RECORDNEWS — broadcast
20260915 140000 UTC
561 transcript segments
Google Cloud Speech-to-Text API (Chirp) + Gemini 2.5 Flash Non-Thinking
Data courtesy of The GDELT Project (https://www.gdeltproject.org/), from the Internet Archive TV News Archive.
Machine transcription. Treat it as a searchable index of what was broadcast, not a verbatim quotation record.

[00:00:00] 16th, then I determined that the
[00:00:04] records should be made available to the Attorney General's Office
[00:00:07] for comment. 17th, well,
[00:00:10] given the content of the information
[00:00:14] presented by the police authority,
[00:00:17] regardless of what the esteemed Attorney
[00:00:20] General's Office may decide,
[00:00:23] the inevitable path of these records
[00:00:26] leads to the plenary of this Federal Supreme Court.
[00:00:30] a sovereign instance to technically analyze
[00:00:33] strictly legally the new elements brought by the
[00:00:37] police authority. 18. as it could
[00:00:40] not be otherwise, due to constitutional imperative,
[00:00:43] an undeniable consequence of the democratic republican
[00:00:46] model, expressly adopted by the fundamental
[00:00:50] law of 1988, the
[00:00:52] aforementioned deliberation by the plenary of the court must
[00:00:56] occur publicly and transparently in a face-to-face session of the...
[00:01:01] from a date to be defined by the eminent president
[00:01:04] of this Federal Supreme Court, in
[00:01:07] full exercise of its regimental
[00:01:11] attributions. 19th,
[00:01:14] in fact, in a rule of law that truly intends to be
[00:01:18] democratic and republican, in which the legitimacy of
[00:01:21] institutions in general and the judiciary in particular
[00:01:25] rests on the effective knowledge by all
[00:01:28] its citizens of the motivations and
[00:01:32] foundations that underlie the decisions made by
[00:01:35] public authorities, there is no other possible
[00:01:39] deliberation than that enshrined
[00:01:42] as a true fundamental clause by the
[00:01:45] original constituent in item 9 of article
[00:01:48] 93 of the 1988
[00:01:50] Charter.
[00:01:53] Item 9. All judgments of the judiciary
[00:01:56] shall be public and reasoned. All
[00:02:00] decisions under penalty of nullity, and the
[00:02:03] law may limit the presence in certain acts to the
[00:02:07] parties themselves and their lawyers, or only to
[00:02:10] these, in cases where the preservation of the right to
[00:02:13] intimacy or the interest in secrecy does not harm the
[00:02:17] public interest in
[00:02:20] body, with the sole information. 20. The aforementioned command is supplemented by the
[00:02:24] provision contained in item 60 of
[00:02:27] article 5, which ensures the guarantee of publicity of judgments
[00:02:31] even in the face of a law to be enacted by the National
[00:02:35] Congress. Based on the fundamental right guaranteed
[00:02:38] to all by the aforementioned provision, the
[00:02:42] law may only restrict the publicity of procedural
[00:02:45] acts when the defense of intimacy or social
[00:02:48] interest so requires.
[00:02:51] thus, in compliance with 21. And returning to item 9, article
[00:02:54] 93, a guiding provision for the
[00:02:57] actions of all national judges, including,
[00:03:00] especially, this Federal Supreme Court,
[00:03:04] the presence of an express command is observed, prohibiting
[00:03:08] any possibility of secrecy if its imposition
[00:03:11] harms the public interest in
[00:03:14] information. 22. When
[00:03:18] analyzing the content of the information presented based
[00:03:21] the respective on such premises,
[00:03:24] which are the only ones applicable to the case, because they
[00:03:28] are established by the exclusive guiding principle of the
[00:03:32] conduct of the ministers of this Federal Supreme
[00:03:35] Court, namely the Constitution of the Federative Republic of
[00:03:38] Brazil, given the inevitable form
[00:03:42] and the inexorable locus of
[00:03:45] deliberation, it is all the more reason to
[00:03:48] immediately lift the secrecy of the present records.
[00:03:52] 23, based on these
[00:03:55] reasons, I order the lifting of the secrecy of the present
[00:03:58] records, close quotes.
[00:04:00] of the citation. I continue with the report.
