Fifth session of the Supreme Court: ministers maintain validity of the accusation of Youssef (Nelson Jr. / SCO / STF / Handout)
Unanimously, the Supreme Federal Court (STF) denied on Thursday resource that sought the annulment of plea bargaining the money changer Alberto Youssef, one of the main collaborators of the task force Operation Lava jet. The request to overturn the accusation was presented by defense contractor Erton Medeiros, of Galvão Engenharia, a company appointed by prosecutors as one of the contractors of cartel participants who rigged contracts with Petrobras and distributed bribes to politicians. This was the first time that the plenary of the Supreme Court analyzed the legitimacy of a cooperation agreement made by a criminal caught in Lava jet.
The main argument Medeiros was that Youssef would lack credibility to testify against other authorities in an award-winning snitching because he himself has already violated a previous collaboration agreement. Youssef was the first investigated the firm in Brazil, a plea bargaining with the prosecution in early 2000. At the time he gave evidence in the case Banestado, but had canceled the agreement in 2014 because the MP returned to commit crimes. For the defense contractor, the prosecution purposely omitted the cancellation of the accusation of Youssef in Banestado. Without this information, claims Erton Medeiros, the minister Teori Zavascki would have been misled. Zavascki is petrolão rapporteur of the proceedings in the Supreme and approved the award-winning collaboration of the money changer.
In analyzing the case, the court ministers considered, however, that neither the whistleblower's personality or breaking previous agreements arguments are able to set aside an award-winning snitching. "The testimony that cooperating partner has allowed the State may enter in the bowels of that group who sought to seize the state apparatus to commit wicked acts of organized crime, promoting immoral and unacceptable assault on the Treasury," said the dean of the Supreme Court, Celso de Mello . "The statements that cooperating partner as a means of obtaining evidence have proven effective in the solution and removal of this veil coibia action and fraudulent collusion of offenders," he added.
The manifestation of the ministers, the plenary of the Supreme Court emphasized the exhaustion that winning collaboration agreements are not overwhelming evidence of a suspect's guilt, but a media research to achieve ascertain the involvement of the whistleblower cited. "An award winning snitching is not celebrated in such an abstract way as one might think. In any case, there is a complete desinfluência the agent's personality. If he is a good person or a bad person, this will affect the legal sphere of his own but has not validity of the award-winning snitching "said Minister Luiz Fux.
"Personality is just accidental element in the collaboration. What matters is the outcome and usefulness of the agreement, regardless of the labeling and qualification that can be given to the employee," said Minister Rosa Weber.
To the rapporteur of the case, Minister Dias Toffoli, and investigated quoted in winning vigilantism can not challenge the agreement in court, the mere fact that there is an approval of the award-winning collaboration does not mean that all the whistleblower's statements are true. The magistrate also considered that are not relevant to the denunciation of the agreement criminal history or the fact that another whistleblower or not it was breached in the past. "The reputation of the developer is not the collaboration agreement requirement of legality," he said. "The award-winning collaboration is not proof. It's kind of taking of evidence. The collaboration agreement is not confused with testimony from employees. The statements constitute evidence, which only will prove adept to the formation of judicial conviction if they should be corroborated by other appropriate means of proof, "he summed up the rapporteur.
