Based on messages from Moro, executive contests whistleblowing

Based on messages that show the prosecutor of “jet wash” Deltan Dallagnol consulting former judge Sergio Moro about the possibility of decreeing a new preventive detention of former Odebrecht executive Alexandrino Alencar, the administrator’s defense claims that the whistleblowing agreement His award was disproportionately strict and that he cannot be harmed again with a new conviction in the case of the Atibaia (SP) site.

Former Odebrecht executive, Alexandrino Alencar asks for the decision that recognized statute of limitations to be maintained in the case of the Atibaia site, in the interior of the state of São Paulo
reproduction

The Federal Supreme Court, in April, declared the incompetence of the 13th Federal Court of Curitiba, which had Moro as its head, to process and judge four cases against former president Lula — the cases of the triplex in Guarujá (SP), from the site of Atibaia and two actions involving the Lula Institute. With the decision, Lula’s convictions in the triplex and siege cases were overturned.

In June, the Supreme Court confirmed the decision of the 2nd Panel that declared Sergio Moro a suspect to try Lula in the Guarujá triplex case. Subsequently, Minister Gilmar Mendes extended Moro’s suspicions to actions against the former president in the cases of the Atibaia site and the Lula Institute, annulling all acts carried out by the former judge in the processes.

Two months later, the 12th Federal Court of Brasília denied the request of the Federal Public Ministry to restart the criminal action in the case of the Atibaia site. Based on the fact that he was over 70 years old, judge Pollyanna Kelly Maciel Martins Alves recognized the statute of limitations for Alexandrino Alencar, who had been sentenced to four years in prison by Sergio Moro.

The MPF filed a strict appeal against this decision. Against the appeal, the executive’s defense, led by the office Alexandre Wunderlich Lawyers, claims that Moro’s conviction that served as the basis for Alencar’s award-winning collaboration agreement is vitiated by his bias in the case.

In March 2016, Moro sentenced the executive to 13 years and 6 months in prison for active corruption and money laundering. In December of that year, Alencar signed an award-winning whistleblower agreement with the MPF. The term provided for a unified sentence of not less than 25 years of imprisonment, based on the facts narrated by the executive and on Moro’s sentence.

However, the former federal judge did not act impartially in relation to Alencar, maintains his defense. Telegram conversations between prosecutors and Moro demonstrate “the correctness of the public prosecution with the judge at the expense of the defense of the investigated and accused”, emphasize the lawyers.

“Specifically what limits the agreement [de delação premiada] Global Odebrecht Group, there are dialogues about possible collaboration agreements, the anticipation of court decisions, the collection of actions by the MPF, as well as issues relating to arrests and ministerial appeals against judgments handed down against alleged employees”, points out the defense.

In messages dated September 16, 2015, Deltan, leader of the “jet wash” consortium in Curitiba, informs Sergio Moro of the STF decision that revoked Alexandrino’s preventive detention and consults him on the possibility of decreeing a new detention.

According to the defense, these facts demonstrate that Moro did not act impartially in relation to Alencar. Thus, the sentence that served as the basis for his denunciation – issued after the conversation via Telegram – was excessive, vitiated and generated an agreement of disproportionately awarded collaboration to the executive, say his lawyers, pointing out that the commitment must be renegotiated.

Recognized prescription
In addition, Alexandrino Alencar’s defense points out that there was a statute of limitations, and he cannot be punished in the case of the Atibaia farm.

As the MPF did not appeal against Moro’s conviction, the indictment for the prosecution took place on March 15, 2019. Thus, the penalty cannot be aggravated, according to article 617 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the lawyers say.

Click here to read the petition
1032252-24.2021.4.01.3400