FERNANDA CÂNCIO

 .

Juízes todos queimadinhos

Há uns dias, soube-se que o órgão que gere a judicatura vai custear ioga e massagens para combater o burnout na profissão. Infelizmente, a medida chega tarde: há magistrados que de tão atrofiados chegaram ao ponto de citar códigos penais e decisões do Supremo de outros planetas.

𝖩𝖺́ 𝗍𝗂́𝗇𝗁𝖺𝗆𝗈𝗌 𝗏𝗂𝗌𝗍𝗈 𝗃𝗎𝗂́𝗓𝖾𝗌 𝖺 𝖼𝗂𝗍𝖺𝗋 𝗍𝖾𝗑𝗍𝗈𝗌 𝖺𝗍𝗋𝗂𝖻𝗎𝗂́𝖽𝗈𝗌 𝖺 𝖽𝗂𝗏𝗂𝗇𝖽𝖺𝖽𝖾𝗌, 𝖼𝗈𝗆𝗈 𝖺 𝖡𝗂́𝖻𝗅𝗂𝖺 𝖾 𝗈 𝖠𝗅𝖼𝗈𝗋𝖺̃𝗈, 𝖾 𝖺 𝗂𝗇𝖼𝗅𝗎𝗂𝗋 𝗇𝖺𝗌 𝖽𝖾𝖼𝗂𝗌𝗈̃𝖾𝗌 𝖼𝗈𝗇𝗌𝗂𝖽𝖾𝗋𝖺𝖼̧𝗈̃𝖾𝗌 𝗂𝗇𝗌𝗎𝗅𝗍𝗎𝗈𝗌𝖺𝗌 𝖾 𝖼𝗋𝗎𝖾́𝗂𝗌 𝗌𝗈𝖻𝗋𝖾 𝗏𝗂́𝗍𝗂𝗆𝖺𝗌 𝖾𝗇𝗊𝗎𝖺𝗇𝗍𝗈 𝖽𝖾𝗌𝖼𝗎𝗅𝗉𝖺𝖻𝗂𝗅𝗂𝗓𝖺𝗏𝖺𝗆 𝗈𝗌 𝖼𝗈𝗇𝖽𝖾𝗇𝖺𝖽𝗈𝗌.

𝖩𝖺́ 𝗍𝗂́𝗇𝗁𝖺𝗆𝗈𝗌 𝗋𝖾𝗉𝖺𝗋𝖺𝖽𝗈 𝖾𝗆 𝗌𝖾𝗇𝗍𝖾𝗇𝖼̧𝖺𝗌 𝖾 𝖺𝖼𝗈́𝗋𝖽𝖺̃𝗈𝗌 𝗇𝖺𝗌 𝗊𝗎𝖺𝗂𝗌 𝗆𝖺𝗀𝗂𝗌𝗍𝗋𝖺𝖽𝗈𝗌 𝖽𝖾𝖼𝗂𝖽𝖾𝗆 𝗂𝗀𝗇𝗈𝗋𝖺𝗋 𝖺𝗌 𝗅𝖾𝗂𝗌 𝖽𝖾 𝗊𝗎𝖾 𝗇𝖺̃𝗈 𝗀𝗈𝗌𝗍𝖺𝗆 - 𝗈𝗎, 𝗉𝗈𝗋 𝗇𝖺̃𝗈 𝖿𝖺𝗓𝖾𝗋𝖾𝗆 𝗉𝖺𝗋𝗍𝖾 𝖽𝖺 𝗌𝗎𝖺 𝗆𝗎𝗇𝖽𝗂𝗏𝗂𝖽𝖾̂𝗇𝖼𝗂𝖺, 𝗇𝖺̃𝗈 𝗉𝖾𝗋𝖼𝖾𝖻𝖾𝗆 -, 𝖿𝖺𝗓𝖾𝗆 𝖽𝖾 𝖼𝗈𝗇𝗍𝖺 𝖽𝖾 𝗊𝗎𝖾 𝗇𝖺̃𝗈 𝖾𝗑𝗂𝗌𝗍𝖾𝗆 𝖼𝗈𝗇𝗏𝖾𝗇𝖼̧𝗈̃𝖾𝗌 𝗂𝗇𝗍𝖾𝗋𝗇𝖺𝖼𝗂𝗈𝗇𝖺𝗂𝗌 𝗏𝗂𝗇𝖼𝗎𝗅𝖺𝗍𝗂𝗏𝖺𝗌, 𝖾𝗑𝗂𝖻𝖾𝗆 𝗈𝗌 𝗌𝖾𝗎𝗌 𝗉𝗋𝖾𝖼𝗈𝗇𝖼𝖾𝗂𝗍𝗈𝗌 𝗌𝖾𝗆 𝗊𝗎𝖺𝗅𝗊𝗎𝖾𝗋 𝗋𝖾𝖻𝗎𝖼̧𝗈 𝖾 𝖽𝖾𝖼𝗂𝖽𝖾𝗆 𝖿𝖺𝗓𝖾𝗋 𝗀𝗋𝖺𝖼̧𝗈𝗅𝖺𝗌 𝖽𝖾 𝗀𝗈𝗌𝗍𝗈 𝖽𝗎𝗏𝗂𝖽𝗈𝗌𝗈 - 𝗌𝗎𝖼𝖾𝖽𝖾 𝗆𝗎𝗂𝗍𝗈 𝗉𝗈𝗋 𝖾𝗑𝖾𝗆𝗉𝗅𝗈 𝗇𝗈𝗌 𝗉𝗋𝗈𝖼𝖾𝗌𝗌𝗈𝗌 𝖽𝖾 𝖼𝗋𝗂𝗆𝖾𝗌 𝗌𝖾𝗑𝗎𝖺𝗂𝗌.

