Federal Police delegate becomes defendant for abuse of authority after attempting investigation against Augusto Aras.
The legal action should include the questioning of witnesses until the case is judged.
247 - Federal Police (PF) delegate Bruno Calandrini has become a defendant in a lawsuit filed by the Federal Public Prosecutor's Office on charges of abuse of authority due to an investigation initiated against the then Attorney General of the Republic, Augusto Aras, in 2022. The defense classified the accusation as "political persecution". The information was published this Monday (22) by Aguirre Talento's column.
Federal Judge Pollyanna Kelly, of the 12th Federal Court of the Federal District, accepted the indictment in a decision dated December 17th of last year, making Calandrini a defendant in the case. The proceedings will include the questioning of witnesses and the production of evidence until the case is judged.
The investigator was trying to obtain a statement from the then Minister of Economy, Paulo Guedes, on the matter. Guedes' defense was attempting to postpone the interrogation. The then head of the Attorney General's Office mistakenly published on his social media a dialogue in which someone asked the prosecutor to meet with one of Guedes' lawyers, who was seeking to have the testimony waived. Consequently, Calandrini filed a request with the Supreme Federal Court for a search and seizure warrant for Aras' cell phone, which was rejected.
In the complaint, the Federal Public Prosecutor's Office (MPF) stated that Calandrini committed abuses because, initially, he did not request authorization from the Supreme Federal Court (STF) to investigate Guedes or Aras. According to prosecutors, Calandrini considered a meeting between the prosecutor and a lawyer a possible criminal act, which does not constitute a crime.
"Holding a hearing between a lawyer and the Attorney General or any procedural figure, including judges and delegates, is not illegal and, therefore, does not provide just cause for criminal prosecution. Furthermore, as has been demonstrated, it did not aim to address an illegal act, especially since the hearing itself of the then-minister, in the manner determined by the now-indicted party, was illegal," wrote the Federal Public Prosecutor's Office.