Instituto / Prêmio Innovare

Obtenção de provas no exterior – emissão de pedido de auxílio direto em inquérito civil do Ministério Público – substituição da carta rogatória judicial – rapidez no processamento e na resposta de autoridades internacionais – possibilidade de propositura de ações civis no Brasil para recuperar ativos desviados dos cofres públicos e outros fins rapidamente

Inúmeros casos de desvios de recursos públicos revelados no Estado de São Paulo e em outras unidades da Federação nos últimos anos mostraram que os sistemas de fiscalização da administração estatal brasileira não funcionam a contento. Como se isso não bastasse, em algumas situações concretas foi constatada a remessa de valores desviados do erário para outros países e territórios, muitos deles considerados “paraísos fiscais”, que, para manterem os depósitos de origem lícita ou ilícita, dificultam o levantamento do segredo bancário. O Ministério Público e alguns órgãos do Poder Executivo, especialmente o Departamento de Recuperação de Ativos e Cooperação Internacional do Ministério da Justiça (DRCI) e a Polícia, têm se esforçado para obterem documentos estrangeiros que possam levar à propositura de ações penais e civis visando a aplicação de cominações diversas, notadamente a prisão dos envolvidos e a devolução das quantias subtraídas. A partir de 2001, Promotores e Procuradores passaram a emitir e enviar aos Estados Unidos da América, por intermédio do Ministério da Justiça, pedidos de assistência legal ("request for assistance") na área criminal, acarretando a aceleração de algumas investigações. Contudo, no âmbito civil não havia instrumentos legais céleres com vistas à obtenção desses documentos internacionais, necessários à recuperação dos ativos desviados dos cofres públicos. Por isso, o subscritor passou a emitir pedidos de auxílio direto em inquéritos civis, com base no art. 43 da Convenção da Organização das Nações Unidas, cujo texto é o seguinte: “Artigo 43 - Cooperação internacional 1. Os Estados Partes cooperarão em assuntos penais, conforme o disposto nos Artigos 44 a 50 da presente Convenção. Quando proceda e estiver em consonância com seu ordenamento jurídico interno, os Estados Partes considerarão a possibilidade de prestar-se assistência nas investigações e procedimentos correspondentes a questões civis e administrativas relacionadas com a corrupção [...]”. É certo que o inquérito civil, previsto na Lei n. 7.347/1985, se destina a obtenção de elementos para a propositura de ações civis públicas relativas a questões ambientais, consumeristas, habitação e urbanismo, patrimônio público e outros direitos difusos e coletivos. Com o pedido de auxílio direto, não há necessidade de movimentar o Poder Judiciário na fase da obtenção de documentos internacionais e de outras provas, que podem servir para futura ação. Os primeiros pedidos de auxílio direto, emitidos em inquéritos civis da Promotoria de Justiça do Patrimônio Público e Social daCapital paulista em 2008, com base na referida convenção e em outras normas, foram enviados pelo subscritor para o Reino Unido da Grã-Bretanha e aos Estados Unidos. O pedido enviado ao Reino Unido foi atendido em cerca de um mês, considerada a data da saída do ofício do DRCI Brasil (modelo anexo, sem os nomes dos investigados). Em suma, foi autorizado pelo Home Office inglês o compartilhamento de milhares de cópias de documentos relativos à movimentação financeira de um ex-prefeito da capital paulista e de seus familiares. Em razão da utilização desses documentos, poderá ser obtida a repatriação de, pelo menos, US$ 90.000.000,00 desviados dos cofres do Município de São Paulo. O pedido enviado aos Estados Unidos pelo subscritor foi atendido em cerca de 5 (cinco) meses. Igualmente foi autorizada a utilização de documentos relacionados bancários, os quais constam de uma investigação existente em face de um Conselheiro do Tribunal de Contas do Estado de São Paulo. O Superior Tribunal de Justiça, inclusive, considerou idôneo o pedido referido (Reclamação 2.723, Rel. Ministra. Laurita Vaz, j. 15/10/2008). Em geral, uma carta rogatória pode demorar alguns anos para ser respondida. É certo, contudo, que os autos do inquérito civil relativo ao segundo caso encontram-se atualmente na Procuradoria Geral de Justiça de São Paulo, considerando que o investigado tornou-se presidente do Tribunal de Contas do Estado. Saliente-se que, pelo texto do art. 43 da Convenção da ONU contra a Corrupção (conhecida como Convenção de Mérida), em vigor no Brasil por força do Decreto n. 5.687/2006, o pedido de auxílio direto pode ser emitido não o Ministério Público, mas também pela Administração Pública municipal, estadual ou federal, nos autos de processo administrativo que visa apurar corrupção de agentes públicos. Para que o pedido de auxílio direto seja emitido e enviado pelo Promotor ou Procurador, necessário se faz instaurar o regular inquérito civil, em estrita obediência ao disposto na Lei 7.347/1985 e Resolução 23-2007 do Conselho Nacional do Ministério Público. Evidentemente não devem ser aceitas com válidas provas recolhidas no exterior por órgão do Ministério Público ou da Administração Pública que não tenha atribuições legais para o caso concreto. Por outro lado, apenas podem ser expedidos tais pedidos (ativos) para os países que ratificaram a Convenção de Mérida. O Brasil, por sua vez, também deverá atender aos pedidos internacionais (passivos). Ademais, deve ser mantido o sigilo dos documentos e aberta a oportunidade para que os investigados se manifestem sobre as apurações, no momento oportuno.