𝖫𝖾𝗆𝗈𝗌-𝗅𝗁𝖾𝗌 𝗍𝗈𝖽𝗈𝗌 𝗈𝗌 𝖽𝗂𝖺𝗌 𝖾𝗋𝗋𝗈𝗌 𝖽𝖾 𝗈𝗋𝗍𝗈𝗀𝗋𝖺𝖿𝗂𝖺 𝖾 𝗌𝗂𝗇𝗍𝖺𝗑𝖾, 𝗉𝖺𝗋𝖺́𝗀𝗋𝖺𝖿𝗈𝗌 𝗂𝗇𝗍𝖾𝗂𝗋𝗈𝗌 𝖼𝗈𝗉𝗂𝖺𝖽𝗈𝗌 𝖽𝖾 𝗎𝗇𝗌 𝗉𝖺𝗋𝖺 𝗈𝗎𝗍𝗋𝗈𝗌, 𝖺𝗋𝗀𝗎𝗆𝖾𝗇𝗍𝖺𝖼̧𝗈̃𝖾𝗌 𝗌𝖾𝗆 𝖺 𝗆𝖾𝗇𝗈𝗋 𝗅𝗈́𝗀𝗂𝖼𝖺, 𝖼𝗈𝗇𝗍𝗋𝖺𝖽𝗂𝖼̧𝗈̃𝖾𝗌 𝗂𝗇𝗌𝖺𝗇𝖺́𝗏𝖾𝗂𝗌, 𝖽𝖾𝗆𝗈𝗇𝗌𝗍𝗋𝖺𝖼̧𝖺̃𝗈 𝖽𝖾 𝖺𝖻𝗌𝗈𝗅𝗎𝗍𝖺 𝖿𝖺𝗅𝗍𝖺 𝖽𝖾 𝖾𝗑𝗉𝖾𝗋𝗂𝖾̂𝗇𝖼𝗂𝖺 𝖽𝖾 𝗏𝗂𝖽𝖺 𝗈𝗎 𝗍𝗈𝗍𝖺𝗅 𝗂𝗀𝗇𝗈𝗋𝖺̂𝗇𝖼𝗂𝖺 𝗌𝗈𝖻𝗋𝖾 𝖺𝗌 𝗆𝖺𝗍𝖾́𝗋𝗂𝖺𝗌 𝖾𝗆 𝖽𝖾𝖼𝗂𝗌𝖺̃𝗈; 𝖼𝗈𝗇𝗍𝖺𝖻𝗂𝗅𝗂𝗓𝖺𝗆𝗈𝗌 𝗍𝗈𝖽𝗈𝗌 𝗈𝗌 𝖺𝗇𝗈𝗌 𝗉𝗋𝗈𝖼𝖾𝗌𝗌𝗈𝗌 𝗊𝗎𝖾, 𝗌𝖾𝗆 𝗃𝗎𝗌𝗍𝗂𝖿𝗂𝖼𝖺𝖼̧𝖺̃𝗈 𝗉𝗅𝖺𝗎𝗌𝗂́𝗏𝖾𝗅, 𝖽𝖾𝗆𝗈𝗋𝖺𝗆 𝖽𝖾́𝖼𝖺𝖽𝖺𝗌 𝖺 𝖽𝖾𝖼𝗂𝖽𝗂𝗋.

𝖳𝖺𝗆𝖻𝖾́𝗆 𝖺𝗇𝗈𝗍𝖺𝗆𝗈𝗌 𝗇𝖺̃𝗈 𝗋𝖺𝗋𝗈 𝗍𝗋𝖺𝗍𝗈𝗌 𝖽𝖾 𝗉𝗈𝗅𝖾́ 𝖽𝖺𝖽𝗈𝗌 𝖺 𝗍𝖾𝗌𝗍𝖾𝗆𝗎𝗇𝗁𝖺𝗌, 𝖺𝗋𝗀𝗎𝗂𝖽𝗈𝗌 𝖾 𝖺𝖽𝗏𝗈𝗀𝖺𝖽𝗈𝗌 𝗉𝗈𝗋 𝗉𝖺𝗋𝗍𝖾 𝖽𝖾 𝗆𝖺𝗀𝗂𝗌𝗍𝗋𝖺𝖽𝗈𝗌 𝗊𝗎𝖾 𝗏𝖾𝖾𝗆 𝗇𝖺 𝗌𝖺𝗅𝖺 𝖽𝖾 𝖺𝗎𝖽𝗂𝖾̂𝗇𝖼𝗂𝖺 𝗎𝗆𝖺 𝖼𝖺𝗍𝖺𝗋𝗌𝖾 𝗀𝗋𝖺́𝗍𝗂𝗌 𝖽𝖺𝗌 𝗌𝗎𝖺𝗌 𝗂𝗋𝗋𝗂𝗍𝖺𝖼̧𝗈̃𝖾𝗌 𝖼𝗈𝗆 𝖺 𝗏𝗂𝖽𝖺 𝗈𝗎, 𝗌𝗂𝗆𝗉𝗅𝖾𝗌𝗆𝖾𝗇𝗍𝖾, 𝗎𝗆 𝗅𝗎𝗀𝖺𝗋 𝗇𝗈 𝗊𝗎𝖺𝗅 𝗉𝗈𝖽𝖾𝗆 𝗀𝗈𝗓𝖺𝗋 𝖽𝖾 𝗎𝗆 𝖾𝗑𝖾𝗋𝖼𝗂́𝖼𝗂𝗈 𝗂𝗋𝗋𝖾𝗌𝗍𝗋𝗂𝗍𝗈 𝖽𝖾 𝗉𝗈𝖽𝖾𝗋.

𝖤 𝗍𝗎𝖽𝗈 𝗂𝗌𝗍𝗈 𝗌𝖾𝗆, 𝗇𝖺 𝗆𝖺𝗂𝗈𝗋𝗂𝖺 𝖽𝗈𝗌 𝖼𝖺𝗌𝗈𝗌, 𝗊𝗎𝖺𝗅𝗊𝗎𝖾𝗋 𝖼𝗈𝗇𝗌𝖾𝗊𝗎𝖾̂𝗇𝖼𝗂𝖺 𝗉𝖺𝗋𝖺 𝗊𝗎𝖾𝗆 𝗍𝖾𝗆 𝖼𝗈𝗆𝗈 𝖿𝗎𝗇𝖼̧𝖺̃𝗈 𝖽𝗂𝗍𝖺𝗋 𝗊𝗎𝖾 𝖼𝗈𝗇𝗌𝖾𝗊𝗎𝖾̂𝗇𝖼𝗂𝖺𝗌 𝗌𝖾 𝖺𝗉𝗅𝗂𝖼𝖺𝗆 𝖺̀𝗌 𝖿𝖺𝗅𝗍𝖺𝗌, 𝖾𝗋𝗋𝗈𝗌 𝖾 𝖼𝗋𝗂𝗆𝖾𝗌 𝖽𝗈𝗌 𝗈𝗎𝗍𝗋𝗈𝗌.

𝖮 𝗊𝗎𝖾 𝖺𝗂𝗇𝖽𝖺 𝗇𝖺̃𝗈 𝗍𝗂́𝗇𝗁𝖺𝗆𝗈𝗌 𝗏𝗂𝗌𝗍𝗈 𝖾𝗋𝖺, 𝗇𝖺𝗌 𝗉𝖺𝗅𝖺𝗏𝗋𝖺𝗌 𝖽𝖾 𝗎𝗆 𝗋𝖾𝗊𝗎𝖾𝗋𝗂𝗆𝖾𝗇𝗍𝗈 𝖾𝗇𝗏𝗂𝖺𝖽𝗈 𝖺𝗈 𝖳𝗋𝗂𝖻𝗎𝗇𝖺𝗅 𝖽𝖺 𝖱𝖾𝗅𝖺𝖼̧𝖺̃𝗈 𝖽𝖾 𝖫𝗂𝗌𝖻𝗈𝖺, 𝗎𝗆 𝖺𝖼𝗈́𝗋𝖽𝖺̃𝗈 𝗊𝗎𝖾 𝖼𝗂𝗍𝖺 “𝖺𝗋𝗍𝗂𝗀𝗈𝗌 𝗅𝖾𝗀𝖺𝗂𝗌 𝗊𝗎𝖾 𝗇𝖺̃𝗈 𝖾𝗑𝗂𝗌𝗍𝖾𝗆 𝗇𝖾𝗆 𝗌𝖾𝗊𝗎𝖾𝗋 𝖺𝗅𝗀𝗎𝗆𝖺 𝗏𝖾𝗓 𝖾𝗑𝗂𝗌𝗍𝗂𝗋𝖺𝗆”, 𝖾 𝗌𝖾 𝗅𝗈𝗎𝗏𝖺 𝖾𝗆 “𝗃𝗎𝗋𝗂𝗌𝗉𝗋𝗎𝖽𝖾̂𝗇𝖼𝗂𝖺 𝗊𝗎𝖾 𝗇𝖺̃𝗈 𝖾𝗑𝗂𝗌𝗍𝖾”.

