Prosecutor rejects Mendonça defence bid, denies bias in Corinthians case | OneFootball

Prosecutor Cássio Roberto Conserino, from the São Paulo Public Prosecutor’s Office (MP-SP), submitted a filing to the courts contesting the motion for recusal filed by the defense of Corinthians vice-president Armando Mendonça, which seeks his removal from the criminal case involving the disappearance of sports equipment from the club’s storage facilities.

In the document filed last Monday (20), Conserino states that the request presented by the executive’s lawyers is legally mistaken and argues that there is no element whatsoever to justify his recusal in the case. He also criticizes the defense’s strategy of using personal images taken from his social media accounts and those of his relatives to support the petition.

Photo: Reproduction/Corinthians

Armando’s defense had requested the annulment of the charges brought by the Public Prosecutor’s Office, the acts carried out directly by Conserino during the pretrial phase, and the suspension of the criminal proceedings until the procedural incident is ruled on. Among the arguments presented, the lawyers claim that the prosecutor, as a Corinthians fan who attends club-related events, lacks the impartiality required to conduct the case.

In his filing, Conserino argues that the very way the recusal motion was presented was incorrect, stating that, under Article 100 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the incident should have been filed separately and not within the main case records.

Prosecutor cites investigations into different Corinthians administrations

The MP-SP representative rebuts the claim of bias by detailing a series of proceedings opened from a complaint randomly assigned through the Public Prosecutor’s Office Integrated System (SISPM) in July 2025.

According to the prosecutor, the investigations led to charges involving executives linked to the last three Corinthians administrations. Among them, he cites criminal cases against former presidents Andrés Sanchez and Duilio Monteiro Alves, in addition to the charges brought against Armando Mendonça.

Conserino also says he submitted reports to the Public and Social Assets Prosecutor’s Office, the Federal Revenue Service, and the Federal Public Prosecutor’s Office, as well as several requests for police investigations related to alleged irregularities committed at Parque São Jorge.

In his view, the fact that there are proceedings involving members of different club administrations demonstrates the impartiality of his actions.

“I have never been a Corinthians club member”

Another point challenged by Conserino concerns his relationship with Corinthians. The prosecutor states that he has never been a member of the club’s social branch, being only a member of the Fiel Torcedor program, a status that allows him to attend the team’s matches.

He also maintains that he has never had personal contact with Armando Mendonça, Andrés Sanchez, or Duilio Monteiro Alves and that he had never entered the administrative facilities of Parque São Jorge before taking over the investigations.

Regarding the fact that he is a Corinthians supporter, the prosecutor described the defense’s argument as “weak” and stated that his passion for the club predates his work as a prosecutor and has no connection whatsoever to his professional conduct.

In the document, Conserino uses an ironic tone in saying that, if the argument were to prevail, it would be necessary to require a “certificate of no organized supporter affiliation” in civil service exams or that referees in derby matches should support Íbis, a club nationally known for its folkloric character.

Participation in a Democracia Corinthiana event and social media

Armando Mendonça’s defense also used images of the prosecutor at an event related to Democracia Corinthiana to support the claim for recusal. Conserino says he attended the event only as a spectator and that there is no legal prohibition on members of the Public Prosecutor’s Office attending public events in their private lives.

He also criticized the inclusion of photographs of his relatives in the petition, stating that they have no connection whatsoever to the case.

The prosecutor also rebutted questions about posts on his social media related to the work carried out by the Public Prosecutor’s Office in the investigations involving Corinthians. According to him, the posts merely reproduce publicly accessible journalistic content, without any personal statements on the merits of the cases.

Prosecutor’s Office cites possibility of new irregularities

In the final part of the filing, Conserino highlights that the investigations involving Corinthians resulted in several measures authorized by the courts, including the lifting of bank and tax secrecy, technical expert examinations, and analyses by the Financial Activities Control Council (Coaf).

According to the prosecutor, there is a possibility that other irregularities may be uncovered in the course of the investigations, all conducted under judicial supervision and in compliance with rules of the National Council of the Public Prosecutor’s Office (CNMP) and the Code of Criminal Procedure.

Finally, he argues that he does not fall under any of the legal grounds for recusal provided for in Articles 254 and 258 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and reaffirms that he acts with “independence, autonomy, and impartiality.”

Understand the case

Armando Mendonça became a defendant after the São Paulo courts accepted the charges brought by the Public Prosecutor’s Office regarding the disappearance of sports equipment supplied by Nike and stored at CT Dr. Joaquim Grava and Parque São Jorge.

The Corinthians vice-president is charged with aggravated and continued misappropriation, attempted aggravated misappropriation, aggravated theft through abuse of trust, and coercion in the course of proceedings.

After the court’s decision, Armando’s defense filed a motion for recusal against prosecutor Cássio Conserino, alleging a lack of impartiality in the conduct of the investigations and requesting the annulment of the acts carried out by the member of the Public Prosecutor’s Office.

Now, it will be up to the Judiciary to analyze both the request made by the defense and the filings submitted by the prosecutor within the scope of the case.

Corinthians News

This article was translated into English by Artificial Intelligence. You can read the original version in 🇧🇷 here.