Superior Electoral Court Decides if Odebrecht Whistleblowers Testimonies Are Valid to Remove Temer from Office

06/07/2017 - 10h35

The justice of the Superior Electoral Court Napoleão Nunes Maia Filho has paved the way for the Court to decide on Wednesday (7) whether the plea deal bargains' testimonies of Odebrecht's former executives are valid to remove President Michel Temer from office.

During the session on Tuesday (6), the first of the resumption of the trial of Dilma and Temer, the main controversy was about accepting or refuting revelations from the testimonies of plea deal bargains related to the company about slush funds and bribes in the campaign accounts.

The trial was adjourned after three hours after ministers discussed preliminary issues raised by the defense teams of Temer and former President Dilma Rousseff.

In addition to the strategy announced by the defense teams - that they would question the inclusion of new facts in the trial -, Maia Filho signaled a new aspect of disagreement. He questioned whether the rapporteur, Herman Benjamin, could have called witnesses of the company without their having been indicated by any of the parties.

Benjamin summoned Odebrecht whistleblowers in February based in news reports about operation Car Wash in the press.

	Pedro Ladeira/Folhapress
	The case's Rapporteur, Herman Benjamin

Although today on opposing political sides, the defense teams of Dilma and Temer have argued in part for the same thesis: the exclusion of testimonies of former Odebrecht executives and campaign strategists João Santana and Mônica Moura, and that whistleblowers´ testimonies are not considered as evidence.

The suit, filed in 2014 by the PSDB (Brazilian Social Democracy Party), accuses the ticket Dilma-Temer of abusing political and economic power in that year's campaign, but did not contain, initially, whistleblowers´ testimonies.

Translated by MARINA DELLA VALLE

Read the article in the original language