The president of the (Supreme Federal Court) confirmed that the court decided to keep the digital militias inquiry open, which aims at the former president () and allies.
“The problem is the facts that multiply and therefore led to extension. New things were discovered,” he said. THE Sheet em 2026.
Barroso said on Thursday (3) to the interview, weekly music video Sheetwho had agreed with the minister the closure of the inquiry, but the plans changed because new revelations would have led to the need for further investigations. According to the minister, what causes tension today is not the investigation, but the trial of the coup plot.
In the interview, the STF president stated that it is not necessary to discuss amnesty to accused of the coup plot before a possible conviction.
“In principle, amnesty is a competence of,” he said, noting that the Supreme Court could look at some measure eventually approved by Parliament. Some colleagues of the minister see an amnesty as unconstitutional.
Barroso also commented on what would be an excess of judicialization, which often brings political issues to the Supreme. He said he considered “reasonable” a discussion to limit the access of minor parties to the court, “to give more representativeness to these demands.”
The minister gave the interview, where he participates in the Lisbon Forum, known as “Gilmarpalooza”.
He said there was a “mistaken perception” about the performance of ministers in events with the participation of entrepreneurs. “When I talk to indigenous people or quilombolas, there is no problem. When I talk to entrepreneurs, people get all kinds of suspicions.”
Digital militias inquiry
Minister Alexandre [de Moraes] And we had talked and we had the idea that the inquiry could end at the end of last year or at the beginning of it. The problem is the facts, which multiply and therefore effectively led to the provocation [do Supremo].
Judgment of the coup plot
The big problem, which also creates a less pacified environment in the country, [é] The trial of an alleged coup attempt, which, if it has happened, if the evidence confirms, we have to judge, because we need to end these cycles of Brazilian history in which those who lost scam.
Amnesty for January 8
With respect to January 8, I myself supported the modification of the legislation to reduce the penalties and almost all to be released. In the vote, I voted formed. I didn’t accumulate [condenações pelos crimes de] coup d’état with violent abolition of the rule of law. I gave smaller penalties than those that prevailed. And now there is a project being discussed in Congress to make this understanding prevail.
Amnesty in the coup plot
I don’t like to speculate about what didn’t happen. The only comment I would do, in theory, is that amnesty usually comes after there is some punishment. Amnesty before punishment I think it has no precedent.
Therefore, this discussion, whether amnesty is legitimate or not, must be a post-eventual discussion. Before eventual conviction, I think this is not a discussion of its own.
The Supreme, on the contrary even what is widespread, is often defender towards the political choices of the National Congress, including the political amnesty that took place to torturers and representatives of the dictatorship, although it is a controversial theme, the Supreme valued at the time, considering that it was a legitimate political decision of the National Congress.
I am not anticipating a judgment on any future amnesty, because it depends a lot on other circumstances, but in principle amnesty is a competence of the National Congress.
I get the quilombola representatives, and I still recently went to Quilombo dos Palmares, just as I went to Xapuri, in Acre, just as I went to Humaitá, in the Amazon, just as I was Altamira, I went to Rio Branco, went to. This is not news. When I come to Lisbon, it’s news.
There is a great prejudice in Brazil against free initiative, because when I talk to the indigenous people or the quilombolas, there is no problem. When I talk to entrepreneurs, people raise all sorts of suspicions. And entrepreneurs are competitors with each other, not homogeneity. I think it’s an unfair perception of what happens.
STF Image
There was a significant increase in judicialization in Brazil in general, both in the supreme and in the lower instances. The judiciary has become a more relevant power in Brazilian life, which displeases more people and, therefore, became the target of more criticism and more dissatisfaction.
Part of the criticisms are fair, and we need to improve. And others are unfair and come as a consequence of a certain desire for the interests that are contradicted.
But we judge questions that contrast agribusiness and indigenous communities. One side will be dissatisfied. We judge tax issues, the government or taxpayer is dissatisfied. Everyone vocalizes their dissatisfaction.
I am not very impressed with public opinion polls that criticize the judiciary, because the importance of a court cannot be assessed even in public opinion polls. We interpret the Constitution and often displease many people.
Big Techs Responsibility
I consider that [o resultado do julgamento do ] It is perhaps the best legal treatment of this theme in the world.
Party access to the Supreme
You have an immense amount of actors that can cause the Supreme, which includes all political parties, includes the Chamber Bureau, the President of the Republic, the Attorney General of the Republic, all national class entities, all union confederations and the Brazilian Bar Association and the […] I think there is a proposal that limits, in relation to political parties, a minimum of representatives in Congress. This seems reasonable to me to give perhaps more representativeness to these demands.
Permanence in the Supreme
Look, I’m so happy in the supreme. News came out that I would go to an embassy. This news is not correct. I have no intention of going to an embassy. I have fulfilled my role in the supreme the best way I can.
I don’t intend to go to any embassy and I can stay [no STF] Until 75 years. I’m far from it.
When my wife was alive and sick, I really shared with friendly people I thought of retiring after the presidency to enjoy the life she had. Unfortunately, she left and this motivation I no longer have. So, I don’t know. I can stay up to 75 years, let’s see.