𝖤𝗆 𝖼𝖺𝗎𝗌𝖺 𝖾𝗌𝗍𝖺́, 𝖼𝗈𝗆𝗈 𝖿𝗈𝗂 𝗇𝗈𝗍𝗂𝖼𝗂𝖺𝖽𝗈 𝖾𝗌𝗍𝖾 𝖽𝗈𝗆𝗂𝗇𝗀𝗈 𝗉𝖾𝗅𝗈 𝖢𝗈𝗋𝗋𝖾𝗂𝗈 𝖽𝖺 𝖬𝖺𝗇𝗁𝖺̃, 𝗎𝗆𝖺 𝖽𝖾𝖼𝗂𝗌𝖺̃𝗈 𝖽𝖺 𝗍𝖾𝗋𝖼𝖾𝗂𝗋𝖺 𝗌𝖾𝖼𝖼̧𝖺̃𝗈 𝖼𝗋𝗂𝗆𝗂𝗇𝖺𝗅 𝖽𝗈 𝖳𝗋𝗂𝖻𝗎𝗇𝖺𝗅 𝖽𝖺 𝖱𝖾𝗅𝖺𝖼̧𝖺̃𝗈 𝖽𝖾 𝖫𝗂𝗌𝖻𝗈𝖺, 𝖽𝖺𝗍𝖺𝖽𝖺 𝖽𝖾 𝟤𝟥 𝖽𝖾 𝗈𝗎𝗍𝗎𝖻𝗋𝗈, 𝗋𝖾𝗅𝖺𝗍𝖺𝖽𝖺 𝗉𝖾𝗅𝗈 𝖽𝖾𝗌𝖾𝗆𝖻𝖺𝗋𝗀𝖺𝖽𝗈𝗋 𝖠𝗅𝖿𝗋𝖾𝖽𝗈 𝖢𝗈𝗌𝗍𝖺 𝖾 𝖼𝗈-𝖺𝗌𝗌𝗂𝗇𝖺𝖽𝖺 𝗉𝖾𝗅𝖺𝗌 𝖽𝖾𝗌𝖾𝗆𝖻𝖺𝗋𝗀𝖺𝖽𝗈𝗋𝖺𝗌 𝖧𝖾𝗋𝗆𝖾𝗇𝗀𝖺𝗋𝖽𝖺 𝖽𝗈 𝖵𝖺𝗅𝗅𝖾-𝖥𝗋𝗂𝖺𝗌 𝖾 𝖬𝖺𝗋𝗀𝖺𝗋𝗂𝖽𝖺 𝖱𝖺𝗆𝗈𝗌 𝖽𝖾 𝖠𝗅𝗆𝖾𝗂𝖽𝖺.