[00:04:04] On the same day, September 1st, the
[00:04:07] Attorney General's Office opined for the nullity of the
[00:04:11] request of Minister André Mendonça and its
[00:04:15] result, said the PGR. I open
[00:04:18] quotes, when the reporting minister ordered the
[00:04:22] investigation of people who were referred to in
[00:04:25] IPJ number such, he knew that
[00:04:28] among them there were people holding office by
[00:04:31] prerogative of function,
[00:04:34] subject to process and judgment only by the plenary
[00:04:38] of the Federal Supreme Court. He knew
[00:04:41] that among them was Minister Alexandre Moraes, he could
[00:04:44] not fail to know. The act that ordered
[00:04:47] the Federal Police investigation dates from August 24, 2026, the
[00:04:51] rapporteur had
[00:04:55] long had all the pieces he
[00:04:58] wanted detailed in writing, continues the
[00:05:02] PGE, I am quoting literally, indeed,
[00:05:04] the name of Minister Alexandre Moraes was notoriously
[00:05:08] mentioned in the previous police
[00:05:11] reports, to which the order for investigation alluded,
[00:05:14] and this was widely reported in the press. The
[00:05:18] rapporteur himself had already ordered that the
[00:05:21] computer device containing
[00:05:24] all the data that would later be included in the police
[00:05:28] report be handed over to him. In any case, it is certain that the
[00:05:31] rapporteur wanted it to be thoroughly
[00:05:34] scrutinized. It does not matter the degree of
[00:05:37] investigation that the measure constitutes. It is undeniable that there was an immersion of
[00:05:40] elements from the records to seek
[00:05:44] indications of the involvement of Minister
[00:05:47] Alexandre Moraes in illicit acts.
[00:05:51] The PGR continues. By requesting that the elements of
[00:05:53] investigation be examined, no matter who
[00:05:57] the authority was, the reporting minister imposed
[00:06:01] the investigation of Minister Alexandre Moraes, which actually
[00:06:04] ended up happening in
[00:06:06] almost 190, 190
[00:06:09] pages of the 200. 18
[00:06:13] that make up the police study,
[00:06:15] however, it is up to the plenary of the Federal Supreme
[00:06:19] Court to investigate its members.
[00:06:23] Article 33, sole paragraph of the National
[00:06:26] Magistracy Organic Law provides.
[00:06:30] And here, then, is the citation of the
[00:06:33] law. I continue reading the PGR's
[00:06:37] statement:
[00:06:41] Who is competent to process and judge a
[00:06:45] minister of the STF is the plenary of the Court, article
[00:06:48] 102, item I, letter B of the Federal Constitution and
[00:06:52] article 5, item 1 of the STF's internal
[00:06:55] regulations. If the police authority must
[00:06:59] interrupt its investigations so that the
[00:07:02] judiciary body responsible for the judgment can deliberate
[00:07:05] on them, all the more reason the rapporteur
[00:07:09] should not admit or order that a colleague from the
[00:07:12] court be scrutinized.
[00:07:15] In reality, the rapporteur does not even have
[00:07:18] competence to direct police
[00:07:21] actions against targets he decides to aim at.
[00:07:25] Who investigates in the pre-procedural phase is the judicial
[00:07:28] police, with the Public Prosecutor's Office as the prosecuting
[00:07:33] right to propose criminal action, also seeking
[00:07:36] elements of conviction.
[00:07:40] Article 3A of the
[00:07:42] Code of Criminal Procedure leaves no doubt in this regard, there
[00:07:46] it is established, here comes the 3A of the CPP.
[00:07:50] I continue reading the PGER's statement:
[00:07:53] it is not up to the judge to accuse, much less is it up to the
[00:07:56] judge to conduct pre-procedural investigations.
