[ad_1]
Minister Edson Fachin of the Supreme Electoral Tribunal (TSE) asked for a hearing and the court stayed the lawsuit over whether President-elect Jair Bolsonaro (PSL) and businessman Luciano Hang, owner of the Havan retailer, exercised Abuse of economic power during the election campaign
There was already a majority – five of the seven magistrates – to sue when Fachin stated that he needed more time to badyze the documents.
Ministers reviewed the case Tuesday night, (4). The complaint was filed at the PT's request in October
Fachin said. Other actions against the Bolsonaro campaign are ongoing in the courts and, in his view, they should be badyzed together. In total, eight actions were opened by the TSE. He pointed out that one of these actions involved Bolsonaro and the owner of Havan
The case was resting on Tuesday and suspended by hearing demand, she was dealing with the alleged coercion that Luciano Hang would have exercised over its employees to vote in Bolsonaro
In November, the prosecutor's office of Santa Catarina (MPT) requested the recovery of fines against Havan and Hang, alleging that employees had been forced to vote in Bolsonaro. Hang, who supported the campaign, has always denied having forced employees to vote in Bolsonaro for the position of president.
The Crown told the TSE that the application was inadmissible. Attorney General Humberto Jacques said that the trial should not focus on the finesse of what was done, but whether the episode occurred in the election – which for him, has not been proven.
Bolsonaro's lawyer, Tiago Ayres said that Hang's statements fall under his right to freedom of expression. According to him, the economic exploitation was not proven and the allegations were based on journalistic reports.
"What would have compromised the election?" Ayres said, noting the difference between the number of votes Bolsonaro and that of his opponent Fernando Haddad.
Reporter of the case, the corregedor Minister Jorge Mussi, of the TSE, understood that the evidence presented did not allow to conclude that Hang had forced the employees to be constrained.
According to him, the act of restraint exercised on employees during the election can be proved, for example, at meetings at which the boss says that officials must vote for a particular candidate; through the distribution of a registration form allowing employees to specify their vote; or the distribution of party material.
These acts, however, have not been proven in this case, according to Mussi. According to him, the charges are "mere allegations which, if not substantiated, are not sufficient to judge the convictions"
For Mussi, Hang's statements fall within his constitutional right to come forward. "
" There is therefore no evidence that the word has aroused fear, "said Mussi, adding that" the fact that he was not going to open a shop would not be enough. he was winning was not an act of restraint. "
The vote of Mussi was followed by the colleagues Og Fernandes, Admar Gonzaga, Tarcisio Vieira and Luís Roberto Barroso
Source link
