Lula's life is in Moro's hands, says Regina Sousa.

Piauí Today/Paulo Pincel - Lula's life is in the hands of Judge Sérgio Moro, he has become a trophy, denounced Senator Regina Sousa (PT-PI), commenting on the controversy created throughout Sunday (8) between the judge and appeals court judge Rogério Fraveto, of the Regional Federal Court (TRF) of the 4th Region. Favreto ordered the release of the former president of Brazil, Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva, which ended up not being carried out by a counter-order from Judge Sérgio Moro, hierarchically subordinate to the appeals court judge.

“The Judiciary is becoming increasingly politicized. That is why it is diminishing, despite the president saying that she is preserving the STF. That has nothing to do with it. The process had to follow the procedure. He granted the injunction, someone was going to come in to overturn it. That is the procedure. You can't rush it. Excuses are only useful when it's for them. When I say that it has become politicized, it is something that has been going on for a long time,” criticized the senator on the Notícia da Manhã program (TC Cidade Verde), this Monday (9).

“Fachin gave up judging Lula’s habeas corpus because he counted the votes and saw that Lula was winning. Is that politicizing or not politicizing? They are all connected within Romero Jucá’s quick phrase: an agreement with the Supreme Court, with everything.” He did politicize. Lula’s life is in Moro’s hands. It’s a trophy. And in the hands of those three gentlemen from Porto Alegre,” lamented Regina Sousa.

Regarding Favreto's past affiliation with the Workers' Party (PT), Regina Sousa considered it "absurd to allege that." "Moro's father is affiliated with the PSDB, Moro's wife was a lawyer for the PSDB. Nobody ever questioned that. It's too small an absurdity to allege that. It's legitimate, so much so that he's the duty judge. Nobody questions it."

The senator claims there was a breach of hierarchy. “Moro no longer has anything to do with this case, which has already left the first instance and is now in the second. He shouldn't have been involved. He's on vacation. Did they happen to revoke his vacation? Is the Court in recess? If it's in recess, then whoever is on duty is responsible,” she argues.