[00:08:00] He is not allowed to use the judicial police as his
[00:08:03] long arm for activities that were
[00:08:06] not assigned to him. Paradigmatic decisions
[00:08:10] of the Federal Supreme Court leave
[00:08:12] no doubt that the assumption by the judge of
[00:08:16] functions other than his own is a cause of nullity
[00:08:20] that affects the results of the wrongly
[00:08:23] initiated action. From this jurisprudence, these
[00:08:26] precedents that cite and follow many others
[00:08:28] come here
[00:08:32] the citation of precedents. I continue with the
[00:08:35] PGR's statement, the order for
[00:08:38] investigation given by the reporting minister and the elements
[00:08:42] it contains suffer, therefore, from double
[00:08:45] nullity. The order given to the police authority to
[00:08:49] investigate specific people, without
[00:08:51] a request from the public prosecutor's office and without the initiative of the
[00:08:55] police authority, is null, for exceeding the
[00:08:58] limits of the magistrate's competence in the
[00:09:01] pre-procedural phase. For another reason, it is
[00:09:04] null, even if accidentally some
[00:09:07] indication of what the rapporteur understood
[00:09:10] to be an irregularity of penal
[00:09:14] interest was found, it would not be up to him to delve
[00:09:17] deeper into the research on his colleague, that is to say,
[00:09:20] it would not be up to him to order a more
[00:09:23] detailed investigation of references to his colleague,
[00:09:27] he should rather, believing there was something that deserved to be
[00:09:31] investigated, address the president of the
[00:09:34] court so that the plenary could evaluate the correctness of his
[00:09:38] impression, agreeing or disagreeing with the
[00:09:40] investigation,
[00:09:43] being null the order and its result, it is
[00:09:47] up to the rapporteur to recognize it and dismiss the petition,
[00:09:50] close quotes from the citation of the PGR's
[00:09:53] opinion and I continue the report.
[00:09:56] I record at this point in the report
[00:09:59] that, according to the chronology of the records, regarding the
[00:10:03] precautionary removal of Andrei Augusto Passos
[00:10:06] Rodrigues, from the position of Director
[00:10:09] General of the Federal Police, the matter is
[00:10:13] inscribed in the preliminary suspension 1946
[00:10:16] of the decision rendered in the scope of PET
[00:10:19] 16704, moreover, other
[00:10:23] matters related to facts and circumstances
[00:10:26] related to Minister André Mendonça are in PET
[00:10:29] 16704 mentioned above, with these
[00:10:33] records made, I continue. On September 12,
[00:10:37] 2026, Minister André Mendonça issued
[00:10:40] the following order, I open
[00:10:43] quotes: given the identification of elements
[00:10:46] capable of justifying that autonomous treatment be given to the
[00:10:50] information from the judicial police, number such,
[00:10:54] reproduced here, forwarded by the
[00:10:56] police authority, originally
[00:11:00] contained in documents 5451 to
[00:11:02] 547, 541 to
[00:11:05] 547 of PET
[00:11:07] 15556, I ordered the judicial
[00:11:10] secretariat to proceed with its dismemberment,
[00:11:14] together with the respective ordering dispatch
[00:11:17] and documents contained in the documents
[00:11:20] cited here. two, as can
[00:11:24] be seen? it is verified from the content of the judicial police information
[00:11:28] number cited here, the pointed
[00:11:31] need to confer autonomous treatment to the
[00:11:34] said document and its attachments results from the
[00:11:38] identification by the said information of a person
[00:11:42] who attracts the incidence of article 5, item 1
[00:11:46] of the internal regulations of the Federal Supreme Court.
[00:11:49] Three. Therefore, as can be verified
[00:11:53] from the dispatch that terminated its institution,
[00:11:56] the present PET 16662 was created to
[00:12:00] enable that, from autonomous treatment,
[00:12:04] the information in question could be appreciated by the
[00:12:07] plenary of the Federal Supreme Court, in faithful
[00:12:11] compliance with the provisions of article 5, item one of the
[00:12:14] internal regulations of the Supreme Court, fully
[00:12:18] consistent also with article 33, sole paragraph of the
[00:12:22] Loman, so much so that on September 6,
[00:12:25] 2026, I released the case for judgment by the
[00:12:28] court's highest collegiate body.
