Fux responds to Ferrajoli’s comment on his vote: “Militancy”

Minister Luiz Fux stated this Tuesday (21.Oct.2025) that he was “perplexed” with the statements of theorists Luigi Ferrajoli and Adam Przeworski, cited in their vote to acquit (PL) for a coup d’état. According to the minister, they “they don’t know the Brazilian reality” and the statements were a “trace of political militancy”.

Luigi Ferrajoli is considered the “father of criminal guarantees” and was cited by the minister to talk about curtailing the right to defense in the trial of nucleus 1 of the coup d’état accusation, on September 6th. However, Ferrajoli stated, in an interview with Whomthat the conviction of the former president and those accused of a coup d’état is a sign of “democratic solidity”.

Fux began analyzing the merits of his vote in the action that judges those involved in nucleus 4 of the PGR (Attorney General’s Office) complaint, saying: “I am perplexed by the way in which the authors themselves, in some way, in my view, misplaced their works”.

According to the minister, Ferrajoli “he did not make a line, any comment, about the affronts, as indicated, to due legal process, the prohibition of exceptional courts, broad defense, the individualization of conduct, the prohibition of in malam partem analogy, among other elementary guarantees”.

Soon after, Fux mentioned statements by political scientist Adam Przeworski who, in an interview with the newspaper The Globesaid he did not understand what conclusions the minister wanted to draw when quoting him. Fux considered that Przeworski “calls himself a democratic theorist” and didn’t read or “was never bothered by the restrictions on freedom of expression and other fundamental rights highlighted by international organizations, as I mentioned in my vote”.

For the minister, the 2 theorists “they don’t know the Brazilian reality” and did not read the process that “they got up to comment”.

“It’s more embarrassing — because we teachers are careful, we all have the same situation, we are full professors, we have written books — you have to be careful when you read the vote and its observations, and you don’t agree with them”.

“I, with almost 5 decades of teaching, being a full professor, because the denomination is old, I consider it regrettable that academic seriousness has been left aside due to a streak of political militancy”.

FUX VOTE

Fux began his vote in the nucleus 4 trial by reaffirming his understanding of the STF’s incompetence to judge the accused.

Nucleus 4 is the 2nd to be judged by the Supreme Court. The core 1 trial concluded on September 11 and resulted in the conviction of all 8 defendants, including Bolsonaro, sentenced to 27 years and 3 months in prison.

The defendants are:

• Ailton Moraes Barrosformer Army major;
• Angelo DenicoliArmy reserve major;
• Giancarlo RodriguesArmy warrant officer;
• Guilherme AlmeidaArmy lieutenant colonel;
• Reginaldo AbreuArmy colonel;
• Marcelo BormevetFederal Police agent;
• Carlos Cesar Moretzsohn Rochapresident of the Voto Legal Institute.

PGR

The PGR. The Attorney General of the Republic, Paulo Gonet, considered that the group acted in coordination to use the structure of Abin (Brazilian Intelligence Agency) to concentrate the production and dissemination of false information to promote distrust in institutions.

The oral arguments were held on October 14th in the 1st Panel of the Court. Read what the lawyers at the heart of “disinformation” said:

• Ailton Moraes Barros (former Army major) – asked for acquittal due to lack of evidence. He claimed that he did not receive orders from Braga Netto, had no public position in Bolsonaro’s government and had no influence in the Army. The lawyers stated that their publications on the networks had the character of marketing political, without coup intent;
• Ângelo Denicoli (Army reserve major) – maintained that facts outside the complaint were included and that the evidence presented by the PGR does not prove the effective participation of the soldier in the criminal organization. According to the defense, the charges are generic;
• Carlos Cesar Rocha (president of Instituto Voto Legal) – claimed that he acted only technically, hired by the PL, without disclosing misinformation. He said that he never claimed there was fraud and that he publicly declared that the system was auditable and without irregularities;
• Giancarlo Gomes Rodrigues (Army warrant officer) – said he did not use weapons or encourage violence and had no connection with the group, except professionally. He said he didn’t know Alexandre Ramagem, he didn’t create fake news and that he only followed technical orders at Abin;
• Guilherme Almeida (Army lieutenant colonel) – argued that he did not produce content, was not part of a criminal organization or encouraged third parties. He said that he only shared public links in private groups and that he did not participate in the events of January 8;
• Marcelo Bormevet (federal police officer) – asked for acquittal due to lack of relevance in the facts. He maintained that his research at Abin was technical in nature, that he did not create or spread fake news and that he had no power of command, nor involvement in a plan for institutional disruption;
• Reginaldo Abreu (Army colonel) – defense alleged lack of evidence and disproportionate accusations. He said that messages exchanged were just personal opinions, that he did not participate in the “Crisis Office”, nor did he interfere in reports from the Armed Forces.