Post by account_disabled on Mar 10, 2024 5:43:09 GMT -5
Former banker Edemar Cid Ferreira was acquitted of charges of crimes against the financial system. The decision was made by the substitute judge of the th Federal Criminal Court of São Paulo, Marcelo Costenaro Cavali, who considered that the defendant could not be held responsible for alleged irregularities in the sale of capitalization bonds. In addition to Edemar, his nephew, Ricardo Ferreira de Souza e Silva, was also acquitted. The news is from the newspaper O Estado de S. Paulo .
Started in May , the Criminal Action that targeted Edemar and Ricardo was an offshoot of the investigation that, a year earlier, led the former banker to prison. According to the complaint from the Federal Public Ministry, an operational Austria Phone Numbers List agreement between Valor Capitalização, a company managed by the two, and Megainvest Empreendimentos e Participações allowed the sale of capitalization bonds in the programmed purchase modality — an option in which, at the end of the validity period, the buyer can choose to redeem the investment in cash or receive the equivalent in goods or services.
The investigation was opened based on a complaint formalized by Gervásio Rodrigues Fernandes who, attracted by a TV advertisement, purchased a capitalization bond from Valor. The agreement provided for payment of R$,, divided into installments, in exchange for the delivery of a vehicle after payment. The MPF maintained that Fernandes never received the letter of credit or the refund of the amounts disbursed.
In the complaint, the public prosecutors pointed out administrative irregularities by the companies involved, such as the fact that Valor and Megainvest had acted as financial institutions without the authorization of the Central Bank.
Another victim, Valdemir Ferreira da Silva, reportedly found out at the Private Insurance Superintendency (Susep), the body responsible for controlling and supervising the insurance market, that Megainvest charged undue fees.
According to the accusation, Valor's managers were responsible for the alleged embezzlement suffered by the buyers of capitalization bonds, as they should have monitored the work of the service provider. He also maintained that Edemar's company benefited from illegal practices. The prosecutors requested the conviction of the defendants based on articles (appropriation of values), (requiring commission) and (operating a financial institution without authorization) of Law ,/
In the sentence, the judge rejected the accusations and accepted the arguments of criminalists Fábio Tofic Simantob and Leônidas Ribeiro Scholz, defenders of Edemar and Ricardo.
Regarding the crime of operating a financial institution without authorization, Cavali wrote: "The simple fact that Valor had a contract with a company that did not have authorization for regular operation is not enough to justify the attribution of criminal liability to those legally responsible for the company." The judge also stressed that, at the time, Edemar did not hold the position of president of Valor.
The order also dismisses the accusation of embezzlement against Edemar and his nephew. "Could its (Valor) directors be criminally punished for committing an intentional crime allegedly committed by Megainvest simply because they have a brokerage contract with it?", asks Cavali, and then responds: "I believe not." The MPF has already appealed the decision.
Started in May , the Criminal Action that targeted Edemar and Ricardo was an offshoot of the investigation that, a year earlier, led the former banker to prison. According to the complaint from the Federal Public Ministry, an operational Austria Phone Numbers List agreement between Valor Capitalização, a company managed by the two, and Megainvest Empreendimentos e Participações allowed the sale of capitalization bonds in the programmed purchase modality — an option in which, at the end of the validity period, the buyer can choose to redeem the investment in cash or receive the equivalent in goods or services.
The investigation was opened based on a complaint formalized by Gervásio Rodrigues Fernandes who, attracted by a TV advertisement, purchased a capitalization bond from Valor. The agreement provided for payment of R$,, divided into installments, in exchange for the delivery of a vehicle after payment. The MPF maintained that Fernandes never received the letter of credit or the refund of the amounts disbursed.
In the complaint, the public prosecutors pointed out administrative irregularities by the companies involved, such as the fact that Valor and Megainvest had acted as financial institutions without the authorization of the Central Bank.
Another victim, Valdemir Ferreira da Silva, reportedly found out at the Private Insurance Superintendency (Susep), the body responsible for controlling and supervising the insurance market, that Megainvest charged undue fees.
According to the accusation, Valor's managers were responsible for the alleged embezzlement suffered by the buyers of capitalization bonds, as they should have monitored the work of the service provider. He also maintained that Edemar's company benefited from illegal practices. The prosecutors requested the conviction of the defendants based on articles (appropriation of values), (requiring commission) and (operating a financial institution without authorization) of Law ,/
In the sentence, the judge rejected the accusations and accepted the arguments of criminalists Fábio Tofic Simantob and Leônidas Ribeiro Scholz, defenders of Edemar and Ricardo.
Regarding the crime of operating a financial institution without authorization, Cavali wrote: "The simple fact that Valor had a contract with a company that did not have authorization for regular operation is not enough to justify the attribution of criminal liability to those legally responsible for the company." The judge also stressed that, at the time, Edemar did not hold the position of president of Valor.
The order also dismisses the accusation of embezzlement against Edemar and his nephew. "Could its (Valor) directors be criminally punished for committing an intentional crime allegedly committed by Megainvest simply because they have a brokerage contract with it?", asks Cavali, and then responds: "I believe not." The MPF has already appealed the decision.