𝖭𝗈 𝖺𝖼𝗈́𝗋𝖽𝖺̃𝗈 𝗊𝗎𝖾 𝖽𝖾𝗌𝖽𝖾 𝗅𝗈𝗀𝗈, 𝗇𝗎𝗆 𝖽𝖾𝗌𝗉𝖺𝖼𝗁𝗈 𝖽𝖾 𝗋𝖾𝖼𝗎𝗌𝖺 𝖽𝖾 𝖺𝖼𝖾𝗌𝗌𝗈 𝖽𝗈 𝖢𝖬, 𝗈 𝗋𝖾𝗅𝖺𝗍𝗈𝗋 𝗊𝗎𝗂𝗌 𝗆𝖺𝗇𝗍𝖾𝗋 𝗋𝖾𝗌𝖾𝗋𝗏𝖺𝖽𝗈, 𝖼𝗅𝖺𝗌𝗌𝗂𝖿𝗂𝖼𝖺𝗇𝖽𝗈-𝗈 𝖼𝗈𝗆𝗈 “𝖼𝗈𝗇𝖿𝗂𝖽𝖾𝗇𝖼𝗂𝖺𝗅” (𝗌𝖾𝗆 𝗊𝗎𝖾 𝗌𝖾 𝗏𝗂𝗌𝗅𝗎𝗆𝖻𝗋𝖾 𝖺𝗅𝗀𝗎𝗆 𝗆𝗈𝗍𝗂𝗏𝗈 𝗅𝖾𝗀𝖺𝗅 𝗉𝖺𝗋𝖺 𝗍𝖺𝗅 𝖼𝗅𝖺𝗌𝗌𝗂𝖿𝗂𝖼𝖺𝖼̧𝖺̃𝗈), 𝗈𝗌 𝖺𝖽𝗏𝗈𝗀𝖺𝖽𝗈𝗌 𝖽𝖾 𝖺𝗅𝗀𝗎𝗇𝗌 𝖽𝗈𝗌 𝖺𝗋𝗀𝗎𝗂𝖽𝗈𝗌 𝗇𝗈 𝗉𝗋𝗈𝖼𝖾𝗌𝗌𝗈 𝗂𝖽𝖾𝗇𝗍𝗂𝖿𝗂𝖼𝖺𝗋𝖺𝗆 𝗏𝖺́𝗋𝗂𝗈𝗌 𝖾𝗋𝗋𝗈𝗌 𝖻𝖺𝗌𝗍𝖺𝗇𝗍𝖾 𝖺𝗌𝗌𝗈𝗆𝖻𝗋𝗈𝗌𝗈𝗌. 𝖳𝗋𝖺𝗍𝖺-𝗌𝖾 𝗊𝗎𝖾𝗋 𝖽𝖾 𝗋𝖾𝖿𝖾𝗋𝖾̂𝗇𝖼𝗂𝖺𝗌 𝖾𝗊𝗎𝗂𝗏𝗈𝖼𝖺𝖽𝖺𝗌 𝖺 𝖺𝗋𝗍𝗂𝗀𝗈𝗌 𝖽𝗈 𝖢𝗈́𝖽𝗂𝗀𝗈 𝖯𝖾𝗇𝖺𝗅 (𝗂𝗇𝖽𝗂𝖼𝖺𝗇𝖽𝗈 𝖼𝗈𝗆𝗈 𝖽𝗂𝗓𝖾𝗇𝖽𝗈 𝗋𝖾𝗌𝗉𝖾𝗂𝗍𝗈 𝖺 𝗎𝗆 𝖽𝖾𝗍𝖾𝗋𝗆𝗂𝗇𝖺𝖽𝗈 𝖼𝗋𝗂𝗆𝖾 𝗎𝗆 𝗇𝗎́𝗆𝖾𝗋𝗈 𝖽𝖾 𝖺𝗋𝗍𝗂𝗀𝗈 𝗍𝗋𝗈𝖼𝖺𝖽𝗈), 𝗊𝗎𝖾𝗋 𝗍𝗋𝖺𝗇𝗌𝖼𝗋𝗂𝖼̧𝗈̃𝖾𝗌 𝗂𝗇𝖼𝗈𝗋𝗋𝖾𝗍𝖺𝗌 𝖽𝖾 𝗍𝗂𝗉𝗂𝖿𝗂𝖼𝖺𝖼̧𝗈̃𝖾𝗌 𝖼𝗋𝗂𝗆𝗂𝗇𝖺𝗂𝗌, 𝗊𝗎𝖾𝗋 𝗋𝖾𝖿𝖾𝗋𝖾̂𝗇𝖼𝗂𝖺𝗌 𝖽𝖾 𝖺𝖼𝗈́𝗋𝖽𝖺̃𝗈𝗌, 𝗉𝗈𝗋 𝖾𝗑𝖾𝗆𝗉𝗅𝗈 𝖽𝗈 𝖲𝗎𝗉𝗋𝖾𝗆𝗈 𝖳𝗋𝗂𝖻𝗎𝗇𝖺𝗅, 𝗊𝗎𝖾, 𝗀𝖺𝗋𝖺𝗇𝗍𝖾𝗆 𝗈𝗌 𝖼𝖺𝗎𝗌𝗂́𝖽𝗂𝖼𝗈𝗌 𝖽𝖾𝗉𝗈𝗂𝗌 𝖽𝖾 𝗆𝗎𝗂𝗍𝗈 𝗈𝗌 𝗉𝗋𝗈𝖼𝗎𝗋𝖺𝗋𝖾𝗆, “𝗇𝖺̃𝗈 𝖾𝗑𝗂𝗌𝗍𝖾𝗆”. 𝖠𝖼𝗋𝖾𝗌𝖼𝖾 𝖺𝗂𝗇𝖽𝖺 𝗈 𝖿𝖺𝖼𝗍𝗈 𝖺 𝖽𝖾𝖼𝗂𝗌𝖺̃𝗈 𝗆𝖺𝗇𝖽𝖺𝗋 𝖺𝗅𝗀𝗎𝗇𝗌 𝖽𝗈𝗌 𝖺𝗋𝗀𝗎𝗂𝖽𝗈𝗌 𝗉𝖺𝗋𝖺 𝗃𝗎𝗅𝗀𝖺𝗆𝖾𝗇𝗍𝗈 𝗉𝗈𝗋 𝗎𝗆 𝖼𝗋𝗂𝗆𝖾 𝖽𝖾 𝗊𝗎𝖾 𝗇𝖺̃𝗈 𝗏𝗂𝗇𝗁𝖺𝗆 𝗇𝖾𝗆 𝗉𝗈𝖽𝗂𝖺𝗆 𝗏𝗂𝗋 𝖺𝖼𝗎𝗌𝖺𝖽𝗈𝗌, 𝗉𝗈𝗋 𝗌𝗈́ 𝗌𝖾 𝖺𝗉𝗅𝗂𝖼𝖺𝗋 𝖺 𝗍𝗂𝗍𝗎𝗅𝖺𝗋𝖾𝗌 𝖽𝖾 𝖼𝖺𝗋𝗀𝗈𝗌 𝗉𝗈𝗅𝗂́𝗍𝗂𝖼𝗈𝗌 - 𝗈 𝗊𝗎𝖾 𝗇𝖺̃𝗈 𝖾𝗋𝖺 𝗈 𝖼𝖺𝗌𝗈.

𝖥𝖺𝖼𝖾 𝖺̀ 𝖾𝗑𝗍𝖾𝗇𝗌𝖺̃𝗈 𝖽𝗈 𝖽𝖾𝗌𝖺𝗌𝗍𝗋𝖾, 𝗈𝗌 𝖽𝖾𝖿𝖾𝗇𝗌𝗈𝗋𝖾𝗌 𝖼𝗈𝗇𝗌𝗂𝖽𝖾𝗋𝖺𝗆 𝖾𝗌𝗍𝖺𝗋 𝖺𝗇𝗍𝖾 𝗎𝗆 “𝗀𝗂𝗀𝖺𝗇𝗍𝖾𝗌𝖼𝗈 𝖾 𝖿𝗅𝖺𝗀𝗋𝖺𝗇𝗍𝖾 𝗅𝖺𝗉𝗌𝗈, 𝗉𝗈𝗋𝗏𝖾𝗇𝗍𝗎𝗋𝖺 𝖽𝖾 𝗇𝖺𝗍𝗎𝗋𝖾𝗓𝖺 𝗂𝗇𝖿𝗈𝗋𝗆𝖺́𝗍𝗂𝖼𝖺 𝖾 𝗌𝗂𝗆𝗂𝗅𝖺𝗋”, 𝗇𝗈𝗍𝖺𝗇𝖽𝗈 𝗁𝖺𝗏𝖾𝗋 “𝗉𝖺𝗋𝖾𝖼𝖾𝗇𝖼̧𝖺𝗌 𝗏𝖺́𝗋𝗂𝖺𝗌, 𝖺𝗈 𝗈𝗅𝗁𝗈 𝖽𝖾 𝗎𝗆 𝗈𝖻𝗌𝖾𝗋𝗏𝖺𝖽𝗈𝗋 𝗆𝖾́𝖽𝗂𝗈, 𝖼𝗈𝗆 𝗎𝗆 𝗍𝖾𝗑𝗍𝗈 𝗀𝖾𝗋𝖺𝖽𝗈 𝗉𝗈𝗋 𝗂𝗇𝗍𝖾𝗅𝗂𝗀𝖾̂𝗇𝖼𝗂𝖺 𝖺𝗋𝗍𝗂𝖿𝗂𝖼𝗂𝖺𝗅 𝗈𝗎 𝖺𝗅𝗀𝗎𝗆𝖺 𝗈𝗎𝗍𝗋𝖺 𝖿𝖾𝗋𝗋𝖺𝗆𝖾𝗇𝗍𝖺 (𝗈𝗎 𝗂𝗇𝗍𝗋𝗈𝗆𝗂𝗌𝗌𝖺̃𝗈, 𝖺𝖻𝗎𝗌𝗈, 𝗏𝗂𝖼𝗂𝖺𝖼̧𝖺̃𝗈, 𝗈 𝗊𝗎𝖾 𝗌𝖾𝗃𝖺) 𝖽𝖾 𝗇𝖺𝗍𝗎𝗋𝖾𝗓𝖺 𝗂𝗇𝖿𝗈𝗋𝗆𝖺́𝗍𝗂𝖼𝖺 𝗈𝗎 𝖽𝗂𝗀𝗂𝗍𝖺𝗅”, 𝖾 𝖺𝗉𝖾𝗇𝖺𝗌 𝗏𝖾𝗋𝖾𝗆 𝖼𝗈𝗆𝗈 𝗉𝗈𝗌𝗌𝗂𝖻𝗂𝗅𝗂𝖽𝖺𝖽𝖾 𝖾𝗑𝗉𝗅𝗂𝖼𝖺𝗍𝗂𝗏𝖺 “𝗎𝗆𝖺 𝖾𝗏𝖾𝗇𝗍𝗎𝖺𝗅 𝗀𝖾𝗋𝖺𝖼̧𝖺̃𝗈 𝖺𝗎𝗍𝗈𝗆𝖺́𝗍𝗂𝖼𝖺, 𝖼𝗈𝗆𝗉𝗎𝗍𝗈𝗋𝗂𝗓𝖺𝖽𝖺 𝖾 𝖺𝗋𝗍𝗂𝖿𝗂𝖼𝗂𝖺𝗅”. 𝖯𝖾𝗅𝗈 𝗊𝗎𝖾, 𝖼𝗈𝗇𝖼𝗅𝗎𝖾𝗆, 𝗌𝖾 𝖾𝗌𝗍𝖺́ 𝗉𝖾𝗋𝖺𝗇𝗍𝖾 “𝗎𝗆 𝖺𝖼𝗈́𝗋𝖽𝖺̃𝗈 𝗂𝗇𝖾𝗑𝗂𝗌𝗍𝖾𝗇𝗍𝖾” - 𝖾 𝗉𝗈𝗋𝗍𝖺𝗇𝗍𝗈 𝗇𝗎𝗅𝗈.