A prática encontra-se em efetivo funcionamento desde 2008, quando também foram obtidos os primeiros resultados junto ao Home Office (órgão equivalente ao Ministério da Justiça) à Grã-Bretanha.

Com o "pedido de auxílio direto" emitido diretamente no inquérito civil, não é necessário propor um pedido judicial, para obter uma medida liminar ou sentença visando a expedição de carta rogatória, cujo processamento é extremamente demorado. Ademais, não é movimentado o Poder Judiciário, gerando economia de recursos.

A principal inovação consistiu em utilizar efetivamente a Convenção das Nações Unidas contra a Corrupção em casos concretos, propiciando a celeridade na instrução de inquéritos civis. Com essa prática, poderão ser obtidos documentos internacionais e propostas as ações respectivas no Brasil com rapidez.

A implementação prática decorreu da formulação de um pedido nos autos do inquérito civil,conforme modelo inicial concebido pelo Ministério da Justiça (DRCI) para inquéritos policiais e processos-crime. Na adptação do modelo, foram utilizadas as normas legais relacionadas à recuperação de ativos, sobretudo aquelas da Lei de Improbidade Administrativa (n. 8.429/1992) e da Convenção de Mérida.

As principais dificuldades encontradas ocorreram na adaptação de um pedido que era usado na área criminal para a área civil. Ademais, os pedidos de auxílio direto e os documentos respectivos devem ser enviados na língua do país requerido. O modelo abaixo (que constitui uma versão daquela efetivamente utilizada, mas sem os nomes dos investigados) demonstra que o pedido deve ser claro e detalhado:

REQUEST FOR LEGAL ASSISTANCE

1. Legal Basis: United Nations Convention Against Corruption

2. To: UK Central Authority – Home Office.

3. From: Department of Assets Recovery and International Legal Cooperation / National Secretariat of Justice / Ministry of Justice of Brazil – Central Authority

4. Requesting Authority: Prosecutor’s Office of the State of São Paulo (Rua Riachuelo n. 115, São Paulo – SP – Brazil)

5. Subject: Request for Mutual Legal Assistance with the aim of obtaining copies of documents pertaining to bank accounts related to Mr. PSM, owning to Acts of Administrative Improbity, related to the criminal activities of money laundering crimes (article 1 of Law 9.613/98) and crimes against the national financial system (articles 1 and 16 of Law 7.492/86).

