The PGE (Electoral Attorney General’s Office) stated to the (Superior Electoral Court) that it is insufficient and suggests that the court expand restrictions on the use of it in electoral advertisements, which would now be authorized only for improvements in the technical quality of the image or sound.
According to the PGE, the rule proposed by the court “which only requires campaigns to report the use of ‘synthetic content’ is insufficient”, arguing that, in a universe of 156 million voters, many are unaware of the technical meaning of these terms.
In the Prosecutor’s Office’s suggestion, the resolution would go on to say that the use, in , of digital technologies “to create, replace, omit, merge, change the speed, or superimpose images or sounds, including , technologies, allowing only the improvement of the quality of the image or sound”.
The TSE’s current resolution prohibits the use of so-called “deepfakes” — defined as use “to create, replace or alter the image or voice of a living, deceased or fictitious person” — as well as the use of AI to “disseminate notoriously untrue or decontextualized facts”. In other cases, it says that the use “to create, replace, omit, merge or change the speed or superimpose images or sounds imposes on the person responsible for advertising the duty to inform” this use.
The PGE also states that Brazil already has investigations into the illicit use of this technology against politicians and that it faces more widespread cybercrime compared to Argentina — a case of manipulation on the eve of the election.
According to the agency, “the creation of a deepfake, once it goes viral, causes irreversible damage.” “Even with court orders for removal, the true content or the response hardly reaches the same public impacted by the fraud. Repair is, in practice, impossible, violating the fairness of the claim”, says the text.
As shown by Sheetthe initial proposal released by the TSE last month to update the rules on electoral propaganda for 2026 did not expand the rules involving the use of artificial intelligence in any respect. This, despite the first dispute held with specific rules on the subject.
The TSE opened a public consultation last month and held three days of public hearings this week to hear suggestions from public bodies, parties, experts and civil society entities. The process is coordinated by the vice-president of the court, minister Kassio Nunes Marques, who is the rapporteur of the resolutions. The final versions must be approved by March 5, after a vote by the court’s plenary.
In total, the Public Electoral Ministry sent 81 proposals to the TSE to improve the rules for this year’s dispute, 9 of which were about advertising. According to the body, they were consolidated by a working group, based on suggestions made by attorneys and electoral promoters from across the country.
Another suggestion was to impose a fine of up to R$30,000 in the case of dissemination of manipulated content, including using AI, to propagate lies. The intention would be to standardize the rule, given that this type of penalty is currently available.
Among the Prosecutor’s Office’s proposals is also the change of a rule that would be new and was presented by Kassio. The text in question says that, if “elements related to the electoral dispute” are absent, they would not be considered negative early electoral propaganda, even in the case of boosting.
The Electoral Prosecutor’s Office says that it would be unreasonable for the TSE to allow the promotion of electoral content to individuals. This mechanism, made available by some social networks, allows you to expand the reach of a post through payment.
The body defends that it should be included in the standard – in a manner almost opposite to that suggested by the draft reported by the minister – that the hiring of support, by a natural person, whether to criticize or declare support for the performance of the public administration, will be considered early electoral propaganda. And that this would apply even if “elements related to the electoral dispute were absent”.
He argues that the Elections Law provided that any natural person could carry out electoral propaganda on the internet “as long as they do not hire content promotion” and that among the objectives of the rule is the preservation of the health of electoral campaigns.
He then mentions that, among the intentions of this prohibition, would be the prevention of “the formation of parallel private financing networks, before and during the electoral period, which make the necessary monitoring of campaign financing unfeasible”.
Furthermore, it points to “the prevention of disinformation and defamation campaigns”, mentioning as examples the episodes of (which occurred at the beginning of 2025) and of (investigated in the wake of the Banco Master scandal).
This point in the draft, by the Lula government and civil society entities.
According to the rules in force and also based on TSE jurisprudence, only candidates can promote content considered electoral propaganda. Another restriction is that it does not allow promotion in the case of negative electoral propaganda, nor in the pre-campaign period. It can be used only if it benefits the candidate.
