Judge prohibits Lula's participation in Band debate.

Pedro Alves, metropolises - Federal Judge Bianca Georgia Cruz Arenhart, of the 4th Regional Federal Court (TRF-4), rejected a request submitted by the Workers' Party (PT) for former President Lula to participate in a televised electoral debate. Imprisoned since April of this year after being sentenced to 12 years and 1 month in prison in the second instance, the PT member intended to participate in the debate organized by TV Bandeirantes and scheduled for the evening of next Thursday (August 9th).

In its appeal, the Workers' Party (PT) is challenging a decision by Judge Carolina Lebbos, responsible for Lula's penal execution, who had previously denied requests for participation in campaign events. In the appeal, the party argues that "the precarious restriction of the inmate's freedom is not sufficient to deprive him of freedom of expression and that requests for interviews represent an affront to freedom of the press."

According to the PT (Workers' Party), "the Penal Execution Law does not prohibit pre-campaign activities, therefore the Judiciary cannot restrict them; and the alleged logistical difficulty [for participation in the debates] is not supported by actions motivated by the body responsible for custody."

In addition to participating in the interview on TV Bandeirantes, the party requested permission for Lula — confirmed as a candidate for President of the Republic at the convention last Sunday (5) — to also participate in other campaign events.

According to Judge Bianca Arenhart, however, there is no legal basis for the PT's appeal. "The political party seeks to obtain provisional judicial relief under the guise of emergency appeals, a useful tool in Civil Procedure, but one that has no place in Criminal Procedure, given the express provision to the contrary in the Law on Criminal Executions," she states.

The magistrate further argues that "the decision challenged through the appeal against the execution of sentence addresses a generic request for the practice of pre-campaign and, subsequently, campaign acts, such as interviews and debates." "The indication of holding a debate between presidential candidates, with due respect, falls outside the scope of the first-instance decision, since the claim for a general authorization for all cases and acts that the inmate intends to carry out exceeds the specific cognizance in relation to the concrete case," she states.

Continue reading at Metropolis.