6. Reference: PSM – Civil Liability Action for Acts of Administrative Improbity related to criminal activities.

7. Summary:

Civil Liability Action for acts of Administrative Improbity number 1706/053.04.028613-7

This request for mutual legal assistance pertains to Civil Liability Action for acts of Administrative Improbity (Dishonesty) number 0000000, filed before the 4th Court of Public Finances of São Paulo against PSM and others. In essence this action refers to the embezzlement of public funds and is intended to locate assets and repair the damages suffered by the city of São Paulo due to the criminal activities of Mr. M. during his term as Mayor of the city of São Paulo. This proceeding is being lead by the State Prosecutor’s Office of São Paulo.

The aim of the petition filed October 19, 2004 by the State Prosecutor’s Office of the State of São Paulo, is the recovery of the embezzled assets and the full restitution of those assets to the city of São Paulo. In addition it also aims at the application of the penalties of Law n. 8.429/92.

The facts pertaining to the abovementioned cause of action are the same as those in the related criminal proceedings (detailed below), that is, this cause of action also arises from the deviation of public funds from the Água Espraiada Avenue and Ayrton Senna Tunnel, the bribery payments to Mr. PSM and members of his staff, and the remittance of part of those assets abroad.

Additionally, as per an order by judge Renata Coelho Okida from the 4th Court of Public Finances of São Paulo, all of Mr. M’s assets and the assets of more than 34 people and companies have been temporarily frozen. This decision has been upheld by the Court of Justice of the State of São Paulo (Tribunal de Justiça do Estado de São Paulo), although eleven appeals had been filed by the defendant in 2005.

In Brazil, the Action of Civil Responsibility for Acts of Administrative Improbity applies to the cases of illicit enrichment by public officials in the exercise of their public offices, and also private agents who contribute to the perpetration of the same act, and also aims to promote the forfeiture of assets or funds obtained illicitly, as well as the compensation for the victims. It is important to point out that the acts which ground the initiation of an Action of Civil Responsibility for Acts of Administrative Improbity are also crimes described in the Brazilian Criminal Code, in the Chapter regarding the crimes against the public administration.

 Related Criminal Proceedings

A) Criminal Action 2002.61.81.006073-3

This federal criminal action before the 2nd Federal Criminal Court in the City of São Paulo (2ª Vara Criminal Federal de São Paulo), examines among other crimes, the crime of money laundering (article 1 of Law 9.613/98) originated in the alleged diversion of public funds in the construction of Água Espraiada Avenue in the city of São Paulo, during PSM´s term as Mayor of the city of São Paulo.

In 1987, during the public project for the construction of Água Espraiada Avenue, the Municipality of São Paulo, by means of the Municipal Urbanization Company (Empresa Municipal de Urbanização – EMURB), hired the private construction company MJE, which was to lead this project. The construction began that same year and was only finished in the year 2000, costing the municipal public coffers the total of R$ 796,000,000.00 (seven hundred and ninety six million reais) which was equivalent at the time to US$ 600,000,000.00 (six hundred million American dollars).

The over billing scheme of the public construction consisted mainly of the following: Água Espraiada Consortium, comprising the construction companies MJ and OAS, was hired by the state company EMURB and sub-hired dozens of smaller companies to execute and acquire raw materials for the building of the referred to Avenue. Such companies then provided the consortium with fake receipts and invoices which did not correspond to the reality of the services rendered or the raw materials acquired. The leading companies in the consortium then deposited the over billed amounts in the sub-hired companies´ accounts; such companies, in return, paid back approximately 90% of the amount received by the means of checks.

The amount returned was made available in cash as bribery for public agents (PSM and assistants) or sent to accounts abroad through dollar traders and CC5 accounts.

B) Criminal Action number 000

This federal criminal proceeding also investigates money laundering criminal activities (article 1 Law 9.613/98), related to the alleged diversion of public funds obtained from the over billing in the construction of Ayrton Senna tunnel in the city of São Paulo, built by the private company CBPO. This proceeding also investigates the crimes of passive corruption (art. 317 of the Criminal Code), misrepresentation (art. 299 of the Criminal Code), association (art. 288 of the Criminal Code) and crime of accountability for diversion of public funds (art. 1, I, of the Law-Decree 201/67).

