest and national sovereignty. The subtitles argue the occurrence of vices in the negotiation, such as the fact that some of the companies that closed the agreements, such as Odebrecht, negotiated the terms when they had executives arrested by Lava Jato. This put them at a disadvantage, causing them to be coerced into accepting the terms imposed by the Federal Public Ministry (MPF), argued the parties in the initial piece. In the end, the acronyms want the Supreme Court to consider void the leniency agreements concluded before August 6, 2020, when it was signed, with the consent of the Supreme Court itself, a technical cooperation agreement that established the Comptroller General of the Union (CGU) responsible for controlling negotiations with companies.
Agência Brasil
Folha Nobre - Desde 2013 - ©