Globo and Ana Maria are condemned for criticizing a judge.
In her daily program, while reporting on the murder of a young woman by her ex-boyfriend, who subsequently committed suicide, the presenter criticized the court decision that granted the murderer provisional release; she made a point of publicizing the name of the judge responsible, asking viewers to remember it, "as if she had collaborated in the victim's death," according to the ruling of the São Paulo Court of Justice.
Counsel - Judicial decisions are subject to criticism, but such criticism must be based on real facts, and those who issue such criticisms are responsible for any damages they may cause. With this understanding, the 3rd Panel of the Superior Court of Justice upheld the conviction of television presenter Ana Maria Braga and Rede Globo to compensate a judge for criticisms made on national television.
On her daily program, the presenter reported the murder of a young woman by her ex-boyfriend, who then committed suicide. It was also reported that the murderer was on probation after having kidnapped and threatened the young woman approximately five months before the crime.
Ana Maria criticized the court decision that granted provisional release to the murderer and made a point of publicizing the name of the judge responsible, asking viewers to remember it, "as if she had collaborated in the victim's death," according to the ruling of the Court of Justice of São Paulo.
The presenter also stated that the defendant's release was based solely on good behavior. However, according to the court documents, the judge's decision followed the opinion of the Public Prosecutor's Office, which was in favor of the release, given that the victim herself, in her testimony, indicated that her ex-boyfriend did not pose a dangerous threat.
The judge and her family became the target of criticism and public harassment, which led the magistrate to file a lawsuit for moral damages against the presenter and Globo. The sentence, confirmed in the appeal judgment by the TJ-SP (Court of Justice of São Paulo), understood that Ana Maria Braga exceeded the constitutional right to criticism and freedom of expression, as well as the press's duty to inform. For the moral damage caused, the amount of R$ 150 was set.
The discussion reached the Superior Court of Justice (STJ) in a special appeal by Globo and the presenter. Regarding the establishment of moral damages, Justice Sidnei Beneti, the rapporteur, observed that, to reassess the decision, it would be necessary to re-examine the evidence, which is prohibited by Precedent 7. He also highlighted that the coincidence in the understanding of the judgment and the ruling characterized the phenomenon of double conformity in the factual analysis, which reinforces the legal certainty of the decisions.
Regarding the amount of compensation, which was also questioned in the appeal, the minister did not find the necessary requirements for its review by the STJ (overtly exorbitant or insignificant amounts), which is why the R$ 150 was maintained.
Beneti commented that the judicial decision criticized by the presenter was based on the legislation in force at the time. "There could have been criticism of the judicial decision regarding the case or, appropriately, of the law that guided it, but this does not authorize the emphatic negative naming of the magistrate," stated the minister. (Information from the STJ Press Office.)