The investigation verified that several irregularities which constitute crimes have been committed in the execution of the Ayrton Senna tunnel contract. Hence, the amount paid by the Municipality of São Paulo for the construction was over billed in at least US$ 105,000,000.00 (One hundred an five million dollars). In addition, it has been verified that the same method of diversion of public funds used by the Água Espraiada Consortium was also used by the Ayrton Senna Tunnel Consortium.

1. Facts:

The former mayor of São Paulo PSM is under investigation for corruption and money laundering in procedures related to the diversion of public funds in the construction of the Água Espraiada Avenue and the Ayrton Senna Tunnel. Mr. M. and his accomplices have been accused of receiving bribery payments, which elevated the cost of the construction to approximately three times the amount of what was effectively spent.

The Council for Financial Activities Control of Brazil – COAF, the Brazilian financial intelligence unit, the Swiss authorities, financial intelligence unit on Jersey Islands and in Luxemburg reported suspicious financial operations of the defendant or people from his family. Additionally, documents obtained by the New York County D.A.'s Office pertaining to bank accounts in New York corroborate suspicious financial activities in New York as well.

The focus of the cause of action at hand for restitution of damages to the City of São Paulo, are the large construction project involving the construction of Água Espraiada Avenue and Ayrton Senna Tunnel, in the city of São Paulo. Allegedly, Mr. M. aided in the deviation of public funds destined for that project, through the payment of briberies by construction company MJE, hired to perform the construction services.

According to the petition filed on the civil cause of action above mentioned, PSM and his advisers received around 30 to 37% of the proceeds destined for the constructions of Água Espraiada Av. and Ayrton Senna Tunnel (total cost amounted to over 1,200,000,000.00 Dollars) in the form of tips.

Evidence obtained through criminal investigations and through the testimony of Mr. SDO, an attorney who acted as the financial director of the Construction company M. J. E. (company in charge of the Água Espraiada Av. construction), indicates that in January 1998 alone, Mr. M. received tips totaling R$ 13,512,885.34 from MJE, as a result of the Água Espraiada Av. construction.

Documents obtained by the Deputy Bureau Chief of the Investigations Division Central in the New York County D.A.'s Office, Mr. Adam Kauffmann pertaining to bank accounts CH., U. R. and MAD. from the SN Bank of New York among others, corroborates the financial transactions described by Mr. SDO in his deposition, being that the payments showing in the bank statements especially those pertaining to the CH. Account are identical to those described by Mr. SDO.

Additionally, in a testimony before the Federal Police, Mr. VA the operator of the CH. account, confirmed that all the money that was transacted in the account belonged to PSM and his son FM.

Finally, a report compiled by the Federal Public Prosecutor’s Office of Brazil, shows that the accounts CH, UR and MAD. operated over US$ 160,000,000.00 (one hundred and sixty million American dollars), mostly originated from the banks CIT. and DMG on the Jersey Islands and the UBS bank in London, particularly of the accounts D. I. C. and K. F.. Accordingly, evidence indicates that PSM transferred funds from the account W. G. in Zurich, Switzerland, to the accounts D. I. at the UBS bank in London and is the holder of rights of the accounts on the Jersey Islands. The accounts maintained in the name of DUR. at UBS, in London, were managed by Mr. HK, owner of the Swiss company named ‘HBK’.

Furthermore, there is evidence of payments made by CH in favor of the offshore company FAL, whose rights are held by FM. Evidence also shows that the FAL. Company, paid credit card bills of FM, PSM and OM.

According to information collected by the Prosecutor’s Office during the investigations, PSM’s daughter-in-law, Mrs. JLCTM, undertook a lot of transactions trough the account n. 000, EHC, maintained at UBS, in London. Said transactions were carried on during the period between November 24th, 1999 and August, 24th, 2001.

