In a society outworn by corruption, the popular support to the operation was so huge, it gained its own status, a personality comprehending in one individual the figure of the Federal Police, of the Federal Public Ministry and that of the federal judge.

The few defeats suffered by the taskforce of the Federal Public Ministry, the resources provided against decisions of the then federal judge Sergio Moro and, more recently, the scandal of the disclosure of the messages exchanged among them — accusation and judge — are exposed as attacks against “Car Wash” as an “institution”. “What hurts ‘Car Wash’ hurts Brazil”, said and say those obstinate, incapable of acknowledging their own fallibility.

When questioned about the messages attributed to Moro and to prosecutors, the “Car Wash” reporting judge in the Supreme Federal Court, minister Luiz Edson Fachin, demonstrating an ideological alignment with Curitiba, stated to the press that such “conjunctural circumstance” shall not harm the progress of the proceedings related to the operation. He also stated that he is entirely confident that there shall be no “going back”, to the extent “Car Wash” resulted in “a new normative, legal and also of ethical nature standard in Brazil and to public administration “[1].

Well then.

Since, by virtue of the principle of legality, inscribed in Article No. 5, subparagraph XXXIX, of the Federal Constitution, only the law in its strict sense, i.e., normative species produced in a democratic manner by the Legislative Power, may provide and eventually change the criminal and criminal procedural laws, the “new standard” referred to by the eminent minister can only, then, be bound to the ethical field. This is not a small issue.

Let us see some practical examples:

From this “new normative standard”, one concludes that it would not matter how one would obtain proof, whether legitimately or illegitimately, but what really matters is the result (the good use to be made of the proof for the common good). This utilitarian ethics explained by the Federal Judge himself, currently Minister of Justice, Sergio Moro, to journalist Pedro Bial, due to the disclosure of the audio of the telephone conversation illegally intercepted between Dilma and Lula: “The problem there was not the capturing of the dialogue and the disclosure of the dialogue, the problem was the dialogue itself, the content of the dialogue, that was an action intended to circumvent Justice, and that was the point”[2].

Profiled, prosecutor of the Republic Deltan Dallagnol sponsored a broad campaign in favor of the legislative packaged called “ten measures against corruption”, with what he unconditionally supported the use of evidences obtained illicitly, provided that in good Faith, to fulfill the public interest.

From this “new normative standard” also comes the understanding that the most varied actions may give rise to obstruction of Justice. Your excellence, the former Judge, current Minister of Justice, denied the freedom request and grounded a preventive prison required by the Attorneyship of the Republic, because the press disclosed, at the time, “that emissaries of the contractors and of those accused… have been in meetings with the Minister of Justice to deal with Operation Car Wash and the preventive prisons” — which, in his understanding, would be “intolerable… total deviation of the due legal process… with risk to the integrity of Justice and application of criminal law”[3].

Still, the “new normative standard” imposes to each and every individual who may be investigated to refrain from destroying documents and/or deleting messages and e-mails, since it characterizes a destruction of evidence and gives rise to preventive prison. Let us see what the federal judge said upon decreeing the preventive prison of a well-known publicist: “The conduct taken by João Santana, of, in a summary cognition, promoting the elimination of electronic files, i.e., destroying evidence, indicates risk to the investigation or to the instruction if he is released.”

We cannot forget, finally, the creative names given to the phases of operation “car wash”, which also compose the narrative that it seeks to clean up the country. Among which, one should remember the one attributed to the 14th phase: Operation erga omnes. Effectively, upon attributing such epithet, one sought to show the public opinion that nobody is above the law. Restriction to the liberty of specific individuals, with no formed blame, for instance, and beyond the hypotheses provided for in Article No. 312 of the Criminal Procedure Code.

Finally, it is imperative such as those that comprise the so-called “new normative standard” instituted by “Car Wash”, which effects should be opposed erga omnes.

By the answers presented up to now, dear reader, in case of the conducts revealed by the messages, the rule shall not be the same. Which, understand, is not a bad thing. However, corporatism shall come into play, mortally wounding the so-called good repute of the operation.

For now, it is impossible to foresee all consequences. It is expected, however, that the rights and guarantees of those currently involved are respected. The same is expected, as a minimum dignity condition, for those prosecuted and judged in the context of the messages exposed by the media.

Advocacy, so much disrespected at times, is ready, as it, in fact, has always been, to intimately fight for the observance of the sole normative standard admitted in the Democratic State, the constitutional standard.