PGR requests conviction of Eduardo Bolsonaro accused of pressuring process over attempted coup
The Attorney General’s Office presented this Tuesday (16) a formal request for the conviction of former deputy Eduardo Bolsonaro for coercion during the process investigating an attempted coup d’état in 2022.
Deputy Attorney General of the Republic Antônio Edílio Magalhães exposed documentation that includes publications and correspondence exchanged between Eduardo and his father, former president Jair Bolsonaro, as grounds for the conviction request. The PGR argues that the factual context and the evidence clearly demonstrate the occurrence of the crime.
“This is a relatively simple situation from a criminal point of view. There is a whole element, a factual context and set of evidence showing that this coercion actually existed”, declared the deputy prosecutor during the session.
The ministerial body also highlighted that the episode constitutes an attack on the structure of Brazilian Justice. Magalhães pointed out that the judicial administration itself is the victim in this case, since the crime is directed against the institutions responsible for the administration of Justice, even if it involves specific authorities.
Progress of the process and next steps
The trial takes place before the 1st Panel of the Federal Supreme Court. Minister Alexandre de Moraes, who acts as rapporteur, has already presented his technical opinion. At this stage, Eduardo’s defense is declaring its objection to the arguments presented.
After the defense speech, the ministers will begin voting. Moraes will be the first to vote, followed by ministers Cristiano Zanin, Cármen Lúcia and Flávio Dino, the latter president of the First Panel.
There is no established deadline for completing the votes. Conviction or acquittal will require a minimum approval of three votes among the class members.
What the Prosecutor alleges
According to the PGR, Eduardo’s goal was to obstruct the conviction of the former president in the so-called coup plot, keeping the legitimate interests of Justice in the background.
Leia Também
Striker Estêvão details the emotional impact of a serious injury that made his trip to the World Cup unfeasible
YouTuber Jesse Ridgway and wife terminate pregnancy after Down syndrome diagnosis and suffer threats
The Duke and Duchess of Sussex release new records to celebrate daughter Lilibet’s fifth birthday
The prosecutor’s office reinforces that the accumulated documentation proves the criminal conduct, and that the central motivation was always to sacrifice the appropriate legal system to benefit family interests and avoid the father’s criminal responsibilities.
The organization brought together a series of public demonstrations by Eduardo in the press, posts on digital platforms and dialogues with Jair Bolsonaro that reveal coordinated movements in American territory with the aim of putting pressure on the top of the Brazilian judiciary. This effort to embarrass the highest authorities constitutes, in the Prosecutor’s view, the central core of the accusation and differs from the simple exercise of political or expression rights.
Defense positioning
The Federal Public Defender’s Office, appointed to sponsor Eduardo Bolsonaro due to the lack of a private lawyer, requested his acquittal due to insufficient evidence. The institution also pointed out procedural irregularities that would justify the case’s entire nullity, including Moraes’ participation in the trial.
The defense identified a defect in Eduardo Bolsonaro’s quote. According to the DPU, the accused was abroad in a known location and should have received notification via letter rogatory, as determined by the criminal procedure code. The summons by notice, executed in non-compliance with express legal norms, compromised the process from its origin.
The Defender’s Office also maintains that Eduardo did not receive adequate material defense. According to the institution, there was only formal compliance with procedural requirements, without genuine contact with the defendant, absence of his version of the facts and lack of personal guidance, resulting in a contradiction that was only apparent and not substantial.
For the defense, there is no proof of crime. The conduct described by the Prosecutor’s Office does not fall under a specific criminal category and Eduardo’s demonstrations were covered by the constitutional right to free expression. The DPU also reaffirms that the former deputy did not have the capacity to interfere in sovereign decisions of the American government, making any claim of his direct responsibility unfounded.