The Brazilian authorities have reasons to believe that the values involved in the transactions undertaken by Mrs. JLCTM trough the account n. 111 constitute proceeds of the crimes committed against the city of São Paulo. Even though PSM´s daughter-in-law was the only director of the company EMP., the account in reference was managed by Mr. HK, who, as previously mentioned, also managed the accounts maintained in the name of DUR. at the same financial institution.

The State Prosecutor’s Office of the State of São Paulo intends to obtain a damages sentencing of US$ 446.000.000,00 (Four hundred and forty six million dollars), which represents the total amount of funds embezzled and transferred to several countries, including the United States. Additionally, as permitted under Law number 8.429/92, it aims at a sentencing that will also impose a fine worth 3 (three) times the assets embezzled.

As indicated above, the evidence in this case is overwhelming, not only concerning Mr. M´s criminal activities but also the civil aspect related to the deviation of public funds to bank accounts overseas. Without access to documentation regarding the financial transactions of Mr. M. and his family members abroad, the tracking of such funds and the eventual restitution to the city of São Paulo becomes nearly impossible.

1. Transcription of the Legal Provisions:

Legal Provisions for Acts of Administrative Improbity LAW N. 8.429, OF June 2, 1992 Of the Acts of Administrative Improbity which Cause Undue Enrichment Article 1ST The acts of improbity committed by any public agent, civil servant or not, against the direct or indirect Public Administration, foundational of any of the powers of the Federal Government, States, Federal District, Territory, enterprise incorporated into the Public property or entity that the Union had contributed or contribute to its creation or funding with fifty percent or more of the assets or the annual income, will be punished under this law. 1st Paragraph: The improbity acts committed against the assets of an entity recipient of subsidies, benefits, tax incentives or credit incentives from a public organ as well as those that the Union had contributed or contribute to its creation or funding with less than fifty percent of the assets or the annual income, limiting, in those cases, the asset sanction to illicit repercussion on public funds contribution, is also submitted to the sentencing of this law. Article 9 The act of Administrative Improbity causing undue and illicit enrichment to obtain any undue financial advantage by reason of a title, mandate, function, employment or activity in the entities mentioned in art. 1 of this law and especially:

I. to receive for oneself or another, money, real or personal property, or any direct or indirect financial advantage, by means of commission, the granting of percentage, gratification or gift from a directly or indirectly interested party, who may be harmed or benefited by an action or omission related to the duties of the public agent;

II. to receive directly or indirectly financial advantages, to facilitate the acquisitions, exchange or acquisition of reap or personal property, or the attainment of services from entities referred in art. 1 for a price superior to the market value; (...)

VI. to receive direct or indirect financial advantage of any nature, to make false declarations about measuring or evaluations in public projects or any other service, or about quantity, weight, measurement, quality or characteristics of merchandize or assets furnished to any of the entities mentioned in art. 1 of this Law;

VII. to acquire, for oneself or another, in the exercise of a public mandate, position, employment or function, assets of any nature whose value is disproportionate to its market value or the finances of the public servant;

VIII. to accept employment, commission or exercise consulting or assisting activities to juridical or physical person whose interest may be affected or beneficiated by an action or omission resulting from the public servant´s attributions, during the activity;

IX. to receive financial advantage in order to intermediate the approval of public funding or the application of public funding of any nature;

X. to receive direct or indirect financial advantage of any nature, in order to omit an official act, measure or declaration which he/she is under the obligation to sustain;

XI. to in any way incorporate to his/her personal property wealth, income or values that integrate the real and personal properties of entities listed in art. 1 of this law;

XII. to utilize, for one’s own benefit, assets, income, funding or values which integrate the income wealth of entities mentioned in article 1 of this law (...) Damages

Article 12. Independent from the criminal, civil and administrative damages specified under the law, the individual responsible for the act of improbity is subject to: I. in the hypothesis of art. 9, loss of the property or values attained illicitly, full restitution of the damages, loss of the public function, suspension for 8 to 10 years of political rights, payment of a civil fine of three times the value of the increase in personal wealth, the prohibition to enter into contracts with the Public Sector and the prohibition to receive directly or indirectly, benefits, tax or credit incentives, even when such benefit would derive from a company the defendant is a majority partner, for the period of ten years; (...)

