Possible foreign interference in Brazil’s elections this year is a concern, given attempts to influence elections in Latin America in recent months. This is the warning from Chilean Marcela Rios Tobar, 59, director for Latin America at the International Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance (International Idea).
“We have seen active attempts by the United States to play a role in elections in Latin America. So it is possible that we will see attempts by both this power and others willing to finance campaigns and promote disinformation”, he says in an interview with Sheet Rios, who is in Brazil to participate this Tuesday (17) in a European Union event on combating disinformation.
What are your main concerns regarding Brazil’s electoral process this year?
Brazil arrives at the 2026 elections better prepared than in the 2022 election. In particular due to the very proactive role that the Superior Electoral Court took in defense of democracy. At the same time, the challenges have multiplied in four years, increasing the complexity and massiveness of disinformation.
Brazil has been a global example of how a country managed to defend its democracy and its institutions. Despite many attacks, despite much polarization, the State and institutions have shown that they are stronger than in other countries. But there is a lot, to parties, to institutions. And these high levels of distrust make people more likely to believe lies.
The content moderation scenario on social networks is very different, because internet platforms have changed their policies and have a strategy of moderating as little as possible. Is this a concern?
It’s a big concern. Brazil is at the forefront of regulating the use of artificial intelligence and combating disinformation. There is no country in Latin America, and in fact in the world, that has such advanced legislation in this regard. Let’s see if the Brazilian State has the capacity to apply the rules that are on paper.
Yes, the policies [de moderação] of the platforms have devolved, they are in a “hands off” stance, only acting in very extreme cases. This makes the states’ job much more difficult. Furthermore, we are extremely concerned about the misinformation that circulates on private networks, such as WhatsApp, Messenger, Signal, Telegram. People massively share misinformation via private messages.
But we should not think that misinformation directly determines electoral preferences. The offer of fake news, troll farms, fake accounts is not enough. There must be demand, citizens must be willing to believe, consume and share. And this demand is built through polarization, with political parties and candidates who are actively instigating their followers. And the demand for disinformation also increases when citizens do not believe in the State, do not have confidence in parties and electoral bodies.
You were saying that it is very important to have trust in institutions. In Brazil, there are a series of corruption investigations involving judges. Is this a situation that favors electoral disinformation by affecting trust in institutions?
We all want corruption cases to be investigated. But it is a fact that the investigations will ratify the biases, they will give credibility to the sectors that said that the Justice acted politically inspired. And they will sow doubt in less politicized citizens. Because we are not only questioning the probity of these people, but ultimately questioning the autonomy and independence of institutions. And this is very serious.
What is the impact of this on the information environment and on doubts regarding electoral integrity?
This will help to confirm the perceptions of some political sectors that institutions do not act independently. The risk is that electoral bodies become the main target of attacks from political sectors. When political sectors change their strategy of attacking their opponents and dedicate themselves to attacking what in football would be the referee, this is very bad. In Chile, where I am at the moment, despite having a lot of polarization and having gone from one of the most left-wing governments we have ever had to one of the most right-wing, all parties accepted the results, they did not question the electoral body. In other words, it was possible to have a very polarized party system, with a lot of misinformation, a lot of attacks, but the rules of the electoral game were not questioned.
Is there a concern about foreign interference in the election?
In Latin America, until recently, our problems were more related to internal dynamics, polarization, distrust in institutions and the fragility of party systems. But today, due to geopolitical transformations, we are exposed to attempts at external interference. We have seen active attempts by the United States to play a role in elections in Latin America. So it is possible that we will have attempts from both this power and others willing to finance campaigns, to promote disinformation.
We saw that
There is an express policy on the part of the United States presidency to support candidacies and link this to visas, trade issues, applying sanctions, increasing tariffs. . In some countries, it was quite clear that they had an impact; in other countries it is not clear.
Can the US have an impact on Brazilian elections?
Foreign countries cannot actively promote candidacies, this is against international standards of respect for sovereignty. It is a problem that concerns us. On the other hand, Brazil is such a large and complex country that the impact of an attempt to influence the election may be smaller than in a small country that is completely dependent in commercial and political terms on the United States.
Is financing of disinformation by foreign actors also a concern?
In Europe, it became very clear that there is. In Latin America, so far we have not seen clear evidence of explicit government funding from any country for campaigns. There is evidence that non-governmental bodies are active.
There is a lot of funding and coordination between NGOs and religious sectors in the United States. This financing was very active in the plebiscite of the peace agreements in Colombia and the constitutional plebiscite in Chile. There is strong transnational coordination of conservative sectors with links to evangelical movements, for example, which are mobilized against sexual and reproductive rights, equal marriage, and feminism. And we see this throughout Latin America and also in Brazil. But these are influences that come from organized non-governmental sectors, rather than governments.
X-RAY
Marcela Rios Tobar, 59, is director for Latin America at the International Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance (International Idea). She has a doctorate in political science from the University of Wisconsin, a master’s degree in social sciences from the Latin American Faculty of Social Sciences (Flacso), in Mexico, and a degree in Sociology and Latin American Studies from York University in Canada. She was Chile’s human rights minister between 2022 and 2023 (Gabriel Boric government).