𝖤𝗆 𝗋𝖾𝖺𝖼̧𝖺̃𝗈, 𝖼𝗈𝗇𝗁𝖾𝖼𝗂𝖽𝖺 𝖾𝗌𝗍𝖺 𝗌𝖾𝗀𝗎𝗇𝖽𝖺-𝖿𝖾𝗂𝗋𝖺, 𝗈 𝗋𝖾𝗅𝖺𝗍𝗈𝗋 𝗍𝖾𝗋𝖺́ 𝖺𝖿𝗂𝗋𝗆𝖺𝖽𝗈, 𝗌𝖾𝗀𝗎𝗇𝖽𝗈 𝖺 𝗉𝗋𝖾𝗌𝗂𝖽𝖾𝗇𝗍𝖾 𝖽𝗈 𝖳𝗋𝗂𝖻𝗎𝗇𝖺𝗅 𝖽𝖺 𝖱𝖾𝗅𝖺𝖼̧𝖺̃𝗈, 𝗊𝗎𝖾 𝖺 𝗉𝗈𝗌𝗌𝗂𝖻𝗂𝗅𝗂𝖽𝖺𝖽𝖾 𝖽𝖾 𝗍𝖾𝗋 𝗎𝗌𝖺𝖽𝗈 𝖺𝗅𝗀𝗎𝗆𝖺 𝖿𝖾𝗋𝗋𝖺𝗆𝖾𝗇𝗍𝖺 𝖽𝖾 𝖨𝗇𝗍𝖾𝗅𝗂𝗀𝖾̂𝗇𝖼𝗂𝖺 𝖠𝗋𝗍𝗂𝖿𝗂𝖼𝗂𝖺𝗅 (𝖨𝖠) 𝗉𝖺𝗋𝖺 𝗉𝗋𝗈𝖽𝗎𝗓𝗂𝗋 𝗈 𝖽𝗈𝖼𝗎𝗆𝖾𝗇𝗍𝗈 𝖾́ “𝖼𝗈𝗆𝗉𝗅𝖾𝗍𝖺𝗆𝖾𝗇𝗍𝖾 𝖽𝖾𝗌𝖼𝖺𝖻𝗂𝖽𝖺”. 𝖠𝗅𝖿𝗋𝖾𝖽𝗈 𝖢𝗈𝗌𝗍𝖺 𝗇𝖺̃𝗈 𝗍𝖾𝗋𝖺́ 𝗉𝗈𝗋𝖾́𝗆 𝖺𝖽𝗂𝖺𝗇𝗍𝖺𝖽𝗈 𝗊𝗎𝖺𝗅𝗊𝗎𝖾𝗋 𝗃𝗎𝗌𝗍𝗂𝖿𝗂𝖼𝖺𝖼̧𝖺̃𝗈 𝗉𝖺𝗋𝖺 𝗈𝗌 𝖽𝗂𝗌𝗅𝖺𝗍𝖾𝗌 𝖽𝖾𝗍𝖾𝗍𝖺𝖽𝗈𝗌, 𝖺𝗅𝖾𝗀𝖺𝗇𝖽𝗈 “𝗎𝗆𝖺 𝗂𝗆𝗉𝗈𝗌𝗌𝗂𝖻𝗂𝗅𝗂𝖽𝖺𝖽𝖾 𝖽𝖾 𝗇𝖺𝗍𝗎𝗋𝖾𝗓𝖺 𝗉𝖾𝗌𝗌𝗈𝖺𝗅” 𝖽𝖾 𝗎𝗆 𝖽𝗈𝗌 𝗍𝗋𝖾̂𝗌 𝗆𝖺𝗀𝗂𝗌𝗍𝗋𝖺𝖽𝗈𝗌 𝖾𝗇𝗏𝗈𝗅𝗏𝗂𝖽𝗈𝗌 𝗉𝖺𝗋𝖺 𝗃𝗎𝗌𝗍𝗂𝖿𝗂𝖼𝖺𝗋 𝗈 𝖿𝖺𝖼𝗍𝗈 𝖽𝖾 𝖺𝗂𝗇𝖽𝖺 𝗇𝖺̃𝗈 𝗍𝖾𝗋 𝗁𝖺𝗏𝗂𝖽𝗈 𝗋𝖾𝗌𝗉𝗈𝗌𝗍𝖺 𝖺𝗈𝗌 𝗋𝖾𝗊𝗎𝖾𝗋𝗂𝗆𝖾𝗇𝗍𝗈𝗌 𝖽𝖾 𝗇𝗎𝗅𝗂𝖽𝖺𝖽𝖾 𝖽𝗈 𝖺𝖼𝗈́𝗋𝖽𝖺̃𝗈 𝖺𝗉𝗋𝖾𝗌𝖾𝗇𝗍𝖺𝖽𝗈𝗌 𝗉𝖾𝗅𝗈𝗌 𝖺𝖽𝗏𝗈𝗀𝖺𝖽𝗈𝗌.