Legal Provisions for Related Criminal Actions

LAW 9.613, OF 3 March 1998

Chapter I

CRIMES OF MONEY LAUNDERING OR CONCEALMENT OF ASSETS, RIGHTS AND VALUABLES

Article 1 To conceal or disguise the true nature, origin, location, disposition, movement, or ownership of assets, rights and valuables that result directly or indirectly from the following crimes:

I – Illicit trafficking in narcotic substances or similar drugs; II – Terrorism and its financing; (provisions set forth in Law 10.701 of 90.07.2003) III – Smuggling or trafficking in weapons, munitions or materials used for their production; IV – Extortion through kidnapping; V – Acts against the public administration, including direct or indirect demands, on behalf of oneself or others, of benefits, as a condition or price for the performance or the omission of any administrative act; VI – Acts against the national financial system; VII – Acts committed by a criminal organization; VIII – Acts committed by individuals against foreign public administration (arts. 337-B, 337-C and 337-D of the Law-Decree 2.848 of December 7th 1940 – Criminal Code). (subtitle included by Law 10.467, of 11.06.2002) Sentence: incarceration for a period of 3 (three) to 10 (ten) years and a fine.

Paragraph 1st The same punishment shall apply to anyone who, in order to conceal or disguise the use of assets, rights and valuables resulting from the crimes set forth in this article:

I. Converts them into illicit assets;

II. Acquires, receives, exchanges, trades, gives or receives as guarantee, keeps, stores, moves, or transfers any such assets, rights and valuables;

III. Imports or exports goods at prices that do not correspond to their value.

Paragraph 2nd the same penalty also applies to anyone who:

I. Through economic or financial activity, makes use of any assets, rights and valuables that she/he know are derived from the crimes to in this article;

II. Knowingly takes part in any group, association, or Office set up for the principal or secondary purpose of committing crimes referred to in this law.

Paragraph 3rd the attempts to commit any of the crimes referred to in this Law are punishable in accordance with the provisions set forth in article 14, sole paragraph, of the Criminal Code.

Paragraph 4th the sentence shall be increased by one to two-thirds, in any of the instances contemplated in items I to VI of this article when the crime follows a constant pattern or is committed by a criminal organization.

Paragraph 5th In the event that the accused or hi/her accomplice agrees to cooperate with the authorities by providing information that leads to the detection of a crime and the identification of those responsible for it, or to the discovery of assets, rights and valuables that were the object of the crime, the sentence may be reduced by one or two-thirds. The accused may also be allowed to start serving time in an open system of imprisonment. The judge may also decide whether to apply the penalty or substitute it for the restriction of rights.

Article 2 The judicial proceedings and sentencing of the crimes referred to in this Law:

I - Shall be subject to the same provisions that apply to crimes punishable by extended incarceration and that are under the jurisdiction of an order court; II – Are not dependent on the judicial proceedings and sentencing applicable to prior crimes referred to in the previous article, even if these crimes were committed abroad;

III – Shall be subject to federal court jurisdiction in the following instances: a) In the event of crimes against the financial system and the economic-financial order or detrimental to assets, services or interests of the Union or any of its autarchic entities or government companies(3); b) In the event the prior crime is subject to federal court jurisdiction.

Paragraph 1 The charge shall include sufficient indication of the existence of the prior crime. The criminal acts referred to in this Law shall be punishable even when the offender in the prior crime is unknown or exempt from punishment.

Paragraph 2 The provisions of section 366 of the Criminal Procedure Code shall not apply to the judicial process pertaining to the crimes referred to in this law.

Law 7.492. of June 16th 1986

Addresses crimes against the National Financial System and other matters

Article 1st A financial institution is considered, for the purposes of this law, the corporate entity of public law which has as its main or accessory activity, cumulative or not, the collecting, intermediation or investment of financial funds (vetoed) of third parties, in national or foreign currency, or the custody issuance, distribution, trading, intermediation or administration of securities.

