Federal Court rejects action against Bolsonaro and Wal do Açaí
The Federal Justice of the Federal District rejected the administrative misconduct action against former president Jair Bolsonaro and his former advisor Walderice Santos da Conceição, known as Wal do Açaí. Judge Rodrigo de Godoy Mendes ruled that the MPF's evidence did not show a fictitious position or misappropriation of resources. The decision considered STF Tema 1.199, which requires proof of intent.

The Justiça Federal of the Federal District rejected the administrative improbity action against the former president Jair Bolsonaro (PL) and his former parliamentary adviser Walderice Santos da Conceição, known as Wal do Acai. The decision was pronounced by Judge Rodrigo de Godoy Mendes, of the 6th Federal Civil Court of the Federal District, who considered insufficient the evidence presented by the Federal Public Prosecutor's Office (MPF).
The magistrate understood that it was not demonstrated that Walderice was exercising a fictitious position in the Chamber of Deputies or that there was a diversion of public resources. The lawsuit was filed since March 2022.
Understand the case of Wal do Acai
According to the MPF’s indictment, Walderice held the position of parliamentary secretary in Bolsonaro’s office between February 2003 and August 2018, but did not perform activities related to the term. She would never have worked in Brasilia and, together with her companion, Edenilson Nogueira Garcia, would provide private services to the then deputy, such as taking care of the summer house and his dogs in Angra dos Reis (RJ).
The investigation also pointed out that Walderice worked in an acai trade in the Historic Village of Mambucaba, on the same street as Bolsonaro’s residence. The former adviser left the position in August 2018, after the case gained repercussions in the press.
Evidence considered insufficient
According to the MPF, 83.77% of the salaries received during the period were withdrawn in cash. In a few years, the percentage has exceeded 95%. For the prosecution, Bolsonaro was aware that Walderice did not fulfill the attributions of the office and attested to its frequency to allow payment by the House.
In the action, the body argued that the two diverted public resources and obtained illicit enrichment. However, the judge stressed that the legislation does not require parliamentary advisers to work exclusively at the Chamber’s headquarters in Brasilia. They can also carry out activities in the states that represent the deputies.
Requirement of dole and new law
In analyzing the case, the judge also took into account the understanding of Supremo Tribunal Federal (STF) in Item 1.199 of the general repercussion. In 2022, the Court established that the conviction for administrative improbity requires proof of intention, that is, intention to commit the unlawful act.
The understanding also determined the application of the new Administrative Improbity Law to ongoing processes involving guilty conduct without a definitive conviction. The legislation, amended in 2021, no longer provides for the guilty modality for acts of improbity.
In the magistrate’s assessment, the evidence gathered in the process did not demonstrate an intention to defraud the hiring, appropriation of salaries or effective loss to the public coffers.
Bolsonaro's reaction at the time
Bolsonaro reacted to reports about the former adviser and called the treatment of her by some newspapers unfair. In an interview with Jornal Nacional, TV Globo, in October 2018, she stated that the press had labeled Walderice as a ghost employee without considering that she was on vacation on the day of the journalists’ first visit to the Historic Village of Mambucaba, in Angra dos Reis (RJ).
“She’s a lady, a woman, black and poor. On January 10, she was on vacation,” he said. Bolsonaro also said that the press could not be considered worthy if, even in the face of the explanations presented, it did not recognize what he considered an injustice.
The former president also tried to obtain the right of reply and the removal of reports from the air in the Superior Electoral Court (TSE). The Court denied the request in September 2018.
Next steps
The decision can still be appealed by the Federal Public Prosecutor’s Office. Meanwhile, the case closes another chapter in the long-running court battle involving the former president and his former adviser. The source did not detail whether there will be any further demonstrations by the parties.
Read Also
Flávio Bolsonaro says it hasn't been the end of an event in the US yet
Eduardo Bolsonaro claims not to fear US expulsion
Marino and Tereza throw tweezers to beat Alcolumbre
Font
www.gazetadopovo.com























