Augusto Melo's lawyer blasts handling of case, vows court appeal | OneFootball

Corinthians’ Deliberative Council approved, on the night of this Monday (1st), the expulsion of Augusto Melo from the club’s membership. The former president was tried in a proceeding related to the events of May 31, 2025, when there was an attempt to challenge the vote that had approved his impeachment.

After the decision, lawyer Ricardo Jorge spoke to the press and commented on the arguments presented by the defense during the session. According to him, the strategy adopted focused on questioning the procedural conduct of the case rather than the merits of the accusations.

Photo: Reproduction / Youtube Central do Timão

When analyzing the outcome of the vote, the defense attorney said he had already expected the decision and described the procedure as unfair, alleging a lack of evidence production throughout the investigation.

“The issue with the defense I presented today regarding former president Augusto Melo was procedural. I understand that the Bylaws are directly violating due process of law. So much so that, before coming here, I already knew what the result would be. It was practically predetermined that he would be removed. So my defense was merely palliative. I came here only to go through one of their rituals. But now we have taken the matter to court, and it will move forward in the judiciary. I consider this unfair, because it is impossible to determine what his conduct was in this regard, since there was no production of evidence. It is very complicated.”

Next, the lawyer again questioned the legality of the procedure adopted by the club and stated that there were flaws in the application of the internal rules used during the handling of the case.

“To give you an idea, there is a regulation they use to conduct the administrative proceeding, but which, under the bylaws, was not created legitimately. There are no minutes for this regulation. From there, a series of legal aberrations arise, in a broad sense, constitutionally and also from the point of view of citizens’ rights.

The Constitution determines that associations have their internal regulations, but it also guarantees the right to an adversarial defense, due process of law, and impartiality. What we had here was a political trial, and that is what happened. I believe this decision can be reviewed by the courts. I also leave here with my head held high, with the feeling that I fought a good fight. Unfortunately, this is a political system. The courts have not yet ruled on the case.”

Before the vote, Augusto Melo’s defense had filed a preliminary injunction request in court in an attempt to suspend the judgment. The request, however, was denied.

Asked about the lawsuit, Ricardo Jorge explained that the main objective is to seek the annulment of the entire administrative proceeding conducted by the club.

“The injunction was requested to suspend the act, but the main object of the lawsuit is the annulment of the administrative act as a whole. It is more or less like this: when a citizen is the subject of a criminal action, the Public Prosecutor’s Office files charges, and from that point the proceeding begins. Here it should be the same. However, the report is generic, it speaks of countless crimes and countless acts, but without specifying them. There is no way to uphold the democratic rule of law without a formal accusation.”

The lawyer also challenged the participation of members of the Deliberative Council during the course of the proceeding, raising questions about possible conflicts of interest.

“No, not at all. To give you an idea, there are councilors judging other elected councilors, while they themselves are alternates for those positions. I ask: in what society can someone who has a direct interest in taking another person’s position judge that person? If the person leaves, he takes over. How can that be explained?

Pantaleão, for example, said he could not vote. And in fact, he did not vote. But he deliberated and issued decisions on the case. On the day of the events, he was Corinthians’ lawyer. In other words, he was an interested party, he represented the club. How can someone in that position judge another person or preside over a proceeding without compromising integrity, impartiality, and the search for the truth of the facts? That is the issue.”

Augusto Melo’s expulsion took place after analysis by Corinthians’ Ethics and Discipline Committee. The case originated from the developments of the meeting held on May 31, 2025, when a group of councilors tried to invalidate the vote that approved the impeachment of the club’s then-president.

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