Toffoli suspends Frederick Wassef’s tax confidentiality breach in Covid’s CPI | Covid’s CPI

Wassef’s breach of fiscal secrecy was approved by Covid’s CPI senators last Thursday (19). The lawmakers wanted to find out, from the data, if the lawyer had any involvement in the process of acquiring vaccines against Covid-19.

CPI breaks fiscal secrecy of Ricardo Barros and Frederick Wassef

CPI breaks fiscal secrecy of Ricardo Barros and Frederick Wassef

The decision is preliminary (provisional) and is valid until the Supreme Court judges a request from the lawyer to invalidate the request for breach of confidentiality.

Toffoli considered that “there is no way of knowing in advance which information collected to be sent to the CPI by the Federal Revenue Service of Brazil would be covered by the clause of professional inviolability established in the national law”.

“It is entirely pertinent to remember that this means of obtaining evidence cannot serve the deleterious purpose of fishing expeditions, searching the intimacy and private life of anyone, beyond legal limits, in chapada violation of fundamental rights,” says the decision.

The minister also understood that the breach of confidentiality since January 2016 affects the entire “tax life” of the lawyer, without a probable cause.

“Because, in this way, there is no contemporaneity and reasonableness for the temporal lapse of the measure, a hypothesis emerges, at least in theory, of investigation into the private life of the assisted person, which appears inadmissible in the intended extent”, says the document .

Toffoli pointed out that the suspension does not jeopardize the possibility of the commission obtaining the information in the future.

“I would like to stress that the suspension hereby granted does not jeopardize the obtaining of information by the CPI in the future, as they are not in the power of Frederick Wassef, but of public authority, in this case the Federal Revenue Service of Brazil, which, in at any time, it will be able to make them available. In this scenario, the danger of damage is exclusively for the petitioner.”

In the request to the Supreme Court, on the 20th, the lawyer stated that “he has no relationship with the facts found by the CPI of the Pandemic. He has no connection with the Federal Government or its Ministers and Ministries, nor with companies or businessmen in the field of and that acted or act with the Federal Government in the Pandemic”.

In the action, he also argued that the measure taken by the commission on the 19th is illegal and violates the Constitution.

“The act is manifestly null, illegal and disproportionate, given the lack of reputable reasoning or minimal evidence of involvement of the Applicant in the investigation, since no concrete fact is mentioned as justification for the request, so that there is no support for the requests made,” he wrote.

“It should be noted that there was no mention of the Appellant’s name by the CPI deponents, so that, to date, there is no minimum evidential basis or even a single indication capable of indicating any participation, even if minimal, in the investigated facts by the Commission,” he said.

VIDEOS: news about politics