The Mato Grosso court sentenced two journalists for reporting on a judge who had debts with a company and continued to judge her cases. She was declared suspect and they were sentenced.
The 2nd Panel of the STF begins judging this Friday (9.Aug.2024) an action that aims to reverse the conviction of journalist Guilherme Waltenberg, senior editor of Poder360. The 2nd Panel is made up of ministers Edson Fachin (president), André Mendonça, Dias Toffoli, Gilmar Mendes and Nunes Marques.
The case refers to a report published in 2017 on the journalistic website The Free. It is signed by Waltenberg – before he started working on the Poder360– and Mikhail Favalessa.
The published report showed commercial relations between judge Olinda de Quadro Altomare Castrillon, of the 11th Civil Court of Cuiabá (MT), and businessman José Charbel Malouf.
According to the journalistic investigation, the judge had debts with the businessman, but did not consider herself prevented from judging a case involving him. The title of the 2017 report was “Judge in the Zezo Malouf case owes R$1 million to the businessman she is judging”.
Castrillon took legal action against the two professionals. The journalists were ordered in the 1st and 2nd Instance to pay compensation for moral damages in the amount of R$30,000.
The journalists had contacted Castrillon before publishing the report. They incorporated what the judge had said into the text. She confirmed the information released, but said that it would not be grounds for excluding her from the trial of the case.
Later, the TJ-MT (Court of Justice of Mato Grosso) declared the judge’s suspicion in the case. Even so, Waltenberg and Favalessa were held responsible for alleged moral damages caused by the publication.
PROCESS IN THE STF
The journalists’ lawyers took the case to the STF through a complaint, an instrument used to prevent decisions by lower courts that violate binding understandings of the Supreme Court.
However, when analyzing the case, Justice Nunes Marques denied the requests. He argued that the controversy was not related to the matter dealt with in ADPF 130, a landmark ruling by the Court on the protection of freedom of the press; or with ADI 4451 (precedents that, according to the lawyers, were violated by the TJ-MT). Waltenberg appealed the decision and will have his requests analyzed by the 2nd Panel on August 9 and 12.
Lawyers Igor Sant’Anna Tamasauskas and Beatriz Canotilho Logarezzi, from the Bottini & Tamasauskas Advogados law firm, represent Waltenberg. The firm is hired by the digital newspaper Poder360.
Favalessa was welcomed by Abraji (Brazilian Association of Investigative Journalism) through its Legal Protection Program for Journalists, which supports his defense in the appeal phase – led by lawyer André Matheus.
For Tamasauskas and Logarezzi, there is solid jurisprudence in the STF to admit the complaint. “We hope that the Supreme Court, confirming the position it has adopted in defense of freedom of the press, will review the single-judge decision that denied the request. It is unacceptable that a professional should be penalized simply for having disclosed real facts of public interest, especially in times of recurring attacks on journalists.”says a note from Waltenberg’s lawyers.
In the appeal they filed, the lawyers cite precedents from the STF admitting complaints to change mistaken understandings of the Courts of Justice that violate freedom of the press.
In one of them (Rcl 22,328), the current president of the STF, Minister Roberto Barroso, says that “The Supreme Federal Court has been more flexible in admitting complaints regarding freedom of expression, due to the persistent violation of this right in Brazilian culture, including through judicial means. […] Freedom of expression has not yet become a sufficiently rooted idea in the culture of the Judiciary in general. Not without alarm, we witness the routine action of judges and courts to prohibit or suspend the dissemination of news and opinions, in an ‘anti-liberal activism’ that needs to be contained.”.
Abraji president Kátia Brembatti also spoke out about the case. According to her, “It is unacceptable that journalists be convicted for publishing an article that contains true facts, verified and confirmed by the parties themselves”.
“We hope that the STF, which has repeatedly shown itself to be a Court attentive to the protection of freedom of the press, will once again show itself to be sensitive to this issue,” he stated.
STJ LAWSUIT
Waltenberg and Favalessa also filed an appeal with the STJ (Superior Court of Justice). The rapporteur of the case, Minister Antônio Carlos Ferreira, understood that the controversy could not be analyzed by the Court. The journalists appealed and the case awaits judgment by the 4th Panel, which begins next Tuesday (August 13).
#STF #STJ #judge #censorship #case #journalists