𝖲𝖾𝗀𝗎𝗇𝖽𝗈 𝖿𝖾𝗓 𝗌𝖺𝖻𝖾𝗋 𝗈 𝖢𝗈𝗇𝗌𝖾𝗅𝗁𝗈 𝖲𝗎𝗉𝖾𝗋𝗂𝗈𝗋 𝖽𝖾 𝖬𝖺𝗀𝗂𝗌𝗍𝗋𝖺𝗍𝗎𝗋𝖺, 𝗊𝗎𝖾 𝗌𝗎𝗉𝖾𝗋𝗂𝗇𝗍𝖾𝗇𝖽𝖾 𝖺 𝗃𝗎𝖽𝗂𝖼𝖺𝗍𝗎𝗋𝖺 𝖾 𝖾́ 𝗉𝗋𝖾𝗌𝗂𝖽𝗂𝖽𝗈 𝗉𝖾𝗅𝗈 𝗉𝗋𝖾𝗌𝗂𝖽𝖾𝗇𝗍𝖾 𝖽𝗈 𝖲𝗎𝗉𝗋𝖾𝗆𝗈 𝖳𝗋𝗂𝖻𝗎𝗇𝖺𝗅 𝖽𝖾 𝖩𝗎𝗌𝗍𝗂𝖼̧𝖺, 𝖺𝗂𝗇𝖽𝖺 𝗇𝖺̃𝗈 𝖿𝗈𝗂 𝖺𝗅𝗂 𝖺𝗉𝗋𝖾𝗌𝖾𝗇𝗍𝖺𝖽𝖺 𝗊𝗎𝖺𝗅𝗊𝗎𝖾𝗋 𝗊𝗎𝖾𝗂𝗑𝖺 𝗋𝖾𝗅𝖺𝗍𝗂𝗏𝖺 𝖺𝗈 𝖼𝖺𝗌𝗈. 𝖬𝖺𝗌 𝖾𝗌𝗍𝖾 𝗈́𝗋𝗀𝖺̃𝗈 𝖿𝗋𝗂𝗌𝖺 𝗊𝗎𝖾 “𝗈𝗌 𝗃𝗎𝗂́𝗓𝖾𝗌 𝗀𝗈𝗓𝖺𝗆 𝖽𝖾 𝗂𝗇𝖽𝖾𝗉𝖾𝗇𝖽𝖾̂𝗇𝖼𝗂𝖺 𝖾 𝖺𝗎𝗍𝗈𝗇𝗈𝗆𝗂𝖺 𝗇𝗈 𝖾𝗑𝖾𝗋𝖼𝗂́𝖼𝗂𝗈 𝖽𝖺𝗌 𝗌𝗎𝖺𝗌 𝖿𝗎𝗇𝖼̧𝗈̃𝖾𝗌 𝗃𝗎𝗋𝗂𝗌𝖽𝗂𝖼𝗂𝗈𝗇𝖺𝗂𝗌, 𝗂𝗇𝖼𝗅𝗎𝗂𝗇𝖽𝗈 𝗇𝖺 𝗌𝖾𝗅𝖾𝖼̧𝖺̃𝗈 𝖽𝖺𝗌 𝖿𝗈𝗇𝗍𝖾𝗌 𝗊𝗎𝖾 𝗎𝗍𝗂𝗅𝗂𝗓𝖺𝗆 𝗉𝖺𝗋𝖺 𝗌𝖾 𝖽𝗈𝖼𝗎𝗆𝖾𝗇𝗍𝖺𝗋 𝖾 𝖿𝗎𝗇𝖽𝖺𝗆𝖾𝗇𝗍𝖺𝗋 𝖺𝗌 𝗌𝗎𝖺𝗌 𝖽𝖾𝖼𝗂𝗌𝗈̃𝖾𝗌” - 𝖺𝗌 𝗊𝗎𝖺𝗂𝗌, 𝗌𝗎𝖻𝗅𝗂𝗇𝗁𝖺, “𝗌𝖺̃𝗈 𝗌𝗂𝗇𝖽𝗂𝖼𝖺́𝗏𝖾𝗂𝗌” (𝗈𝗎 𝗌𝖾𝗃𝖺, 𝗋𝖾𝖼𝗈𝗋𝗋𝗂́𝗏𝖾𝗂𝗌). 𝖨𝗇𝖿𝗈𝗋𝗆𝖺 𝗍𝖺𝗆𝖻𝖾́𝗆 𝗊𝗎𝖾 𝗇𝗎𝗇𝖼𝖺 𝖽𝖾𝗎 𝗂𝗇𝗌𝗍𝗋𝗎𝖼̧𝗈̃𝖾𝗌 𝗀𝖾𝗋𝖺𝗂𝗌 𝗌𝗈𝖻𝗋𝖾 𝗈 𝗎𝗌𝗈 𝖽𝖾 𝖿𝖾𝗋𝗋𝖺𝗆𝖾𝗇𝗍𝖺𝗌 𝖽𝖾 𝖨𝖠. 𝖤́ 𝗎𝗆𝖺 𝗈𝗉𝖼̧𝖺̃𝗈 𝗊𝗎𝖾 𝖼𝗈𝗇𝗍𝗋𝖺𝗌𝗍𝖺 𝖼𝗈𝗆 𝗈 𝗊𝗎𝖾 𝗌𝖾 𝗉𝖺𝗌𝗌𝖺 𝗇𝗈𝗎𝗍𝗋𝖺𝗌 𝗃𝗎𝗋𝗂𝗌𝖽𝗂𝖼̧𝗈̃𝖾𝗌, 𝖺𝗍𝖾𝗇𝗍𝖺𝗌 𝖺𝗈𝗌 𝗋𝗂𝗌𝖼𝗈𝗌 𝖽𝖺 𝗎𝗍𝗂𝗅𝗂𝗓𝖺𝖼̧𝖺̃𝗈 𝗂𝗋𝗋𝖾𝗌𝗉𝗈𝗇𝗌𝖺́𝗏𝖾𝗅 𝖾 𝗂𝗋𝗋𝖾𝗌𝗍𝗋𝗂𝗍𝖺 𝖽𝖺 𝖠𝖨.