Sole Paragraph – The following can be compared to a financial institution:

I. the Corporate entity which collects or administers insurance, exchange, joint venture, capitalization or any kind of savings or third-party resources;

II. the individual who performs any of the activities referred to in this article, even if in an occasional way.

Article 16 To operate a financial institution, including negotiating securities or exchange, without proper authorization, or with authorization obtained by means of false declaration:

Sentence: prison, from 1(one) to 4 (four) years and fine.

Article 22. Carry out an unauthorized foreign exchange transaction with the intention to transfer funds from the country:

Sentence: Imprisonment from 2 (two) to 6 (six) years and a fine.

Sole Paragraph. The same penalty shall apply to whoever, for any reason, promotes without legal authorization, the transfer of funds abroad, or to whomever keeps sums abroad undeclared to the federal authority.

Brazilian Criminal Code

Passive Corruption

Article 317 – Requesting or receiving on his or her own account, directly or indirectly, even where outside the function or before taking in on, but on account of it, any improper advantage, or accepting the promise of such advantage:

Sentence – incarceration from 1(one) to 8(eight) years and a fine.

§1 – the sentence shall be increased in one third if in consequence of the advantage or the promise, the official holds back or fails to execute any official action of practice and by doing so he/she breaches his official duty.

§2 – If the official acts, fails to act or holds back and official action when he gives in the request or influence of a third party, thus breaching his official duty.

Sentence – detention from 3(three) months to 1(one) year or fine.

Active Corruption Article 333 – Offer or promise undue advantage to an official in order to convince him to act, fail to act or hold back an official act: Sentence - incarceration for 1 (one) to 8 (eight) years and a fine. Sole Paragraph – the sentence shall be increased in one third if due to advantage or a promise , the official holds back or omits an official act or does and by doing so breaks his official duty. Misrepresentation

Article 299 To omit, in public or private document in which should state a declaration, or insert or have someone insert a false declaration or anything else other than what should be declared in order to damage the law, create obligation or alter the truth about a judiciously relevant issue.

Sentence – incarceration, from 1 (one) to 5 (five) years and fine in case the document is public; and, prison, from 1 (one) to 3 (three) years and fine in case the document is private. Sole paragraph – if the agent is a public official and commits the crime by taking advantage of the office, or if the falsification or alteration is of a civil registration, the sentence shall be increased by one sixth. Organized Group or Gang

Article 288 - Association of more than three people, in a group or gang, in order to perpetrate crimes:

Sentence: incarceration for a period of 1 (one) to 3 (three) years. Sole paragraph – The penalty shall be doubled if the organization or gang is armed. LAW DECREE 201, of February, 27th 1967 Addresses the responsibility of Mayors and City Councilmen and other matters Article 1st The following are crimes of responsibility of the Municipal Mayors, subject to trial by the Judiciary Branch, independently of the declaration of Civil Council:

I – to embezzle assets or public funds or divert them on one’s own behalf or a third party´s

UNITED NATIONS CONVENTION AGAINST CORRUPTION

Article 43.International cooperation 1. States Parties shall cooperate in criminal matters in accordance with articles 44 to 50 of this Convention. Where appropriate and consistent with their domestic legal system, States Parties shall consider assisting each other in investigations of and proceedings in civil and administrative matters relating to corruption.

Article 46. Mutual legal assistance

1. States Parties shall afford one another the widest measure of mutual legal assistance in investigations, prosecutions and judicial proceedings in relation to the offences covered by this Convention. Article 48. Law enforcement cooperation

2. With a view to giving effect to this Convention, States Parties shall consider entering into bilateral or multilateral agreements or arrangements on direct cooperation between their law enforcement agencies and, where such agreements or arrangements already exist, amending them. In the absence of such agreements or arrangements between the States Parties concerned, the States Parties may consider this Convention to be the basis for mutual law enforcement cooperation in respect of the offences covered by this Convention. Whenever appropriate, States Parties shall make full use of agreements or arrangements, including international or regional organizations, to enhance the cooperation between their law enforcement agencies.

