‎Brazil News

 

Fernando Paes obtained a writ of habeas corpus in the STJ to annul the judgment, and the case will be reanalyzed by the TJ/PR.

From the Editors

 

Tuesday, July 9, 2024

 

Updated at 12:13

 

To share

 

 

 

 a gown mandatory for oral arguments held in a virtual format? According to STJ Minister Daniela Teixeira, no. For her, a suit is clearly sufficient for holding a hearing or oral arguments when held in a virtual format.

 

The minister ruled on the habeas corpus of lawyer Fernando Paes, who was prevented from making oral arguments remotely during a session of the 4th Criminal Chamber of the TJ/PR, in April of this year.

 

The lawyer said he felt humiliated.

 

Watch:

 

 

 

Daniela Teixeira, who graduated in law, highlighted that it is the lawyer's right to present a defense to ensure the client's full defense, and annulled the judgment.

 

The lawyer told that he does not usually argue in appeals, but that this was a peculiar case, and he considered the judge's attitude outdated.

 

"I felt humiliated that day. In four years of practicing law, that would be my second oral argument. I don't usually argue appeals, because I believe that oral arguments have little practical effectiveness, being necessary only in specific cases - which was my case that day. Preventing a lawyer from arguing an appeal, especially in a virtual session, because of an archaic dress code, is outdated. I was happy with the annulment of the session, not because I was right in my Habeas Corpus, but because the law was respected."

 

With the minister's decision, the case must now receive a new trial in the Paraná Court.

 

Case : HC 909.274

Clothing

 

During the pandemic, in 2021, Minister Reynaldo da Fonseca, of the STJ, explained that the Court was adapting to the telepresence model, and waived the use of a gown or gown at this time, but maintained the requirement of "attire appropriate to the solemnity of the trials", which would be, for men, the use of a suit and tie.

 

In her decision, Minister Daniela Teixeira recalled that, from 2020 to 2022, with the return of professional activities, the use of gowns was waived so that there would be no need for lawyers to share the same clothing offered by the court.

 

She also pointed out that in 2022 the CNJ determined the rules ( resolution 465/22 ) for videoconference sessions, and described the appropriate attire for magistrates as "suit or gown". " If magistrates are authorized to be exempt from wearing gowns, why wouldn't lawyers be? ", asked the minister.

 

And the liturgy?

 

Still on the subject of clothing, it is interesting to remember that, in April 2020, during the pandemic, the then dean of the STF, Minister Marco  Mello (now retired), a staunch critic of virtual sessions, drew attention when he participated in a session of the 1st group of the Supreme Court wearing a comfortable polo shirt.

 

"When you're at home, there's no reason to wear a cape. There's nothing in the liturgy that determines that it should be like that ," the minister reportedly told  magazine when asked about his attire.

 

link: https://www.migalhas.com.br/quentes/410908/me-senti-humilhado--diz-advogado-impedido-de-sustentar-sem-beca