The Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, Minister Dias Toffoli, denied the request to reconsider a decision that requested information from the IRS and the former Coaf, the current Financial Intelligence Unit (FIU). According to Toffoli, contrary to what was reported, the Supreme did not have access to intelligence reports. In addition to denying the request, the minister asked the FIU for further clarification.
According to press reports, Toffoli reportedly had access to more than 600,000 reports. In view of this, the Attorney General of the Republic, Augusto Aras, called for reconsideration. According to him, Toffoli's subpoena could threaten the financial intelligence system, as the action calls for confidential documents without pointing to specific needs or names, just to get to know the methodology employed by the Financial Intelligence Unit (FIU).
For Toffoli, the request is misplaced. According to him, the requested documents have already been made available, in the form of tax representations for criminal purposes (RFFP), to the entire justice system. "In doing so, therefore, by providing this information to the court, the IRS has shown transparency in communicating the addressees of its actions, which would hardly characterize a disproportionate and invasive measure."
Regarding the information provided by the FIU, Toffoli reported that the agency only informed how its activities are and that access to reports, without exception, depends on prior registration of the competent authorities. According to the minister, the Supreme did not register or had access to reports.
"It should not be overlooked that this process, precisely because it contains sensitive information that enjoys constitutional protection, is subject to the secrecy clause, and therefore there is no need to consider the existence of any invasive measure by part of the Supreme Court, the largest judicial authority in the country, "he added.
Finally, Toffoli made further requests to the FIU, arguing that so far it is not clear in the process information about the recipients of the reports disseminated to the appropriate authorities.
That is why it asked the FIU to inform, among other things, which institutions and agents were registered, how many reports were made official and how many were requested and by which agents.
The minister also requested that the MPF itself voluntarily report how many and which members of the MPF (with their positions and functions) are registered in the system; how many intelligence reports were received by the MPF through a spontaneous report sent by the official FIU; and how many reports the MPF received due to its own request.
Click here to read the decision.