@ Pegasus,
There is a confusing issue.
I find it highly unlikely that there would have been a "regular" court case concerning the breach of judicial secrecy. There is, however, a system for dealing with offences relating to the PJ.
There is a whole hierarchy involved in PJ sanctions depending on the gravity, and the sanctions have an escalating range of consequences.
This one appears to have been issued by the deputy head of the PJ (which corresponds to one of the lower levels of santions). The more serious the offence, the higher the decision-making body - which makes sense.
This one was decreed by the deputy national director, whereas booting Amaral off the case was a decision by the national director (Ribeiro, at the time).
However, a sanction decreed by the PJ isn't necessarily the end of the legal process. Again, see Cristóvão re the Joana case in which he got a 120-day suspension from the PJ disciplinary unit, but which appears to have been a separate issue to the torture trial.