[00:12:31] Four, the rapporteur then continues. On the other hand, in
[00:12:35] PET 16704,
[00:12:38] on September 9, 2026, a
[00:12:41] decision was issued by the President Minister which, in
[00:12:45] the relevant part, determined the following: open
[00:12:48] quotes, item four, the suspension of
[00:12:51] any and all proceedings that deal with initial
[00:12:55] investigation against members of this Federal Supreme
[00:12:58] Court, which must be preliminarily forwarded
[00:13:02] to this presidency, close quotes from the citation of item
[00:13:06] four that is cited in the
[00:13:08] dispatch of the then reporting minister that I am still
[00:13:11] reading, item five of the dispatch,
[00:13:16] the said determination, considering
[00:13:19] that, as previously demonstrated, this
[00:13:22] specific PET 16662 was
[00:13:25] instituted for the adoption of the procedural rite
[00:13:29] imposed by the incidence of article 5, item one of the
[00:13:32] internal regulations of the Supreme Court, forward
[00:13:35] these records to the presidency, publish,
[00:13:39] close quotes, that was the citation, I continue in
[00:13:42] the report: on the same date,
[00:13:46] certificate was drawn up, attesting to the
[00:13:49] replacement of the rapporteur of the case to the
[00:13:52] presidency. On September 14, Minister Alexandre
[00:13:56] Moraes presented a statement
[00:13:59] in Edoc 152 in PET
[00:14:01] 16704
[00:14:03] about the documents collected so far, he alleged in
[00:14:07] summary that the police report
[00:14:10] is, I open quotes, an attempt to objectively
[00:14:14] hold responsible for writings by
[00:14:16] a third party, found in a notepad on a cell phone
[00:14:20] seized in a successful police
[00:14:23] operation, and
[00:14:25] that the arrest of the investigated occurred, again, in
[00:14:28] quotes, at the moment of embarkation at the Customs of the largest
[00:14:32] airport in the country, close quotes, and still in
[00:14:35] quotes, with a true passport, the
[00:14:38] investigated, therefore, carrying his own
[00:14:42] cell phone, close quotes, hence, in his
[00:14:45] understanding, I open quotes, it is not logical, reasonable, and
[00:14:49] plausible to assume leakage or
[00:14:52] favoritism. Minister Alexandre also
[00:14:55] alleged, one, that there was nullity in the institution
[00:14:59] ex officio of the incident in the direction of the
[00:15:03] investigation against him, as a minister of
[00:15:05] the court, two, that the report is inadmissible
[00:15:09] as evidence, and three, that there is no criminal
[00:15:12] offense. Regarding the nullities, he argued that
[00:15:15] any investigation requires provocation from the
[00:15:19] PGR and authorization from the plenary, which did
[00:15:22] not occur in this case. In addition
[00:15:25] to the decision that ordered the preparation of the report having been
[00:15:29] ex officio, there was a determination for the federal
[00:15:32] police to hand over the records without going through the
[00:15:36] Attorney General's Office.
[00:15:38] Minister Alexandre, in that statement, also pointed
[00:15:41] out that the then reporting minister André
[00:15:44] Mendonça had prior knowledge that the
[00:15:47] target of the identification would be Minister Alexandre, because in the
[00:15:51] pieces of PET 15625,
[00:15:54] there is a file titled open quotes
[00:15:57] moraes.pdf,
[00:15:59] close quotes, which, for another reason, would constitute
[00:16:02] illegality, since the Loman command was
[00:16:06] not complied with. Still regarding nullity, Minister
[00:16:09] Alexandre Moraes raises that the then rapporteur, open quotes,
[00:16:13] has an interest in the initiation of a formal investigation, close
[00:16:17] quotes, because he requested, open quotes, more
[00:16:20] than once, that the investigation team forward
[00:16:23] some evidence in this regard, close
[00:16:27] quotes, there would still be, according
[00:16:29] to Minister Alexandre Moraes, open quotes, growing
[00:16:33] indications of bias in the conduct
[00:16:36] of the... Judicial vision, manifested in
[00:16:40] thematic direction of progressive intensity,
[00:16:44] close quotes, such as the participation in collaboration
[00:16:47] negotiations, selection of targets, asymmetry by
[00:16:51] orientation within the political spectrum, threats to the
[00:16:55] Director-General of the Federal Police and the Attorney-General of the
[00:16:59] Republic, the leakage of information the week
[00:17:02] before September 7th.
