Gilmar defends Mores in the rebel survey and if he cannot compare it with Moro | Method
The Supreme Federal Court (STF) Minister Gilmar Mendis compared this Saturday, 12, his cutting co -worker Alexander de Mores and former Jato Jato Judge Sergio Moro. He rejected the allegation that Mores would violate the legitimate process by judging a case, and he would also be the victim.
“He has no justification (Mores) Should be removed, because he has already been included in these inquiries and after surveys. He is not suspicious, not blocked, he is not judging his interest. You cannot even compare Alexandre (Mores) com (Sergian) I live. I live with Bolsonoro. He had conversations with Bolsonoro before the election, Bolson agreed to be the Justice Minister, “Gilmar, who participated in the 11th Brazilian Conference Edition in Harvard, announced the former federal judge’s former federal judge’s former federal judge’s former Federal Judge.
At the panel in Harvard, STF Minister Moro and Lava Jato were proud to have “contributed to the breakup of operation.” For him, Kuritiba is the “criminal organization.” Initially, the Dean of the STF had recovered its position over the past few years, in favor of the Curitiba Task Force, and became a critic in court.
Former President Zair Bolsonoro (PL) said that he had received Moro from his government’s largest hit Kuritiba and “nothing there was.”
“I am going to the Planto Palace and Bolsonoro meeting one day. Bolsono says, ‘Minister, we have missed a lot. We have made a lot of bullshit. See you, I have named Moro.” I, “President, which may be your biggest hit. First, I named Moro, then I didn’t give him anything.”
Gilmar has denied criticism that the Supreme Court is undergoing its duties and practicing “legal activation”. Commenting on the repetitive area that 11 Supreme ministers were more commented on the 11 players of the national team, “he said:” Everyone knows that the Brazilian team is not going well. ” Then he said he did not agree with the active analysis. According to him, this problem is in misunderstanding of the court’s abilities.
When reflecting the court’s lessons in the last 10 years, the minister said that during this period, the ministers should leave the idea of a personal agenda and began to work more collectively and comprehensively. He concluded, “Scratch the court. This is a great practice.”
