In conversations that the Federal Public Ministry found on a mobile phone seized from a businessman, attorney Anna Carolina Noronha, daughter of STJ Minister Joao Ottavio Noronha, said her father defended the STF’s invasion of the Department of Former President Dilma Rousseff, as a means of pressure on ministers. The statement, which foreshadows the threats and undemocratic attacks that the STF will suffer in the following years, was issued by Noronha’s daughter, known as Nina Noronha, in a WhatsApp conversation with businessman Marconi Faria, the subject of an investigation by the MPF on suspicion of it. Bid fraud in Para.
In a March 16, 2016 interview, Nina Noronha stated that her father considered the STF to be “corrupt” and its ministers “bought”, while telling Marconi her father’s dissatisfaction with Lula’s candidacy for the presidency of the civil house of Dilma Rousseff. At the time, Labor opposition interpreted the movement as an attempt to protect the former president, who had already been the target of investigations, through a privileged forum. Protests by about 5,000 demonstrators took place in front of the Planalto Palace and in the Esplanada dos Ministérios, and the police had to act when there was an attempt to storm the slope of Congress.
My father said the protesters should have invaded. the palace. srf (STF). Because there is no longer an institution. The lawyer’s books are damaged.
Marconi then replied, “We can’t do that. If we don’t lose order.”
And the lawyer continued: “Yes we can. stf has been destroyed. Complete. Desire to spoil Moro.”
The businessman then noted a move to transfer Sergio Moro, the then federal judge in Lava Jato in Curitiba, to the STF, after Noronha himself became a minister in the Supreme Court.
“We will take several measures. You will not be able to spoil Moro. He will be the next minister from the STF after his father, without mentioning who the people planned this movement were.
Nina pointed to her father again:
“My dad said he’s running (court) Everything is damaged. They need to put pressure on them. Desire to cancel objections. Marco Aurelio (then the supreme minister) He appeared in the newspaper defending Lula. right Now (there) Little. They have a majority.”
Marconi replied that Marco Aurelio did not speak in favor of the former president. He was confronted by Nina Noronha:
“Yes, he did it. (I) Presence (from) my father’s side. (Marco Aurelio) He said the president is in charge of helping the country. And not to escape from Moro. Globe newspaper. Ten minutes have passed. Court was bought. (Rodrigo) Janot and everyone else. My dad will open the membership (session) Tomorrow with a note masquerade squid. To characterize Syrians for Truth and Justice as a coward,” the lawyer wrote in the letters, referring to a letter by Lula and another by then-STF Minister Marco Aurelio Mello.
In fact, the minister said he did not see Lula’s appointment as an attempt to protect him. In a conversation with Dilma intercepted by Lava Jato, Lula said that the Supreme Court and STJ were “cowardly”.
As the lawyer expected the businessman, Noronha spoke the next day, March 17, 2016, at the plenary session of STJ, refuting Lula’s speech. He stated that STJ was not a coward and judged Lava Jato cases fairly.
sought, Minister João Otavio Noronha denied that he ever advocated the invasion of the STF or Planalto. The judge stated in a note:
“I have neither preached nor defended the invasion of the STF. I will never do so to attack democracy and for being an act of disrespect for the Supreme Court of Brazil. I have the deepest sense of respect and admiration for the Supreme Court and the ministers that comprise it. My explanation in class was in defense of the Supreme Court to which I belong. , which was under unfair attack.”
“I have at no time been outraged by any decision regarding appointment to the position of Minister of the Executive Power, for this is a choice reserved for the President of the Republic, as laid down in the Federal Constitution. I repeat, I have never consented to any act of conquest of any public or private body, let alone the Federal Supreme Court”.
Attorney Anna Carolina Noronha said she did not remember the conversation and said her private conversations did not reflect the minister’s opinion.
“I can only say that my parents and I are two different people and we can have different ideas at certain times. I don’t recall any words from my father in this regard, and I assure that my private conversations do not reflect my father’s opinion.”