Former presidential advisor Filipe Martins asked Minister Alexandre de Moraes, of the Federal Supreme Court (STF), to reconsider the dismissal of the two lawyers defending him in one of the criminal actions in the coup plot. 
In a letter written by himself, Martins says that the removal of lawyers Jeffrey Chiquini da Costa and Ricardo Scheiffer Fernandes from the case is abusive and violates his constitutional rights.
“The dismissal of my lawyers, carried out without my hearing and without prior opposition, is abusive and directly violates my inalienable rights, in particular the right to freely choose the defender of my trust”, wrote Martins.
Former advisor for International Affairs to former president Jair Bolsonaro, Martins is a defendant in core 2 of the coup plot, a group that was accused by the Attorney General’s Office (PGR) of having performed “action management” for the coup.
“I declare, for all legal purposes, that I did not authorize, did not request and do not consent to the DPU or any legal defender representing me or carrying out any act of defense in this process”, he added in the petition sent to Moraes.
Martins asks that the right to continue to be represented by his trusted lawyers be guaranteed and that, as a last resort, at least 24 hours be given for the final arguments to be presented by the defenders.
>> Follow the channel Brazil Agency on WhatsApp
Term
Moraes dismissed the lawyers for not presenting final arguments in the case. For the minister, the behavior was “unusual” and represents a “procrastinatory maneuver”, that is, an attempt to postpone the trial as long as possible.
“The behavior of the defendants’ defenses is absolutely unusual, including bad faith litigation, due to the admission of the intention to procrastinate the case, without any legal provision,” said Moraes.
With the decision, the minister determined that the defense of the defendants will be carried out by the Federal Public Defender’s Office (DPU).
For Moraes, the deadline for final arguments ended on October 7, but Martin’s lawyers argue that the PGR added new documents and evidence to the process, which would result in the right to an increase in the deadline. The argument, however, was not accepted by the minister-rapporteur.
Martins argues that there was no abandonment of the case by the lawyers, “but rather legitimate technical action, aimed at preserving the adversarial process and parity of arms”.
