A Brazilian has filed an unusual lawsuit against the Central Bank of Brazil in an attempt to stop the creation of Drex, the Real in digital format.
With the imminent arrival of Drex, many Brazilians have become concerned about their individual freedoms being violated by strict policies practiced by the State, which with the Real in digital format tends to monitor the population's consumption more accurately.
In recent days, for example, former President Jair Bolsonaro has publicly declared that Drex is a technology of social control in the hands of the wrong government.
In any case, the central bank plans to stop issuing physical banknotes with the arrival of digital currency. A bill even provides for the criminalization of people carrying cash on the streets, especially over R$10,000.
Brazilian files habeas corpus against the President of the Central Bank of Brazil, Roberto Campos Neto, seeking to prevent the arrival of Drex
According to Livecoins, the author of the lawsuit filed a habeas corpus independently against the president of the Central Bank of Brazil, Roberto Campos Neto. It is worth remembering that anyone can file a habeas corpus without the need for a lawyer, as provided for in the Federal Constitution.
However, it appears that the court automatically registered the Federal Public Defender's Office in the case as an administrative measure to guarantee legal assistance to the plaintiff. Subsequently, the Public Defender's Office requested the exclusion of the case, justifying that it had not acted on behalf of the plaintiff.
In any case, the case reached the Superior Court of Justice (STJ), where it was analyzed by Minister Afrânio Vilela. When analyzing the Brazilian's case, the minister did not understand the motivation alleged by the Brazilian, and denied his request.
Criminal lawyer indicates that the process is an inadequate judicial instrument
Livecoins spoke with criminal lawyer Lucas Schirmer de Souza, who also studies cryptocurrency technology and follows financial technology innovations.
According to him, the process is an inadequate legal instrument due to the way it is presented. This is because a habeas corpus would not be appropriate in such a process.
Initially, habeas corpus would not be applicable to question the creation or implementation of Drex. This is because habeas corpus is a legal instrument intended exclusively to protect the right to movement when there is a threat or illegal coercion to this right (art. 5, LXVIII, of the Federal Constitution and art. 647 of the Code of Criminal Procedure)”, Lucas told Livecoins this Thursday (21).
According to the lawyer, a Direct Action of Unconstitutionality (ADI), a Popular Action or even a security warrant would make more sense than a habeas corpus.
“There are different types of habeas corpus, classified according to their objective or purpose, but ultimately they all serve to question some limitation on freedom of movement,” the criminalist adds to the report.
Finally, lawyer Lucas understands that the most correct path to a possible brake on Drex should come from the Legislature.
“If the Legislature understands that the Central Bank has exceeded its legal powers or has not adequately consulted Congress on decisions that impact monetary and financial policy, they can challenge the measure created by the Federal Executive, either by an individual parliamentarian or based on the vote of all parliamentarians,” he concluded.