Defense in coup plot trial challenges Moraes’ role

On Tuesday (2), during the opening session, some arguments reflected resignation, and others were even laudatory. Demóstenes Torres, attorney for Admiral Almir Garnier, spent 12 minutes praising all the justices. Cezar Bitencourt, who represents Mauro Cid, joked that Justice Luiz Fux was “friendly” and “attractive,” like “everyone from Rio de Janeiro.”

The tone shifted sharply on Wednesday. The first to speak was Matheus Milanez, who represents General Augusto Heleno, former head of the Institutional Security Office (GSI). He focused on two main points. First, he argued that Justice Moraes’ conduct blurred the line between judge and prosecutor, overlapping with the role of the Attorney General’s Office, which is responsible for the charges.

To illustrate, Mr. Milanez pointed out the number of questions asked during interrogations in June: while Moraes posed 302 questions, prosecutors asked only 59. “Why didn’t the Prosecutor’s Office do this? What is the role of the judge? Is he a judge or an inquisitor? A judge can never become the protagonist of the case,” he said.

He also complained about the lack of clarity and the sheer volume of evidence files provided by the Federal Police, which, he argued, were impossible to review within the time given. Mr. Milanez further claimed that Mr. Heleno had distanced himself from Mr. Bolsonaro toward the end of his presidency, particularly over the growing influence of the center-right bloc in government.

Next was Celso Vilardi, Mr. Bolsonaro’s lawyer. He claimed a denial of due process, stating he still lacked full access to the case files. “In 34 years of practice, this is the first time I’ve stood here to humbly admit: I do not know this case in its entirety. Thousands of documents have been seized through various operations,” he said.

Mr. Vilardi argued there was no evidence tying Bolsonaro to coup plans or to the monitoring and targeting of officials, including Justice Moraes. “Bolsonaro has absolutely nothing to do with the Green and Yellow Dagger operation or with January 8. Not a single email, communication, or person connects him to those events,” he said.

Another of Mr. Bolsonaro’s lawyers, Paulo Cunha Bueno, questioned the legal basis of the charges, namely attempted coup d’état—a crime that replaced provisions of the defunct National Security Law and was signed into law during Mr. Bolsonaro’s presidency. “When you have such a vague statute, in moments of political instability, it risks being turned into a weapon,” he argued.

Andrew Fernandes, attorney for former Defense Minister Paulo Sérgio Nogueira, said his client had no part in the coup attempt and, on the contrary, had sought to dissuade Mr. Bolsonaro from “extreme measures.” Justice Cármen Lúcia pressed him to clarify what those measures were. “Any form of exception,” he replied. Mr. Fernandes’ speech drew laughs at points, as he quoted Brazilian poets and writers Gonçalves Dias, Fernando Pessoa, Belchior, José de Alencar—and even his mother-in-law. Justices Moraes and Flávio Dino joined in the banter. At one point, Mr. Fernandes’ phone rang, prompting Justice Dino to quip: “It’s your mother-in-law calling.”

Closing the day, José Luís de Oliveira Lima, attorney for General Walter Braga Netto, also alleged denial of due process, citing the ban on recording his client’s confrontation with Mauro Cid and the unmanageable evidence load. He argued that the prosecution relied too heavily on Mr. Cid’s plea deal. “It is a narrative built by the Federal Police and embraced by prosecutors,” he said.

The trial will resume on Tuesday (9), with Justice Moraes expected to cast his vote on whether to convict or acquit the defendants. Further sessions are scheduled for September 10 and 12 if needed. Convictions are considered likely.

The defendants at the core of the case face charges of armed criminal conspiracy, attempted coup d’état, violent abolition of the democratic state, aggravated damage to federal property, and destruction of protected heritage.