Judge’s family members, lawyers try to cheat court system to direct petitions

Paula Litaiff – Cenarium Magazine

MANAUS – In an attempt to circumvent the judicial system to direct petitions of unconnected subjects, the office Figliuolo, Gentil, Tavares & Brandão Advogados Associados, based in Manaus (AM), forwarded five processes, in less than 30 days, to the same place, the 15th Court of the Special Civil Court. Judge Socorro Menezes discovered the maneuver and determined the redistribution.

The office has among its partners the lawyers – with recent registrations in the Brazilian Bar Association, Amazonas sectional (OAB/AM) – Ayrton de Sena Gentil Neto and Alcemir Pessoa Figliuolo Neto, respectively son and grandson of judges of the Court of Amazonas (TJAM). Sought, the office did not comment on the matter. 

The lawsuits filed by Figliuolo, Gentil, Tavares & Brandão Advogados Associados have the objective of removing articles from CENARIUM MAGAZINE related to the management of public resources and based on documents and verified information. The first lawsuit was filed at the 15th Special Court on March 17, 2022.

Six days later, the firm filed four more lawsuits with different issues, using the same allegation about the use of “Image Rights“, filed on March 23, March 28, and March 30 of this year. 

Judge Socorro Menezes dispatched the first action and, after noting the firm’s attempt to ensnare the system of TJAM with four more processes for the same Civil Court, the magistrate stopped the maneuver.

“… the analysis of the records in question, it appears that there is no connection between the actions, since the parties, claim or cause of action are different, and unfounded suspicion of repetition of action indicated by SAJ / PG5, so that the distribution by dependency applied to the present records do not fit any of the assumptions listed in art. 286 of the CPC,” concludes the judge.  

According to the Code of Civil Procedure (CPC), the procedural distribution must be electronic, alternated and random, obeying strict equality (Article 285). “It is clear the attempt of the office in trying to direct the petitions to the same court, an act subject to disciplinary representation,” state legal experts consulted by CENARIUM.

Denunciation to OAB/AM

Based on lawyers’ analysis and information obtained from the OAB in Amazonas, CENARIUM MAGAZINE will file a disciplinary representation against Ayrton de Sena Gentil Neto and Alcemir Pessoa Figliuolo Neto, relatives of magistrates in Amazonas.

The report tried to hear officially from the office, as provided by the Journalists’ Code of Ethics, but the company did not respond. Read below the questions sent to Figliuolo, Gentil, Tavares & Brandão Advogados Associados, which were not answered:

Dear Sirs,

We are investigating a journalistic material regarding the law firm. Here are the questions below:

1) How does the law firm evaluate the directing of petitions to specific courts if the rule in the Judiciary is electronic distribution?

2) What is the intention of the lawyers in the legal procedures directed to specific courts?

3) Does the firm use this practice – directing petitions to specific courts – as a routine in its work?

4) Does the fact that partners of the firm are related to magistrates at the TJAM influence the course of proceedings?

Judicial harassment

The filing of five lawsuits against CENARIUM MAGAZINE, within a period of 19 days, may incur in “judicial harassment”, according to the Brazilian Association of Investigative Journalists (Abraji), to which professionals of CENARIUM are associated.

According to Abraji, judicial harassment is the use of the judiciary as a form of persecution and intimidation, especially against human rights defenders. 

The Brazilian courts define procedural harassment as an abuse of access to justice by filing several lawsuits about the same fact or against the same person, with the intention of harming that person. 

It has been observed that these practices have been applied against journalists as an affront to the fundamental right of freedom of speech and of the press.

The strategy represents a disadvantage for the defendants, who are usually journalists sued as individuals, leaving out the vehicles in which the report was published.

These massively distributed actions make it impossible to exercise the right of defense of the defendant.