𝖤𝗆 𝖽𝖾𝗓𝖾𝗆𝖻𝗋𝗈 𝖽𝖾 𝟤𝟢𝟤𝟥, 𝗈 𝖳𝗋𝗂𝖻𝗎𝗇𝖺𝗅 𝖥𝖾𝖽𝖾𝗋𝖺𝗅 𝖽𝗈 𝖢𝖺𝗇𝖺𝖽𝖺́, 𝗉𝗈𝗋 𝖾𝗑𝖾𝗆𝗉𝗅𝗈, 𝖾𝗑𝖺𝗋𝗈𝗎 𝗎𝗆 𝖼𝗈𝗇𝗃𝗎𝗇𝗍𝗈 𝖽𝖾 𝗇𝗈𝗋𝗆𝖺𝗌 𝖽𝗂𝗓𝖾𝗇𝖽𝗈 𝗋𝖾𝗌𝗉𝖾𝗂𝗍𝗈 𝖺̀ 𝗎𝗍𝗂𝗅𝗂𝗓𝖺𝖼̧𝖺̃𝗈 𝖽𝖾𝗌𝗌𝖺 𝖿𝖾𝗋𝗋𝖺𝗆𝖾𝗇𝗍𝖺; 𝖿𝗈𝗋𝖺𝗆 𝖼𝗋𝗂𝖺𝖽𝖺𝗌 𝗇𝗈𝗏𝖺𝗌 𝗈𝖻𝗋𝗂𝗀𝖺𝖼̧𝗈̃𝖾𝗌, 𝗂𝗇𝖼𝗅𝗎𝗂𝗇𝖽𝗈 𝖺 𝖽𝖾 𝗊𝗎𝖾 𝗈𝗌 𝗌𝗂𝗀𝗇𝖺𝗍𝖺́𝗋𝗂𝗈𝗌 𝖽𝖾 𝗉𝖾𝖼̧𝖺𝗌 𝗌𝗎𝖻𝗆𝖾𝗍𝗂𝖽𝖺𝗌 𝖺𝗈𝗌 𝗍𝗋𝗂𝖻𝗎𝗇𝖺𝗂𝗌 𝗂𝗇𝖼𝗅𝗎𝖺𝗆 𝗎𝗆 𝖼𝖾𝗋𝗍𝗂𝖿𝗂𝖼𝖺𝖽𝗈 𝖽𝖾 𝗊𝗎𝖾 𝖾𝗌𝗍𝖺̃𝗈 𝗌𝖾𝗀𝗎𝗋𝗈𝗌 𝖽𝖺 𝖺𝗎𝗍𝖾𝗇𝗍𝗂𝖼𝗂𝖽𝖺𝖽𝖾 𝖽𝖾 𝗍𝗈𝖽𝖺𝗌 𝖺𝗌 𝖼𝗂𝗍𝖺𝖼̧𝗈̃𝖾𝗌 𝗅𝖾𝗀𝖺𝗂𝗌 𝗅𝗂𝗌𝗍𝖺𝖽𝖺𝗌 𝗇𝖺𝗌 𝗆𝖾𝗌𝗆𝖺𝗌. 

𝖳𝖾̂𝗆, 𝖽𝖾 𝗋𝖾𝗌𝗍𝗈, 𝗌𝗂𝖽𝗈 𝗂𝖽𝖾𝗇𝗍𝗂𝖿𝗂𝖼𝖺𝖽𝗈𝗌, 𝗉𝗈𝗋 𝖾𝗑𝖾𝗆𝗉𝗅𝗈 𝗇𝗈𝗌 𝖤𝖴𝖠, 𝗋𝖾𝖼𝗎𝗋𝗌𝗈𝗌 𝖾 𝗉𝖾𝗍𝗂𝖼̧𝗈̃𝖾𝗌 “𝖺𝗅𝗎𝖼𝗂𝗇𝖺𝖽𝗈𝗌”, 𝗍𝗈𝗍𝖺𝗅 𝗈𝗎 𝗉𝖺𝗋𝖼𝗂𝖺𝗅𝗆𝖾𝗇𝗍𝖾 𝗀𝖾𝗋𝖺𝖽𝗈𝗌 𝗉𝗈𝗋 𝖨𝖠, 𝖼𝗈𝗆 𝗋𝖾𝖿𝖾𝗋𝖾̂𝗇𝖼𝗂𝖺𝗌 𝗃𝗎𝗋𝗂𝗌𝗉𝗋𝗎𝖽𝖾𝗇𝖼𝗂𝖺𝗂𝗌 𝖾 𝗅𝖾𝗀𝖺𝗂𝗌 𝖿𝖺𝗅𝗌𝖺𝗌. 𝖤 𝗇𝗈 𝖡𝗋𝖺𝗌𝗂𝗅 𝖿𝗈𝗂 𝖾𝗆 𝗇𝗈𝗏𝖾𝗆𝖻𝗋𝗈 𝖽𝖾 𝟤𝟢𝟤𝟥 𝗇𝗈𝗍𝗂𝖼𝗂𝖺𝖽𝗈 𝗊𝗎𝖾 𝗎𝗆 𝗃𝗎𝗂𝗓 𝖿𝖾𝖽𝖾𝗋𝖺𝗅 𝗂𝖺 𝗌𝖾𝗋 𝗂𝗇𝗏𝖾𝗌𝗍𝗂𝗀𝖺𝖽𝗈 𝗉𝗈𝗋 𝗍𝖾𝗋 𝖺𝗅𝖾𝗀𝖺𝖽𝖺𝗆𝖾𝗇𝗍𝖾 𝖺𝗌𝗌𝗂𝗇𝖺𝖽𝗈 𝗎𝗆𝖺 𝗌𝖾𝗇𝗍𝖾𝗇𝖼̧𝖺 𝖿𝖾𝗂𝗍𝖺 𝖺 𝗉𝖺𝗋𝗍𝗂𝗋 𝖽𝗈 𝖢𝗁𝖺𝗍𝖦𝖯𝖳, 𝗇𝖺 𝗊𝗎𝖺𝗅, 𝗉𝖺𝗋𝖺 𝖻𝖺𝗌𝖾𝖺𝗋 𝖺 𝖽𝖾𝖼𝗂𝗌𝖺̃𝗈, 𝖾𝗋𝖺 𝖼𝗂𝗍𝖺𝖽𝖺 𝗃𝗎𝗋𝗂𝗌𝗉𝗋𝗎𝖽𝖾̂𝗇𝖼𝗂𝖺 𝗂𝗇𝖾𝗑𝗂𝗌𝗍𝖾𝗇𝗍𝖾 𝖽𝗈 𝖲𝗎𝗉𝖾𝗋𝗂𝗈𝗋 𝖳𝗋𝗂𝖻𝗎𝗇𝖺𝗅 𝖽𝖾 𝖩𝗎𝗌𝗍𝗂𝖼̧𝖺. 𝖮 𝗆𝖺𝗀𝗂𝗌𝗍𝗋𝖺𝖽𝗈 𝖾𝗆 𝖼𝖺𝗎𝗌𝖺 𝗍𝖾𝗋-𝗌𝖾-𝖺́ 𝖾𝗌𝖼𝗎𝗌𝖺𝖽𝗈 𝖼𝗈𝗆 𝖾𝗑𝖼𝖾𝗌𝗌𝗈 𝖽𝖾 𝗍𝗋𝖺𝖻𝖺𝗅𝗁𝗈, 𝖺𝖿𝗂𝗋𝗆𝖺𝗇𝖽𝗈 𝗊𝗎𝖾 𝗎𝗌𝖺𝗋𝖺 𝗈 𝖢𝗁𝖺𝗍𝖦𝖯𝖳 𝗉𝗈𝗋 “𝗆𝖾𝗋𝗈 𝖾𝗊𝗎𝗂́𝗏𝗈𝖼𝗈”.

