Defense Dilma will appeal to the Supreme CourtFormer Justice Minister José Eduardo Cardozo, will join with two actions in the Supreme Court questioning the impeachment process.
The defense of former President Dilma Rousseff said today (31) who enters with, at least, two actions in the Supreme Court (STF) questioning the impeachment process, completed today by the Senate.
According to Dilma's defense lawyer, former Justice Minister José Eduardo Cardozo, there is just cause for impeachment and was defense retrenchment in various stages of the process.
"We will, in principle, with two actions, and still another one within a few days. We will discuss the formal process irregularities, curtailing the right of defense, because senators have dismissed the case before the defense can express themselves ", Cardozo explained.
According to him, during the special committee, for example, several senators claimed that the defense could "do whatever he wanted" the result was already set. "This is a substantive offense to becoming the legal process".
The defender of President quashed added that there is no legal reason for impeachment. "We will also question the lack of just cause for the process, lack of motive. I know there are judges who start from a more traditional view that it can not review a process of impeachment, a vision, At my point of view, old. We have a more modern view ", scored.
to Cardozo, the idea that impeachment can not be questioned endangers, inclusive, Ministers of the Supreme Court and the Attorney General of the Republic. "If we can not review the impeachment, tomorrow or after Federal Supreme Court, Attorney General of the Republic may be removed without legal assumption. It is not the political merits of the question that we ask, we question the lack of legal presumptions established in the Constitution ".
For the former Minister of Justice, today represents a "sad day for democracy". "It's a sad day for democracy in Brazil where a legitimately elected president cleared of a charge with no foundation and no constitutional assumption, including lack of assumptions of due process ".