The UN Human Rights Committee (United Nations) said that former president Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva’s political rights were violated in 2018 and that the ban from participating in elections that year was “arbitrary”. The body asks Brazil to ensure that other cases against it comply with due process and that arbitrariness is not repeated.
according to this UOL Announced privately on Wednesday, the committee concluded that former judge Sergio Moro and Operation Lava Jato prosecutors were biased in conducting the proceedings against the former president. The decision, made public this Thursday, marks the first international crackdown on the former Justice Minister of Jair Bolsonaro’s government.
The decision in favor of the former president was not taken unanimously. 16 of the body’s 18 experts estimated that the former president did not have an impartial hearing. The two, however, expressed their opposition to Lula’s arguments and insisted such a decision would undermine the fight against corruption.
“The committee also found that such procedural violations violated Lula’s political rights, including the right to be arbitrary and thus elected to public office, banning Lula from running for president. and to prevent similar violations in the future,” he said.
The Committee is responsible for overseeing compliance with the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights signed and ratified by Brazil.
According to Moro, “the conclusions were drawn from the Federal Supreme Court’s decision last year that overturned the convictions of former President Lula of the 2nd class of the Court”.
“I think the STF’s decision was a gross mistake of justice and unfortunately unduly influenced the UN Committee. In any case, even the Committee does not deny corruption at Petrobras or confirm Lula’s innocence,” Moro said. “It is worth noting that the previous President Lula’s conviction was upheld by three judicial authorities and passed the filter of nine judges. In the implementation of the law, the fight against corruption was legitimate and it is worth noting that there was no form of punishment for political persecution”, the former judge said.
However, the Committee had another assessment. The UN Human Rights Committee said: “The investigation and prosecution of former President Lula da Silva violated his right to a trial by an impartial tribunal, his privacy and his political rights.”
“While states have a duty to investigate and prosecute acts of corruption and to inform the public, especially in relation to a former head of state, such actions must be done fairly and the guarantees of due process must be respected,” said committee member Arif. Bulkan.
“During the investigations, former judge Moro approved prosecutors’ request to tap the phones of Lula, his family members, and his lawyers. He also released the contents of the tapes before he officially launched the charges. The arrest warrant for Lula to testify was leaked to the press, and then photos of Lula were leaked to the media as if she were in prison. taken by him,” he said.
According to the UN, then-judge Moro sentenced Lula to nine years in prison in July 2017. The following year, in January, his sentence was increased to 12 years by a federal district court. He began serving his sentence in April 2018 while his appeal was still pending.
“The Supreme Electoral Court rejected Lula’s candidacy in the October presidential election on the grounds that the country’s legislation prevents people convicted of certain crimes and under certain circumstances from running for public office, including pending appeals.”
The Federal Supreme Court overturned Lula’s conviction in 2021 by ruling that then-Judge Moro did not have the power to investigate and prosecute these cases, and overturned the investigation on the grounds that the then-judge was not considered impartial.
“Although the Federal Supreme Court overturned Lula’s conviction and prison sentence in 2021, these decisions were not timely and effective enough to prevent or repair violations,” Bulkan said.
“The committee considered that the arrest warrant, issued in violation of domestic law, violated Lula’s right to personal liberty, and the recording and public disclosure of his speeches also violated his right to privacy.”
“The State concluded that Judge Moro’s conduct and other public actions violated Lula’s right to a trial by an impartial tribunal, and that the actions and public statements of former Judge Moro and prosecutors violated Lula’s right to the presumption of innocence.” I said.
After six years of analysis in Geneva, the decision has become legally binding, and since Brazil has ratified international treaties, the state has an obligation to follow the advice. But without a way to force countries to take measures or penalties against governments, the committee knows that many of its decisions risk being ignored.
Lula’s defense speaks of a “pedagogical decision”
Cristiano Zanin, the lawyer who served in Lula’s defense, said at a press conference this morning that the most important thing in the decision was to set a parameter for justice and Brazilian institutions.
“[No documento,] The UN emphasizes that no citizen should be subjected to such treatment. Therefore, I think it is a pedagogical decision.”
With the end of the trial, the decision has passed into the execution phase. “The ball is now in the Brazilian government,” the lawyer said.
The federal government has 180 days to respond to the UN on what potential reparations should be made for the process and what action to take domestically to ensure that an incident like the president’s doesn’t happen again.
The defense did not want to say what measures should be taken in case of non-compliance with the findings, but stated that there are legal remedies.
Both Temer and Bolsonaro administrations tried to block the process at the UN
Since 2016, different Brazilian governments have taken action to prevent the agency from prosecuting the case. The first claim was that the Brazilian justice institutions were working and the right of defense was guaranteed to the former president.
When the STF (Supreme Federal Court) evaluated that Moro acted partial and reversed the convictions, Brazil’s argument was that the case in Geneva would no longer make sense.
Lula was represented at the UN by lawyers Valeska Zanin Martins and Cristiano Zanin Martins, in addition to British Geoffrey Robertson.
The complaint included four complaints made by the PT’s defense, which were answered by the committee in favor of the former president:
– Lula’s detention by PF in a room at Congonhas airport in 2016 was considered arbitrary by his lawyers;
– the bias of the process and the judiciary;
– Spread of private messages from Lula’s family members;
– and the impossibility of candidacy in 2018;
The Committee concluded that the rights of the former president were violated in all articles.
The STF has already assessed that Moro violated the rules of procedure and revoked the convictions, allowing Lula to run for president in 2022. But despite this, the process continued in international litigation.
There were two decisions of the Supreme Court. The court considered Moro partial and overturned Lula’s convictions, as it ruled that cases should not be left to the Justice of Paraná.
On Wednesday, Moro announced that he would comment on the committee’s decision only when he had access to its content. However, he noted that “former President Lula was convicted of corruption in three cases of the judiciary and at the hands of nine magistrates” and that “his arrest was authorized by the STF in March 2018”.
“It was a corporate act stemming from corruption discovered at Petrobras. The Brazilian-owned company actually got back R$6 billion thanks to Lava Jato’s work,” said the former judge.
Judiciary’s decision to disregard injunctions weighed in 2018
In August 2018, before the Brazilian elections, the committee gave the former president its first victory. The body issued precautionary measures and asked the Brazilian authorities to protect Lula’s political rights until his case was considered by the STF and the merits of the case were heard in Geneva.
The committee’s decision was ignored by the Brazilian state. However, UOL found that Brazil’s reaction was accepted by the committee as a serious fact.
The decision, now published, criticized Brazil’s option to ignore precautionary measures.
*Collaboration with Lucas Borges Teixeira from UOL in São Paulo
source: Noticias
