Mayra Pinheiro and Zoser Hardman state, in injunctions, that the decision approved by the CPI of Covid-19 is ‘illegal and arbitrary’; Secretary of Science and Technology at the Ministry also appealed
The former special advisor of the Ministry of Health Zoser Hardman Araújo, the Ministry’s Secretary of Work Management and Health Education, Mayra Pinheiro, and the current secretary of Science, Technology, Innovation and Strategic Health Inputs, Hélio Angotti Neto, filed injunctions with the Supreme Court (STF) to try to suspend the decision approved by the senators of the CPI to Covid-19 breaking telephone and telematic confidentiality. The measure provides for the inclusion of the record and the duration of all calls made and received within a period delimited by the parliamentarians, in addition to sending copies of stored content, contact list, copy of emails and access locations to the target’s account investigations.
In the request, Zoser Hardman claims that the commission’s decision is “illegal and arbitrary”, since he was not called upon to provide clarification at the CPI and is not even investigated. This, in fact, was one of the arguments used by the senators of the governing base, in the session this Thursday, 10. “The patient held the position of special advisor, as well as other special advisors, and at no time, due to regimental activities inherent to the position, would be able to practice none of the conducts that are the object of investigation”, says an excerpt of the petition. As Young Pan showed, the commission members approved the breach of confidentiality of four companies and 19 people, among them former ministers Eduardo Pazuello (Health) and Ernesto Araújo (Foreign Relations).
The defense of Mayra Pinheiro, in turn, claims that the breach of confidentiality against the Ministry of Health servant, an “illegal act”, “an abusive excess, with such intensity as to undress the petitioner” and a “violence against dignity”. “There is, in the species, an abusive excess, with such intensity as to undress the petitioner. The lechery imposed by the illegal act, including the breach of confidentiality, including their mobility and access to the world wide web, just to illustrate, combined with the long time span, starting in April 2020, reveals nothing more than a blatant violence against the dignity of the petitioner, notably due to the circumstance that no concrete facts were pointed out or declined, but only assumptions in the sense that the petitioner, by exercising the reported position in the Federal Government, would have participated in ‘meetings and decisions’ ”, states the writ of mandamus.