[00:17:06] I continue. Regarding the police report, Minister
[00:17:09] Alexandre argues that, open quotes, it is not an expert
[00:17:12] report, it did not analyze the raw
[00:17:16] data, it completely broke the chain of custody, close quotes.
[00:17:20] In addition, the
[00:17:23] file metadata indicates that it was open
[00:17:26] quotes, opened and finalized on the same
[00:17:30] day on the PF computer, that is,
[00:17:33] it was completely inserted, close quotes, the
[00:17:37] minister raises suspicion of strange
[00:17:41] participation, outside the federal police, in the preparation
[00:17:44] of the document, I open quotes, external
[00:17:48] agents due to the form of production, probably
[00:17:51] foreigners, close quotes, which, in his
[00:17:54] understanding, would denote, I open quotes, an attempt to
[00:17:57] foreign interference in Brazilian elections, close
[00:18:01] quotes, he also states that there was, I open
[00:18:04] quotes, early access to the
[00:18:07] raw collection of extractions, close
[00:18:10] quotes, by the cabinet of the then
[00:18:13] rapporteur, which for another reason would point to
[00:18:17] his action,
[00:18:19] between quotes, of the judge as an investigator,
[00:18:23] he also alleges, and I quote between quotes, that there is not a
[00:18:26] single raw data in the document, there are
[00:18:30] images of excerpts cut by whoever cut them,
[00:18:33] captioned by whoever cut them, and that of the
[00:18:37] 42 notes presented,
[00:18:40] 47 were not found in any conversation
[00:18:43] and that 90.4%
[00:18:47] of the set is inference, in the
[00:18:50] remaining five, I open quotes,
[00:18:52] it is presumed, without any effective proof, close
[00:18:56] quotes, he also pointed out that there was a violation of the
[00:18:59] inviolability of the legal profession, and that
[00:19:02] the Barce de Moraes office had
[00:19:05] only one, not
[00:19:07] two contracts with Banco Master, as for the
[00:19:11] dialogues, he stated that they were my messages that never
[00:19:14] existed, fictitious dialogues, close
[00:19:18] quotes. Minister Alexandre Moraes also points out that
[00:19:21] there is no proof in the document of the existence of a criminal
[00:19:25] offense. There is no contact with the authority, neither
[00:19:29] with the Attorney-General of the Republic, nor with the Director of the Federal
[00:19:32] Police. He asserted, between quotes, that he never
[00:19:36] judged with... any process of Banco Master or
[00:19:39] Daniel Vorcaro, this between quotes, and
[00:19:43] that, I open quotes again, the farce of
[00:19:46] the existence of leaks that would have
[00:19:50] harmed the operation was created, what was the
[00:19:52] leak, no leak, no
[00:19:55] damage, between quotes, he attributed the
[00:19:58] motivation for the piece to the revenge of people
[00:20:02] allied to the agents who were convicted of
[00:20:05] attempted coup. stating that, I open
[00:20:09] quotes, the attempted coup did not end on January
[00:20:13] 8, 2023, it simply changed its
[00:20:16] modus operandi, close quotes, for these
[00:20:20] reasons, he requested the immediate approval of the
[00:20:23] opinion of the Attorney General's Office,
[00:20:26] nullity of the IPJ, the judicial
[00:20:29] police information, produced by the Federal Police,
[00:20:32] the extinction of PET 16662,
[00:20:36] also. information in that PET
[00:20:40] 16704,
[00:20:42] the Director General of the Federal Police and Minister André
[00:20:46] Mendonça. The content of these statements
[00:20:50] will be specifically examined when examining PET
[00:20:53] 16 704.
[00:20:56] At this point, and to conclude the
[00:20:58] report,
[00:21:01] what, in my opinion, is in the
[00:21:04] delimitation of the object.
