The year 2016 is ending and up to the moment, not a single piece of evidence incriminating former President Lula has been produced by the Operation Car Wash Task Force. No effort was spared, all in vain. The malicious efforts failed in face of the refutation of the 27 witnesses chosen by the Federal Attorney’s Office to charge Lula. None of them presented any fact that could confirm the accusations made against the former President of participation in unlawful acts.

An unexpected turn of events for Lula’s tormentors. Nonetheless, the year was still marked by arbitrarities against the former President. The frivolous and abusive use of legal procedures for purposes of political persecution – characterizing lawfare – flourished. The chronology is full of unacceptable facts.

On March 4, a Curitiba trial judge issued a bench warrant ordering Lula to testify, although he never failed to comply with any summons to that end, as required by law for such measures (Code of Criminal Procedure, Article 260). The ground for the decision was to confer “security” to the former President. But he was taken to testify at the Congonhas Airport, in São Paulo, a place with one of the largest circulation of people in all the country and specifically in a room surrounded by glass walls - which were almost destroyed.

On March 10, the private conversations of Lula, his relatives, collaborators and even his lawyers were disclosed on a national television network, with the authorization of the same judge in Curitiba. There were even conversations between Lula and then President Dilma Rousseff, which were tapped without a warrant. The law prohibits the disclosure of intercepted conversations (Law 9,296 / 96, Article 8) and even typifies the conduct as a criminal offense (Law 9,296 / 96, Article 10).

The purpose of this disclosure was not related to the judicial process. It was political in nature. It sought to create obstacles for Lula to assume the office of Chief of Staff, although no constitutional or legal prohibition was imposed on him.

The Federal Supreme Court took over Lula’s cases after the Curitiba judge had usurped the jurisdiction of the Court by authorizing the disclosure of telephone conversations intercepted by extensions used by the President. Under the pretext of requesting “excuses” from the Supreme Court, the federal public official of Curitiba filed 12 charges against Lula, acting as a prosecutor and not as a judge.

Meanwhile, the Supreme Court Justice Gilmar Mendes, through a monocratic decision, issued injunctions in two writs of mandamus filed by opposition political parties - which had been assigned to him since he was presiding over a connected lawsuit, on the basis of an (amiss) individual writ of mandamus to question the matter.

All abuses committed by the Curitiba Judge were the subject of a representation filed in June before the Attorney General’s Office, requesting measures for the abuse of authority and practice, in theory, of the crime provided for in Article 10 of the Law of Telephone Wiretapping.

In June, the Federal Supreme Court decided to annul only the conversation that had been intercepted between Lula and Rousseff. In relation to the other illegalities pointed out by former president Lula’s defense, the Court preferred to return the cases to the judge of Curitiba, so that he himself would judge his “wrongdoings”. The situation motivated the filing of a communication to the UN Human Rights Committee, in face of violation of three provisions of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) adopted by that international body, which deal with, respectively: (i) the right not to be deprived of liberty by measures without legal provision; (ii) the right to privacy, and (iii) the right to a fair and impartial trial. It was the first communication made to the UN Human Rights Committee by a Brazilian citizen, as authorized by a treaty signed by the country in 2009. The Brazilian government should present information in the procedure until January 27th, 2017.

In the following months, the Federal Attorney’s Office, using one of the “lawfare” tactics, began to present a series of complaints against Lula, all without any materiality.

In September, the former President was subject to a grotesque accusation on a national television network by the coordinator of the Operation Car Wash Task Force. The fact motivated - later - the filing of a claim for compensation for non-material damages by Lula against the member of the Federal Attorney’s Office.

Still in September, the Federal Regional Court of the 4th Region, which judges the Operation Car Wash appeals, decided that the operation is not subject to the “general rules”, formalizing a true State of Exception.

In November, in face of the Federal Attorney’s Office inaction in relation to the Curitiba Judge, even after the representation filed in July, Lula and his next of kin filed a subsidiary criminal complaint before the Federal Regional Court of the 4th. Region. The purpose of the lawsuit is to investigate the possible crime of abuse of authority and misuse of material from the wiretapping which is pending under seal.

The year ended with several hearings being held in Curitiba aiming at the hearing of prosecution witnesses - an unsuccessful effort because Lula’s truth prevailed. A relevant detail is that the federal prosecutor who accused him on television did not appear in any of those hearings.

Such hearings were presided over by the same judge in Curitiba, which is being criminally prosecuted by Lula and who has a history of participating in public events alongside politicians antagonistic to the former president and his political party. At the last hearing, the judge allowed Lula and one of his lawyers to be called “trash” by one of the witnesses.

And at the end of the procedural act, he still felt comfortable provoking Lula’s lawyer with ironies. But this judge of Curitiba does not accept to acknowledge his partiality; He insists on “judging” the former president.

A journalist who welcomed the judge from Curitiba in Rio de Janeiro in early December published on social networks that Lula will be convicted “at the beginning of the year [of 2017].” He is being judicially challenged to clarify the publication.

The defense believes that, in 2017, LULA’S TRUTH will prevail. We will leave in the past the history of abuses and arbitrariness. This is necessary for justice to prevail and the Democratic State of Law to be a reality, in fact. Brazil deserves this.