The government made a new law making it impossible to judge politicians for corruption, and the Supreme Court decided that it applies retroactively to Lula, making it so no judgement was considered valid.
The way I’m interpreting it is that the charges were dismissed or retracted before they went to trial. The same thing can happen in the US.
For reference, Brazil uses a different legal philosophy (Civil Law) than most of the US and English-speaking countries (Common Law) so there are differences in how things work compared to the US, but presumption of innocence is also a feature in that philosophy, and specifically codified into law there from what I see on wiki.
I assumed Brazil’s judicial system used the same presumption of innocence as the US. How does it work in Brazil?
The government made a new law making it impossible to judge politicians for corruption, and the Supreme Court decided that it applies retroactively to Lula, making it so no judgement was considered valid.
The way I’m interpreting it is that the charges were dismissed or retracted before they went to trial. The same thing can happen in the US.
For reference, Brazil uses a different legal philosophy (Civil Law) than most of the US and English-speaking countries (Common Law) so there are differences in how things work compared to the US, but presumption of innocence is also a feature in that philosophy, and specifically codified into law there from what I see on wiki.