Former Rio de Janeiro governor Anthony Garotinho suffered a defeat in the Supreme Federal Court (STF) when he tried to keep offensive videos and posts against lawyer Juliana Bonazza, from Cabo Frio, in the Lakes Region, online on his social media. Minister Alexandre de Moraes denied the appeal filed by the former governor and upheld the decision of the Rio de Janeiro court that ordered the removal of the posts.
In his decision, Moraes reinforced the understanding that freedom of expression does not protect personal attacks and accusations without evidence on social media.
"The full constitutional protection of the expression of opinion (positive aspect) does not mean the impossibility of subsequent analysis and accountability for any injurious, defamatory, or false information, and in relation to any material and moral damages, since the rights to honor, privacy, private life, and one's own image form the constitutional protection of the dignity of the human person, safeguarding an intimate space that cannot be transgressed by illicit external intrusions," the minister wrote.
Garotinho was attempting to overturn an order issued by the 3rd Civil Court of Cabo Frio against publications made by the former governor regarding a real estate transaction in Arraial do Cabo related to a plot of land owned by the company Álcalis, valued at approximately R$ 13 million.
In his posts, Garotinho linked the lawyer and other people connected to the business to alleged crimes, including money laundering, even without pointing to any formal investigation or ongoing legal proceedings. In some videos and texts published on social media, he used the derogatory term "Dr. Mutreta" to refer to the lawyer.
When analyzing the complaint filed by the former governor with the Supreme Federal Court (STF), Alexandre de Moraes rejected the argument that the Rio de Janeiro court's decision constituted "prior censorship." According to the minister, the Judiciary only acted in response to possible abuses in the use of freedom of expression.
"The court in question did not impose any restriction on the plaintiff that would violate the protection of freedom of expression in its negative aspect, that is, it did not establish prior censorship," the minister wrote in another part of the decision.
The minister also highlighted that the Constitution guarantees freedom of expression, but also protects the honor, image, and dignity of individuals. He believes that excesses committed in publications can be reviewed by the Judiciary.
"Any abuses that may occur in the improper exercise of freedom of expression are subject to examination and assessment by the Judiciary," the magistrate stated.
The Supreme Court's decision fully upheld the order from the Cabo Frio court, which mandated the removal of the posts and prohibited new publications by Garotinho of a vexatious nature involving Juliana Bonazza.
According to the judge responsible for the case in Rio, Garotinho went beyond the limits of criticism by linking the lawyer's name "to the practice of acts that, in theory, would constitute serious crimes, notably money laundering," without presenting evidence or indicating official investigations.
Another passage cited by the Supreme Federal Court (STF) deals with the use of the expression "Dr. Mutreta," pointed out as a sign of possible intent to offend. According to the decision, the nickname reveals "indications of animus injuriandi," a legal expression used to indicate intent to insult.
Alexandre de Moraes also emphasized that the court decision did not completely prevent Garotinho from mentioning the lawyer, but required "restraint, responsibility, and abstention regarding statements of a vexatious nature."
In dismissing the complaint, the minister concluded that there was no violation of the Supreme Court's understanding regarding freedom of the press and prior censorship. According to Moraes, the case involves possible abuse in the use of social media, a situation that allows for civil and even criminal liability.
The decision was handed down in Claim 94.237 and adds to the series of legal defeats faced by Anthony Garotinho in the higher courts.
The attacks on the lawyer have already led the OABRJ (Brazilian Bar Association of Rio de Janeiro) to file a request to also intervene as a party in civil and criminal proceedings brought against the owner of a blog accused of harassing and threatening Juliana Bonazza. The OABRJ's decision was made at a meeting held this Monday, April 13th, at the Sectional headquarters, with the aim of ensuring a fair trial and the effective investigation of the facts.
The president of the local chapter, Ana Tereza Basilio, emphasized that it is unacceptable for a woman to suffer death threats or any other form of violence.
Leave a comment