Notarial record backs claims of irregularities at Corinthians meeting | OneFootball

The extraordinary meeting of Corinthians’ Deliberative Council, held last Monday (23), called by president Osmar Stabile, has become the subject of formal questioning amid signs of irregularities in how the proceedings were conducted and concluded. The episode, which involves an attempt to remove the head of the body, has now become part of a complaint submitted to the São Paulo Public Prosecutor’s Office (MP-SP).

Central do Timão obtained access to the notarial record that underpins the filing submitted by Romeu Tuma Junior against Osmar Stabile. The document, which carries public faith, details the events of the meeting and points to signs of improper conduct after the formal closing of the session.

Photo: Reproduction/Corinthians

Drawn up on March 25 at the 4th Notary Office of the Capital, under the responsibility of substitute notary Antonio Canheu Filho, the record chronologically describes the facts witnessed by a clerk who attended the meeting at Parque São Jorge at Tuma’s request.

According to the document, the session was opened at 7:02 p.m. by Maria Angela Ocampos, first secretary of the Deliberative Council, who took over the chair due to the absence of both the president and vice president of the Deliberative Council. At the outset, the councilor questioned the legality of the meeting being called by the board president and pointed to possible violations of the club’s Bylaws and the body’s Internal Rules.

According to the record, Maria Angela stated that the agenda item, which involved the judgment of a councilor, could not proceed without prior input from the Ethics and Discipline Committee. Faced with what she described as “flagrant disobedience” to internal rules and the law, she decided to close the meeting.

The document states that, after the announcement of the adjournment, the atmosphere was taken over by arguments and statements from councilors, with interruptions and challenges to how the session was being conducted. Among those present, there was opposition to the legitimacy of Maria Angela’s chairing of the session, as well as requests for another member of the table to take over the proceedings.

Despite the adjournment declared by the session chair, the notarial record indicates that the meeting continued. According to the account, no longer under the formal conduct of the table, board president Osmar Stabile opened a vote to decide on the provisional removal of Romeu Tuma Junior from the presidency of the Deliberative Council.

Still according to the document, the vote resulted in 115 votes in favor of the removal, 15 against, and seven abstentions. The record states that, after the count, the meeting was closed at 9:06 p.m.

Another relevant point recorded in the document is Maria Angela’s public statement after leaving the venue. In a statement given to the press while the events were unfolding, the councilor reiterated that she had ended the session because she considered it irregular and said that its continuation had no support in the bylaws.

According to Maria Angela, she was interrupted by lifetime councilor Rubens Gomes, who tried to resume the session with the presence of the Deliberative Council’s second secretary, Denis Piovesan, son of Osmar Stabile administration finance director Emerson Piovesan.

“He [Rubão] went in there and immediately started shouting, started coming toward the table, so I didn’t stay inside. I’m leaving, going home. I left because I ended the meeting, because the meeting is completely irregular, it is not in accordance with the Bylaws. I ended the meeting, they did not agree, and I am leaving,” Maria Angela Ocampos told the press, in a statement that was also recorded in the notarial record.

By its legal nature, a notarial record carries a presumption of truth regarding the facts attested by the notary or their representative, and is often used as evidence in court proceedings and investigations. In this case, the document is part of the complaint filed by Tuma with the MP-SP, which will assess the legality of the meeting’s call, the legitimacy of its continuation after the formal adjournment, and the validity of the decisions made.

The controversy mainly revolves around two points: the validity of the extraordinary meeting’s call and the legitimacy of the continuation of the proceedings after the formal adjournment declared by the chair of the session. The interpretation of these elements may be decisive for the validity or nullity of the decisions made that night.

So far, the club has not officially commented on the contents of the notarial record or on the developments of the complaint within the Public Prosecutor’s Office.

See more:

Corinthians News

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