shahadat119
Trochê muzykuj±cy
Do³±czy³: 09 Mar 2024
Posty: 1
|
|
 "Former president of Embratur only fulfilled his role&q |
 |
Lawyer David Rechulski , who defends Mario Moysés, former president of Embratur, arrested in Operation Voucher, by the Federal Police, refuted all accusations against his client. Operation Voucher investigates the embezzlement of funds by employees and members of the Ministry of Tourism's leadership, as well as private entities that have signed agreements with the body. Mário Moyses is identified as the mastermind of the millionaire embezzlements for having signed the agreement with Ibrasi.
In an interview with Consultor Jurídica magazine , the lawyer stated that it is not up to the executive secretary to review, individually, the activities and information provided by each of his employees. "In this specific case, the signing of agreements, as well as other documents and certain contracts, was a legal attribution inherent to the role of executive secretary, and the agreement with Ibrasi was only signed after numerous departments had expressed their favor, all before the affixing a simple signature that formalized the instrument”, he argues.
Rechulski states that it is not possible to attribute an error to his BTC Number Data client because he believes in the good faith of his team. After all, “it is not possible to manage a ministry alone”. According to him, his client was just fulfilling one of his obligations: signing agreements. “Moysés had among his functional duties to sign agreements and contracts. The agreement he signed and which is the target of the operation was preceded by a specific parliamentary amendment. Parliamentary amendment is law and must be complied with”, he explains.
According to Rechulski, Moysés' procedure is provided for in Ordinance , dated December , , published in the Official Gazette of December , At the time, the executive secretary of the Ministry of Tourism was delegated authority to carry out numerous acts management, including “signing agreements with municipalities and non-profit entities”.
The lawyer also states that there is no evidence against his client, such as telephone recordings, images, witnesses or breach of banking and tax secrecy. “All that is against him is his simple signature on the agreement and this does not constitute a crime and does not demonstrate, in itself, any intent or knowledge of what would happen in the future with that institution”.
He commented on the risk of the investigation being nullified due to irregularities committed by the Federal Police during the execution of the arrest warrants, such as the use of handcuffs and the publication of photos of those involved shirtless, in the process of photographic identification. Rechulski does not believe in the real possibility that the investigation will be considered invalid. Reason: the arbitrariness observed is not directly related to the production of evidence, but only to the image and dignity of those being investigated, which, although serious, does not mix with procedural acts of evidence production.
_________________
BTC Number Data |
|
