Governor of Minas Gerais and pre-candidate for the Presidency, (Novo) again criticized the Federal Supreme Court () this Wednesday (18) and compared the court’s actions to that of a pedophile pope.
Zema, who is still slipping in the electoral polls, has adopted a confrontational speech with the Supreme Court in recent weeks amid the Master case controversy surrounding the court.
“What we are seeing in Brazil, I don’t remember seeing the highest court, which should be a reference. Look what it is up to. It’s as if we had a pedophile pope. What can we expect from priests?”, said the governor at an agribusiness event in Belo Horizonte.
The governor of Minas Gerais, who will hand over the position next Sunday (22) to his vice-president, Mateus Simões (PSD), criticized the Supreme Court after being asked how he would take the agribusiness flag to the pre-campaign for the Presidency.
Like , Zema and have sought to occupy the space of the Bolsonarists in criticizing the Judiciary.
The Minas Gerais governor’s strategists assess that (PL) supporters have adopted caution in attacks on the Judiciary, with the aim of demonstrating moderation among centrist voters.
Zema’s accumulation of criticism of the STF was the subject of comments by the minister in a Supreme Court session at the beginning of the month.
“It’s shocking to see a governor like the one from Minas Gerais, who led the state to an economic debacle, but is surviving thanks to injunctions given by this court, attack the court. I’m thinking ‘Dad, they don’t know what they’re doing'”, said the dean.
Gilmar was referring to a decision by the STF at the end of the government of Zema’s predecessor, Fernando Pimentel (PT), which freed the state from paying its debts to the Union.
The injunction was renewed throughout the Zema government until the state entered the Fiscal Recovery Regime – also by decision of the Supreme Court.
Minas Gerais ended 2025 with R$177 billion in debt to the Union, an increase of 40% in inflation-adjusted values compared to 2018, the last year before Zema took office.
State management claims that it did not contract new debts during the period and that the increase is justified by the incidence of interest and other charges. It also says that an indicator that measures the state’s payment capacity improved during the Zema government.
