The Chamber of Deputies rejected the loss of mandate of deputy Carla Zambelli (PL-SP). There were 227 votes in favor of losing the mandate and 110 against, with 10 abstentions.
To approve the loss of mandate, 257 votes would be needed. As a result, the Board of Directors’ representation against the deputy will be archived.
Carla Zambelli was definitively sentenced by the Federal Supreme Court (STF) to ten years in prison for participating in the invasion of the National Justice Council (CNJ) systems. She is imprisoned in Italy after fleeing Brazil as a result of the STF case becoming final. The Supreme Court awaits extradition.
CCJ opinion
The Chamber’s Constitution, Justice and Citizenship Committee (CCJ) approved this Wednesday (10) an opinion by deputy Claudio Cajado (PP-BA) that recommended the loss of the parliamentarian’s mandate due to the absolute factual incompatibility of incarceration in a closed regime with the exercise of the mandate.
“How can someone exercise the mandate while incarcerated in a closed regime? The mandate requires presence, attending the plenary and participating in committees,” he said.
Cajado cited STF jurisprudence, based on the judgment of a criminal case against then-deputy Nelson Meurer in 2018.
The representation against Carla Zambelli was presented by the Board of Directors due to a statement from the Supreme Court, whose interpretation of the Constitution by the 1st Panel defined the Board’s declaration of loss of mandate.
However, the jurisprudence of the Chamber’s interpretation of cases involving parliamentarians who have been definitively convicted supports the committee’s analysis.
False documents
The 1st Panel of the STF also sentenced Zambelli to a fine and compensation of R$2 million for having participated as an “instigator” in the systems invasions by Walter Delgatti Neto and Thiago Eliezer, arrested as part of Operation Spoofing.
According to the Public Ministry, at the beginning of January 2023, there were 13 invasions of the CNJ systems to insert 16 false documents, such as arrest warrants, release permits and a court order to block bank assets, in addition to an arrest warrant against Minister Alexandre Moraes, of the STF, issued by himself.
Winning opinion
The initial report on the case against Zambelli was made by deputy Diego Garcia (Republicanos-PR), who recommended maintaining the mandate, but the CCJ rejected it.
Garcia had argued that there was no evidence of the deputy’s direct participation in the authorship of the crimes and that the records would demonstrate weaknesses in circumstantial evidence. He was also based on the testimony of the deputy’s witness, expert Anderson de Jesus Anchieta Carvalho, who outlined a profile of Delgatti’s compulsion to lie (mythomaniac).
Defense
Zambelli’s lawyer, Fábio Pagnozzi, criticized the “fragility” of the evidence that incriminates the deputy and highlighted that the conviction was based on the questionable testimony of Walter Delgatti, for having altered his own testimony six times, according to expertise hired by the defense.
“All the deputy wants most is for her not to be impeached, so she can have dignity where she is imprisoned. Only by showing the Italian courts that her peers did not impeach her will she have a chance to be free,” he said.
According to Pagnozzi, Zambelli commented that he would resign if his mandate was maintained so as not to upset the other deputies. “Carla Zambelli just wants dignity.”
Carla Zambelli was heard by the CCJ in September, via video conference
Representative Diego Garcia, rapporteur of an expired opinion at the CCJ, said that he produced a technical report, which was not approved because there was a change of committee members before the vote.
According to him, there is no evidence against the deputy in the court records.
“Everything that the prosecution claims is in the police report is not there. A left-wing deputy [que também acessou os autos] He told me he couldn’t go against the vote because I was telling the truth”, he declared.
For deputy Jandira Feghali (PCdoB-RJ), deputy leader of the government, the judicial decision for the loss of mandate should have been put into practice through an administrative decision by the Chamber, and not be taken to the plenary for analysis. “If it weren’t for a congresswoman already convicted, there would be no point in this debate. There isn’t anymore, she’s in prison,” he said.
The leader of the PL, deputy Sóstenes Cavalcante (RJ), defended that the plenary did not analyze Zambelli’s impeachment considering that, in one week, the Board of Directors could declare her loss of mandate due to her having missed more than a third of the Chamber’s sessions this year, exceeding the limit of absences allowed by the Constitution.
“We will respect the deputy’s mandate and, in a week’s time, let the Board resolve this matter and not bring this problem to all of us deputies”, he stated. Representative Júlio Lopes, based on the opinion of Chamber technicians, stated that Zambelli would only reach this total number of absences at the end of February 2026.
However, the Minority leader, Representative Chris Tonietto (PL-RJ), highlighted that it is up to the Chamber to decide whether to lose the mandate or not. According to her, revocation would perpetuate injustice against Zambelli.
*With information from Agência Câmara.
