Court accepts complaint against congressman Cláudio Meirelles

TJ-GO_ The Special Court of the Court of Justice of Goiás (TJGO) accepted charges against Congressman Cláudio Meirelles, accused of renewing a contract with the company Vip Limpeza e Serviços Ltda without a bidding process.

The company had signed an agreement with the Goiânia City Council for 12 months, and at the end of that period, on December 1, 2005, Meirelles, then president of the Council, in addition to keeping the company without bidding, allegedly granted an adjustment to the value of the agreed contract, including retroactive effect to the period in which Vip operated without a contractual link.

"It is verified that the facts narrated in the preamble are supported by the documents of the investigation that accompany it. There is proof of the materiality of the facts and evidence of criminal authorship, which points against the defendant," observed the case's rapporteur, Judge Leandro Crispim.

He denied the argument presented by Cláudio Meirelles that there was no just cause, due to the atypical nature of his conduct. The congressman claimed that he "strictly obeyed the relevant legal norm, which is why he was judged and duly registered by the esteemed Court of Accounts of Municipalities (TCM)."

According to Leandro Crispim, however, the complaint contains all the requirements stipulated in article 41 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, that is, it describes the exposition of the criminal act with its circumstances, the identification of the accused, the classification of the crime, the existence of just cause capable of enabling action in defense of public funds and society, as well as the exercise of the right to a fair trial and full defense.

The summary was worded as follows: "Criminal Action. Imputation of a Crime Defined in Article 89 of Law No. 8.666. Former President of the Legislative Chamber of the Municipality of Goiânia (currently serving as a state deputy). Preliminary Judgment. Presence of Requirements. Just Cause for Acceptance. The acceptance of the indictment is mandatory when the requirements of Article 41 of the Code of Criminal Procedure are present, especially due to the absence of grounds for rejecting the accusatory document or for summary acquittal. Allegations pertaining to the configuration of the criminal offense imputed to the defendant presuppose a merit-based inquiry, which must be resolved during the criminal proceedings, through due criminal process." (Case 201204180061)