[00:21:06] I understand, subject to a better judgment and different understandings
[00:21:09] of meaning, that what is submitted to the
[00:21:13] plenary is not at this moment any
[00:21:16] judgment about possible criminal responsibility of
[00:21:20] the investigated authority,
[00:21:22] nor anticipation of conclusion about the evidentiary
[00:21:25] value of the collected elements, even
[00:21:29] because any judgment of this nature is the responsibility of the
[00:21:33] public prosecutor's office as the exclusive holder of public
[00:21:36] criminal action, under the terms of item one of article
[00:21:40] 129 of the Constitution of the Republic. In my
[00:21:43] opinion, the object of this judgment is circumscribed
[00:21:46] to what is contained in PET 16. The idea
[00:21:50] of saying, that is to say, precisely the
[00:21:54] authorization not for the continuation of an investigation in
[00:21:57] the course of which there would theoretically be an indication of the
[00:22:01] practice of a crime by a magistrate, together with the issue of
[00:22:04] nullity raised by the
[00:22:07] Attorney General's
[00:22:09] Office, ladies and gentlemen ministers, this is the
[00:22:12] report. In this
[00:22:15] minute, Minister Flávio, and at this
[00:22:18] stage, the presidency proposes to
[00:22:21] Your Excellencies that if any minister has any
[00:22:25] impediment or suspicion
[00:22:29] to participate in the judgment, that the
[00:22:31] colleague, if he wishes, feels free to
[00:22:35] decline, because in this way we already
[00:22:38] have an outcome for this
[00:22:42] session.
[00:22:45] Mr. President, first I greet Minister Cássio, you have the floor, I greet Your
[00:22:48] Excellency. "In your person, I greet all
[00:22:52] members of the court, the Attorney
[00:22:55] General, servers, female servers,
[00:22:58] lawyers, the president of the Brazilian Bar Association present here,
[00:23:02] I also take this opportunity to greet all lawyers in your
[00:23:04] person. I would like to make
[00:23:08] a clarification and a record in relation to
[00:23:12] what Your Excellency commented, I have never used
[00:23:15] the Supreme Court's platform to make clarifications, but I think today is
[00:23:19] the day. The
[00:23:21] gravity of the circumstances
[00:23:24] deserves it, in relation to messages circulating from
[00:23:28] yesterday, from today, and that will
[00:23:31] always surround authorities in Brazil,
[00:23:34] I have never judged
[00:23:38] any process related to Master,
[00:23:42] my son has never provided any service to the bank and has never been remunerated
[00:23:46] by the bank.
[00:23:52] And it is a fact, because banking secrecy has already been
[00:23:55] breached, there is no point in speculating otherwise,
[00:23:59] because if the secrecy has already been breached, against facts, there
[00:24:03] are no arguments.
[00:24:05] As for that, I have absolute
[00:24:08] exemption, my exemption is based and absolutely
[00:24:12] proven in the votes I cast. If I felt
[00:24:16] uncomfortable
[00:24:19] or had voted in some way,
[00:24:22] I would never have voted for the confirmation
[00:24:26] of the arrest of Daniel Vorcaro, his father, and other
[00:24:29] people involved, but we know that impediments
[00:24:32] and suspicions do not arise only from
[00:24:36] culpability, they are also the result
[00:24:39] of intrinsic and extrinsic factors,
[00:24:42] as day
[00:24:43] used to say.
[00:24:50] We know that in relation to this, all of us, not only ministers
[00:24:54] of the Supreme Court, but ministers of State, magistrates
[00:24:57] of all spheres of the judiciary in
[00:25:00] Brazil, will always suffer
[00:25:03] some type of influence from people who try
[00:25:07] to get close, sometimes with an immediate objective, sometimes
[00:25:11] with no objective at all,
[00:25:14] just by being close to courts, whether
[00:25:18] judicial courts, or
[00:25:20] legislative courts, or executive power courts, this
[00:25:24] is a reality and none of us
[00:25:27] will be free from that as long as we raise
[00:25:30] our robes, it
[00:25:33] is good to record that regarding the case, I never exchanged
[00:25:37] any messages, there is no record of any messages
[00:25:40] from me with Daniel Vorcaro, this is already
[00:25:43] clarifying some
[00:25:44] points:
[00:25:50] However, Mr. President,
[00:25:53] I understand that I have a mission that was conferred upon me
[00:25:57] by the Brazilian Constitution, and until
[00:26:00] now, it is being safeguarded by God. And
[00:26:03] for me, with absolutely no
[00:26:06] diminution of the relevance of this judgment or even the master
[00:26:10] case, I understand that this mission is more
[00:26:13] important than ensuring balance in the
[00:26:17] 2026 elections and that we are only 19
[00:26:20] days away. I have made a huge effort and
[00:26:24] this is
[00:26:27] easily verifiable, the Superior Electoral Court has
[00:26:30] maintained itself, despite another criticism, but I am
[00:26:34] convinced of this, it has remained absolutely
[00:26:36] equidistant from party preferences, from
[00:26:40] members of advisors, from all those who run the electoral
[00:26:43] process. I may even be wrong, but
[00:26:47] I believe that the TSE is doing very
[00:26:50] well. I have no doubt
[00:26:52] that,
[00:26:57] that, despite the debates,
[00:27:01] they will flow. That this
[00:27:04] judgment may also impact the
[00:27:07] political electoral scenario. So, in my capacity as president of the
[00:27:11] TSE, I do not
[00:27:14] feel comfortable participating in this judgment and
[00:27:18] I declare my recusal.
