Businessman convicted of insulting Lula's son.
Alexandre Paes dos Santos will have to pay R$ 5 to Fábio Luís Lula da Silva, son of former president Lula, for calling him "primitive," "idiot," and "a disappointment" in a conversation with a journalist from "Veja" magazine that was never published; the decision is subject to appeal.
Counsel - Even if not published, offensive comments that harm a citizen's image can lead to a lawsuit for moral damages if the citizen is aware of their content. This is because, even if a particular opinion was expressed in a family or private setting, without public repercussions, it is not possible to allow any comment offensive to the dignity or decorum of a third party. After all, the Constitution states that both a person's image and honor are inviolable. The consequence of such an act should be reparation for the harm caused by such statements. This understanding was adopted, by majority vote, by the 1st Chamber of Private Law of the Court of Justice of São Paulo to partially grant the appeal of Fábio Luis Lula da Silva, son of former president Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva. The defendants in the case are businessman Alexandre Paes dos Santos and journalist Alexandre Oltramari, from Veja magazine.
During a conversation with journalist Alexandre Paes dos Santos, he described the former president's son as "a simpleton," "an idiot," and "a disappointment." He also said that Lulinha (pictured) "has some kind of dysfunction" for calling President Dilma Rousseff "aunt." The conversation was not published in the Veja magazine report, but it was transcribed in the lawsuit Lulinha filed against the magazine because of the article. Its transcription and inclusion in the case file motivated the Civil Liability Action—rejected in the first instance and which reached the São Paulo Court of Justice through a Civil Appeal, where it was accepted.
Represented by lawyers Roberto Teixeira and Cristiano Zanin Martins, from Teixeira, Martins & Advogados, Fabio Luis Lula da Silva stated that the words and exceptions are offensive in themselves and incompatible with his personal and professional conduct.
The judge in charge of the case, Alcides Leopoldo e Silva Júnior, pointed out that Alexandre Paes dos Santos did not deny using the cited expressions, stating, however, that the terms were not published and that it is not forbidden for anyone to express their opinions, even strong ones, in private dialogue.
Citing a precedent from the Superior Court of Justice, the rapporteur defined defamation as the formulation of "value judgments, expressing negative qualities or defects that imply contempt, outrage or vilification of someone." According to him, by using negative attributes to describe Fábio Luis Lula da Silva, the businessman "had the unequivocal intention" of offending the victim and, even if the opinions were not published, the fact that they reached the son of the former president constitutes moral damage.
In his view, journalist Alexandre Oltramari caused no harm, as he merely stated that "he's a boy who plays video games." Even if Lula's son was 30 years old at the time of the events, the statement cannot be offensive, stated Alcides Leopoldo e Silva Júnior. He justified this opinion based on a study from the University of Denver (USA) that reveals an increase in personal and professional productivity among those who adopt the practice, widespread among pilots, surgeons, and other renowned professionals.
He voted to condemn Alexandre Paes dos Santos to pay R$ 5 for moral damages, and was joined by Judge Christiane Santini. Judge Elliot Akel, elected general inspector of justice at the beginning of the month, was in the minority. He voted to acquit the businessman, arguing that the conversation with the journalist took place in a private setting. In such a situation, according to Akel, "everyone is free to express their personal opinions," and the conviction would prevent anyone from expressing their opinion about other citizens to third parties.