To O Globo newspaper
Respectfully Mr. Editorial Director
Mr. Thiago Herdy
I refer to the newspaper report issued today by O Globo (https://oglobo.globo.com/brasil/defesa-nao-questionou-apreensoes-em-enderecos-ligados-lula-21825094) which has the following statement: “Through the press relations of the law firm that defends Lula, former President’s attorney Cristiano Zanin, has admitted that there was no previous questioning regarding the authenticity of the evidence. He couldn’t explain why the doubts about the legitimacy of such documents weren’t reported during the proceeding.”
However, the press release I sent the journalist through our press relations says the following:
“At the time the law guarantees him the right to defend himself, former President Lula questioned Judge Sérgio Moro about the trustworthiness of documents that were presented to him.
Lula made it clear that he was never aware of such documents, nor are they related to any conduct of his, and that they are not even addressed to him.
The Defense has properly questioned about other documents which were included in the record which had indications of tampering, both by the Federal Attorney’s Office and Mr. Marcelo Odebrecht. However, Judge Sérgio Moro is not presiding over this incidental proceeding as required by the law (Code of Criminal Procedure, Article 145 onward). This means that instead of submitting the documents to expert examination, the judge would rather give great value to the claims of the parties that attached such documents, once again violating the due process of law.”
As you can see, on the one hand, I have shown the journalist that my client, former President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva, could, by law, point out the foundation of his defense during his interrogation, including raise questions about the procedural acts practiced (Code of Criminal Procedure, Article 187, Paragraph 2, VIII); on the other hand, I made it clear that there is a motion against document forgery concerning the documents included in the record by the Federal Attorney’s Office and by one of the defendants in this case who is not being prosecuted by the judge as required by the law.
I have never taken, directly or indirectly, any positioning or had any conversation with this journalist that allowed the following statement: “He couldn’t explain why the doubts about the legitimacy of such documents weren’t reported during the proceeding.”
Therefore, the news report did not address the positioning received by the journalist in charge on the part of former President Lula in a factually correct manner. For that reason, we request that the content of the report be rectified.
Without further issues to consider.
Cristiano Zanin Martins