[00:27:21] Thank you very much, Your Excellency, Minister Cássio, therefore, the
[00:27:24] secretariat will note the
[00:27:26] declaration of recusal by Your Excellency.
[00:27:30] Minister Diaz Toffle asks for the floor. Good morning, Mr. President,
[00:27:33] greeting Your Excellency, eminent dean, Minister Carmen
[00:27:36] Lúcia, all eminent colleagues, Prosecutor General of the
[00:27:39] Republic, lawyers, and all
[00:27:43] who accompany
[00:27:46] us, and civil servants. Mr.
[00:27:49] President, it is well known to all that on
[00:27:52] February 9, 2026, I was still
[00:27:56] under the role of rapporteur and under my
[00:27:59] rapporteurship, the case of... Banco
[00:28:02] Master
[00:28:05] and, it must be said, again, without ever having received any
[00:28:08] documentation from the Federal Police until that
[00:28:11] moment, none. I ordered
[00:28:14] all the diligences that were requested by the
[00:28:18] Attorney General of the
[00:28:20] Republic, and also those that came from the
[00:28:24] Federal Police, but whose materials were never
[00:28:27] in my custody in my
[00:28:30] office. On February 9, 2026, a
[00:28:34] request was submitted to Your Excellency after the protocol in the
[00:28:38] Supreme Court, signed
[00:28:40] by
[00:28:44] members
[00:28:46] of the
[00:28:48] CINC making two requests, one for
[00:28:52] investigation under Article 33, sole paragraph,
[00:28:56] and another for an argument of
[00:28:59] suspension
[00:29:01] for my non- involvement in the
[00:29:05] rapporteurship.
[00:29:07] They presented
[00:29:09] a report and Your Excellency
[00:29:13] told me that you had read it entirely, in full,
[00:29:16] and decided that there was no indication
[00:29:20] of any illicit material
[00:29:23] from the point of view, but that it would be registered as
[00:29:27] an argument of suspension for analysis by the
[00:29:30] plenary. So he did, it received the
[00:29:33] number AS244 for suspension
[00:29:36] argument.
[00:29:39] Your Excellency gave the regimental period for my
[00:29:42] manifestation. I responded in full
[00:29:46] to all the questions
[00:29:50] raised in that report, which was
[00:29:53] made absolutely outside of any type of
[00:29:57] investigation or authorization from the presidency
[00:30:01] of this Court, or from the plenary
[00:30:04] of this Court.
[00:30:06] And
[00:30:09] this defense, both the defense and the report, I asked
[00:30:12] Your Excellency, I myself asked Your Excellency to
[00:30:16] forward it to all eminent
[00:30:17] colleagues. All eminent colleagues had
[00:30:21] access to the full report, to the full
[00:30:25] of my defense, and I had the
[00:30:28] opportunity to manifest myself in
[00:30:31] a meeting with all colleagues present
[00:30:34] in Your Excellency's office on that date,
[00:30:38] Mr. President, at the suggestion of
[00:30:41] Minister Flávio Dino, after the manifestation of all colleagues,
[00:30:45] mostly, the great majority, understanding that there was no
[00:30:48] existence of anything that
[00:30:52] would lead to my suspicion, but
[00:30:55] accepting the suggestion made by the eminent Minister Flávio Dino
[00:30:59] that...