3. Description of the Requested Assistance:

Based on the description above, the requesting authority requests the following:

• Bank documentation referring to the accounts maintained in the name of DIC (number 000 and 111), pertaining to the period between January 1st, 1997 and December 31st, 2001, and EHC (number 222) at UBS, located in London, pertaining to the period between January 1st, 1999 and December 31st, 2001, including but not limited to:

a) signature cards; b) bank statements; c) cancelled checks; d) deposit tickets; e) items deposited; f) credit and debit memos; g) loan applications; h) Loan ledger sheets; i) Documents (checks, debit memos, cash in tickets, wires in, etc.) reflecting the means by which loan repayments were made; j) Documents (bank checks, credit memos, cash out tickets, wires out, etc.) reflecting disbursement of the loan proceeds. k) Monthly statements; l) Payment receipts; m) Safekeeping records and logs; n) Fed Wire, CHIPS, SWIFT, or other money transfer or message documents; o) documents (checks, debit memos, cash in tickets, wires in, etc.) reflecting the source of the funds wired out; p) Documents (bank checks, credit memos, cash out tickets, wires out, etc.) reflecting the ultimate disposition within the bank of the funds wired in; q) Notes, memoranda, or other writings pertaining to the sending or receipt of wire transfers. r) All documents pertaining to current or expired safe deposit box rentals by or under the signatory authority of any of the named parties or entities including, but not limited to: contracts; s) Entry records.

1. Objective of the Request: Locate the assets diverted by PSM and his family members, which will serve as proofs to Mr. M.´s embezzlement activities and ultimately repair the damages suffered by the city of São Paulo due to the criminal activities of Mr. M. during his term as Mayor of the city of São Paulo.

2. Procedure to be Observed: It is requested CONFIDENTIALITY in the proceeding of this request for assistance and transmission of information.

São Paulo, 4th April, 2008.

SILVIO ANTONIO MARQUES State Prosecutor

Provavelmente podem ser considerados fatores do sucesso da prática: a) o estudo de textos internacionais susbcritos pelo Brasil (especialmente a Convenção da ONU contra a Corrupção), geralmente esquecidos pelo intérprete do direito; b) a adptação do modelo criminal à área civil; c) a obediência aos preceitos legais sobre o inquérito civil.

O sucesso da prática apenas foi possível graças ao trabalho do Ministério Público e do Ministério da Justiça.

Podem ser consideradas etapas da prática: a) a realização de diligências investigatórias; b) após detectar contas bancárias do investigado no exterior, deve ser elaborado o "pedido de auxílio direto", traduzindo-o para a língua do país requerido; c) remessa do pedido (em português e na língua do país requerido) ao Departamento de Recuperação de Ativos e Cooperação Internacional, que providencia a remessa ao país requerido; d) resposta das autoridades internacionais.

Trabalharam nessa prática: a) o Promotor de Justiça subscritor; b) funcionários do Ministério Público do Estado de São Paulo; c) funcionários e diretores do Departamento de Recuperação de Ativos e Cooperação Internacional do Ministério da Justiça.

Foram utilizados apenas computadores e impressoras do Ministério Público do Estado de São Paulo, bem como documentos nacionais traduzidos.

Trata-se de prática fixa. Além de local de trabalho adequado, a infra-estrutura se resume em equipamentos de informática.

Na realização da prática, houve efetiva parceria com o Departamento de Recuperação de Ativos e cooperação Internacional do Ministério da Justiça (tel 61 2025 8901).

O orçamento necessário é o mesmo para a execução de todas as atividades normais de uma Promotoria ou Procuradoria, ou seja, não há aumento de despesas.

Apenas houve necessidade de despender recursos com a tradução de documentos nacionais para a língua do país destinatário. A versão do pedido para a língua do país requerido pode ser efetivada pelo próprio Promotor ou Procurador.