𝖠𝗉𝖺𝗋𝖾𝗇𝗍𝖾𝗆𝖾𝗇𝗍𝖾, 𝗈 𝗉𝖾𝗋𝗂𝗀𝗈, 𝗂𝖽𝖾𝗇𝗍𝗂𝖿𝗂𝖼𝖺𝖽𝗈 𝗇𝗎𝗆𝖺 𝖽𝖾𝖼𝗂𝗌𝖺̃𝗈 𝖽𝖾 𝟤𝟢𝟤𝟥 𝖽𝖾 𝗎𝗆 𝗍𝗋𝗂𝖻𝗎𝗇𝖺𝗅 𝖽𝖾 𝖭𝗈𝗏𝖺 𝖨𝗈𝗋𝗊𝗎𝖾 ( 𝖬𝖺𝗍𝖺 𝗏. 𝖠𝗏𝗂𝖺𝗇𝖼𝖺 𝖨𝗇𝖼.), 𝖽𝖾 𝖺 𝖨𝖠 𝗀𝖾𝗋𝖺𝗋 𝖽𝖾𝖼𝗂𝗌𝗈̃𝖾𝗌 𝗃𝗎𝖽𝗂𝖼𝗂𝖺𝗂𝗌 “𝖽𝖾𝖾𝗉𝖿𝖺𝗄𝖾”, 𝖼𝗈𝗆 𝖼𝗈𝗇𝗌𝖾𝗊𝗎𝖾̂𝗇𝖼𝗂𝖺𝗌 𝖺𝗍𝖾𝗋𝗋𝖺𝖽𝗈𝗋𝖺𝗌 𝖾 𝖽𝖾 𝗍𝗈𝗍𝖺𝗅 𝖽𝖾𝗌𝖼𝗋𝖾𝖽𝗂𝖻𝗂𝗅𝗂𝗓𝖺𝖼̧𝖺̃𝗈 𝖽𝗈 𝗌𝗂𝗌𝗍𝖾𝗆𝖺 𝖽𝖾 𝗃𝗎𝗌𝗍𝗂𝖼̧𝖺, 𝗇𝖺̃𝗈 𝖺𝖿𝗅𝗂𝗀𝖾 𝗈𝗌 𝗍𝗋𝗂𝖻𝗎𝗇𝖺𝗂𝗌 𝗉𝗈𝗋𝗍𝗎𝗀𝗎𝖾𝗌𝖾𝗌 𝗇𝖾𝗆 𝗈 𝖢𝖲𝖬. 𝖤𝗌𝗍𝖾 𝖾𝗌𝗍𝖺𝗋𝖺́, 𝖽𝖾 𝖺𝖼𝗈𝗋𝖽𝗈 𝖼𝗈𝗆 𝗇𝗈𝗍𝗂𝖼𝗂𝖺́𝗋𝗂𝗈 𝗋𝖾𝖼𝖾𝗇𝗍𝖾, 𝗆𝖺𝗂𝗌 𝗉𝗋𝖾𝗈𝖼𝗎𝗉𝖺𝖽𝗈 𝖾𝗆 𝖿𝖺𝖼𝗎𝗅𝗍𝖺𝗋 𝖺𝗈𝗌 𝗆𝖺𝗀𝗂𝗌𝗍𝗋𝖺𝖽𝗈𝗌 𝗈𝖼𝖺𝗌𝗂𝗈̃𝖾𝗌 𝖽𝖾 𝗋𝖾𝗅𝖺𝗑𝖺𝗆𝖾𝗇𝗍𝗈 𝗉𝖺𝗋𝖺 𝖼𝗈𝗆𝖻𝖺𝗍𝖾𝗋 𝗈 𝗌𝗍𝗋𝖾𝗌𝗌 𝖾 𝗈 𝖻𝗎𝗋𝗇𝗈𝗎𝗍, 𝗂𝗇𝖼𝗅𝗎𝗂𝗇𝖽𝗈 𝗆𝖺𝗌𝗌𝖺𝗀𝖾𝗇𝗌, 𝗉𝗋𝗈𝗀𝗋𝖺𝗆𝖺𝗌 𝖽𝖾 𝗆𝖾𝖽𝗂𝗍𝖺𝖼̧𝖺̃𝗈 𝖾 𝗂𝗈𝗀𝖺 𝗀𝗋𝖺́𝗍𝗂𝗌. 𝖰𝗎𝖾, 𝖺𝗍𝖾𝗇𝖽𝖾𝗇𝖽𝗈 𝖺𝗈 𝖼𝗈𝗇𝗍𝖾𝗎́𝖽𝗈 𝖽𝗈 𝖺𝖼𝗈́𝗋𝖽𝖺̃𝗈 𝗋𝖾𝖿𝖾𝗋𝗂𝖽𝗈, 𝗏𝖾̂𝗆 𝗍𝖺𝗋𝖽𝖾: 𝗁𝖺𝗏𝖾𝗋𝖺́ 𝗆𝖺𝗀𝗂𝗌𝗍𝗋𝖺𝖽𝗈𝗌 𝗃𝖺́ 𝗍𝗈𝖽𝗈𝗌 𝗊𝗎𝖾𝗂𝗆𝖺𝖽𝗂𝗇𝗁𝗈𝗌. 𝖮𝗎 𝖾𝗇𝗍𝖺̃𝗈 𝗇𝖺̃𝗈: 𝖼𝗈𝗇𝗌𝖾𝗀𝗎𝗂𝗋𝖺𝗆, 𝗏𝗂𝖺 𝗆𝖾𝖽𝗂𝗍𝖺𝖼̧𝖺̃𝗈, 𝗌𝗂𝗇𝗍𝗈𝗇𝗂𝗓𝖺𝗋 𝗈𝗎𝗍𝗋𝖺𝗌 𝖽𝗂𝗆𝖾𝗇𝗌𝗈̃𝖾𝗌 𝖽𝖾 𝗍𝖾𝗆𝗉𝗈 𝖾 𝖾𝗌𝗉𝖺𝖼̧𝗈, 𝗊𝗎𝗂𝖼̧𝖺́ 𝗌𝗂𝗌𝗍𝖾𝗆𝖺𝗌 𝗃𝗎𝖽𝗂𝖼𝗂𝖺𝗂𝗌 𝖽𝖾 𝗈𝗎𝗍𝗋𝗈𝗌 𝗉𝗅𝖺𝗇𝖾𝗍𝖺𝗌

* Jornalista, Grande repórter

IN "DIÁRIO DE NOTÍCIAS" - 26/11/24 .