The truth admits only one interpretation – real facts. Nothing else. And the truth about who owns the three-story apartment in Guarujá is unquestionable: former President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva does not own the real estate property, and never did. It belongs to OAS Empreendimentos S/A that pledged, not only apartment 164 A but also other units of Solaris Building, as security for several financial transactions they made – among these, the fiduciary agreement mentioned in the closing arguments of our client’s defense, concerning the Criminal Proceeding No. 5046512-94.2016.4.7000. The Guarantee Fund for Length of Service (FGTS) was the final payee of the transaction, which was managed by Caixa, in a transaction involving the purchase of bonds by said fund. Therefore, FGTS has bought OAS’s debt and one of the securities they received involved receivables resulting from a future sale of the three-story apartment.  

It is unacceptable that part of the press keeps reproducing lies about this transaction. As it is described in our closing arguments (page 239 onwards), the assignment of the three-story apartment’s receivables, and of other Solaris’s units, took place with the “second amendment to the fiduciary agreement on receivables and rights over bank accounts” signed on 10/19/2010. This document is proof that Léo Pinheiro, codefendant, lied when he said to the Judge of the 13th Federal Criminal Court of Curitiba that he had transferred to former President Lula the ownership of the three-story apartment in 2009, whereas, 1 year later, OAS assigned the receivables to FGTS/Caixa.  

The press release issued by Caixa Econômica Federal in no way conflicts with the defense’s closing arguments.  Caixa declared not to be “the owner of the economic and financial rights of the three-story apartment in Guarujá.” Our argument registers the assignment to said Fund. Caixa then confirms that FGTS purchased OAS Empreendimentos’ bonds, also saying that the transaction was secured by Solaris Building’s mortgage, “among others.” The bank acknowledges that, besides the mortgage, OAS has pledged other securities, like the fiduciary agreement we documentarily proved in our closing arguments.

Ultimately, Caixa declares that “such security does not prevent the properties from being commercialized”. We have never declared otherwise. Actually, it is inherent to an assignment of receivables transaction that a sale occurs. What we said was: in order for Léo Pinheiro or OAS to declare that they have transferred the three-story apartment’s ownership to someone – by selling it, donating it, or any other kind of disposition – they would have to prove to have released the securities with Caixa. Also, when it comes to fiduciary agreements, the transaction would only be completed through a deposit in the amount of the property’s value in a specific account designated in the contract signed between OAS and Caixa, with Planner’s participation as trustee, which did not happen.

Is the truth enough? No. The truth gets in the way of those who want to cripple Lula politically, acting to mask the facts to that end. It is our duty to fight for a fair and impartial procedure for our client and to demand from the free press that they play their social role in well informing the society.

Cristiano Zanin Martins, Valeska Teixeira Martins, and Roberto Teixeira