Billion-dollar figures involved, astonishment and the recurring question: "How far will this go?"
A decade later, the Banco Master case makes the country live a script that is partly similar to that of the times of Operation Lava Jato. The newest chapter was the release of messages from banker Daniel Vorcaro to Minister Alexandre de Moraes, of the STF (Supreme Federal Court), on Tuesday (1st), reaching the Attorney General of the Republic, Paulo Gonet.
The comparison between the current scandal and that of ten years ago has appeared with some frequency in the political and legal debate in recent months. The dean of the STF, Gilmar Mendes, is one of those who see a repetition of abuses committed by the authorities in Curitiba, such as the use of preventive arrests to force denunciations.
Interestingly, some well-known names are repeated in both cases, such as senator Ciro Nogueira (PP-PI), still struggling with the operation initiated in Paraná, or former PSDB president Marconi Perillo and former PT minister Guido Mantega, who were sued last decade and have now reappeared in consultancy contracts with Master. All three deny wrongdoing.
The tentacles of influence revealed and the brutal way of acting at the top of the bank, shown by the investigations, are impressive, but it is enough to remember the modus operandi of the construction company Odebrecht, with its bribery department, offshore networks and self-confessed money bag deliverers to see that boldness is not so unprecedented among conglomerates that seek intimacy with power.
The evolution and pace of investigations in Justice present major differences between the Master case and the scandal that earned the nickname petrolão. Lava Jato was processed in parallel in the first instance and in the higher courts, with investigations related to suspects with jurisdiction.
In Curitiba, the authorities had the autonomy to divide Lava Jato complaints and processes in the initial stages of the operation, meaning that defendants were already convicted months after the first phase of the investigation, in 2014. For critics, this tactic blocked the highest levels of the Judiciary: with practical results of the investigations — and sentences already issued —, the political cost of annulling processes was higher.
This is not what we see now with Master, since, as far as we know, there are no formal charges against those involved, a year after the case broke.
The format of the scandal is also very different. While the Master case is focused on the figure of Daniel Vorcaro and his immediate assistants, Lava Jato had an impact on the largest construction companies in the country, which had been exercising political influence in the most varied spheres for decades. It also featured a sequence of accusations, concluded at a hurried pace, which caused a domino effect. It would be more or less as if Vorcaro made a collaboration agreement in which he exposed other bankers with a political scheme of a similar scale.
On the other hand, Lava Jato did not generate panic at the top level of the Judiciary, while the Master caused a historic and unprecedented embarrassment to the Supreme Court with the revelations about the Moraes family law firm, in addition to the episode of Dias Toffoli's departure from reporting on the case, in February.
The difference in the voluntarism of the Public Ministry is also notable. Under the support of then Attorney General Rodrigo Janot, the Lava Jato task force became almost a separate institution at the time, projecting Deltan Dallagnol towards a future political career. In the Master case, the current head of the Attorney General's Office, Paulo Gonet, to this day has seen no reason to investigate Supreme Court ministers and has opposed Vorcaro's second arrest in March. Now, after appearing in messages exchanged by the banker, he asked for the nullity of the PF report on the dialogues involving Moraes and talks about abuse of authority by minister André Mendonça.
As a similarity, there is the resounding political effect. Lava Jato was a crucial issue in the 2014 election, won by Dilma Rousseff, and in 2018, in which Jair Bolsonaro was elected. In 2014, statements by whistleblower Paulo Roberto Costa, a former Petrobras executive, detailing the scheme at the state-owned company, were made public during the second round, putting pressure on the PT campaign. In 2018, excerpts from former PT minister Antonio Palocci's testimony were removed from confidentiality by the then judge Sergio Moro days before the second round, an episode that contributed to his later being considered partial when judging today's president Lula.
The "Dark Horse" case, the main political window of presidential candidate Flávio Bolsonaro (PL), and the operation that targeted PT senator Jaques Wagner generate speculation about the impact that further revelations of this nature could have on the electorate if they occur in the final stretch of the campaign.
The political context, however, is quite different from the peak years of the operation that began in Curitiba. Lava Jato became almost a pop phenomenon, inspiring TV series, films, soap opera characters and Carnival marches. It took protesters to the streets, created a "laundering bench" in Congress and provoked a popular campaign for changes in legislation.
Maybe due to tiredness or a hangover, none of that can be seen now. There is not the same clamor for punishment. There is no illusion that judicial processes alone can transform or reform the country's politics, as was the naive view at the time.
