The Organized Crime report written by the senator (-SE) and the attorney general of the Republic. He did not indict the politicians (generally right-wing) who stole from Master, gained money from Master and tried to save Master with public money.
Reading the report makes it clear that Vieira tried to transform the CPI of organized crime into the CPI of .
Until now, several CPIs have already dealt with topics different from those that inspired their installation: the monthly allowance, for example, was investigated in one.
The problem is that, as a report from a hypothetical Master CPI, Alessandro Vieira’s work is bad.
The rapporteur’s bias becomes clear on page 60 of the report, where Banco Master’s connections with institutions in the Republic are discussed.
When talking about regulatory bodies, the report mentions those of . When he talks about the Judiciary, Vieira also mentions Toffoli by name. When talking about politicians, the report does not name names. The cases of governors and mayors who put retirees’ money into Master are not even discussed.
The anti-STF and pro-political bias of the CPI’s final report is also clear when we look at who voted for and against its approval.
The votes to approve the report were given by parliamentarians from MDB, , Novo and . With the exception of Novo, everyone is at the center of the Master scandal.
From the PP came, which by constitutional amendment; Filipe Barros left the PL, who tried to do the same thing through a bill. PP, PL and MDB signed request 3,651/2025, which called for urgency for the project that would authorize Congress to oppose the rescue of Master with public money. It came from the MDB, which valued between R$15 billion and R$18 billion trying to save the Master. From the PL came the Brazilian ruler who had the most (R$ 1 billion).
The votes against the report were given by parliamentarians from the PT, PSD and PSB.
The PT has people from Bahia. The PSDB has mayors from the interior of São Paulo who invested pension money in Master. Of the three parties, only the PSB signed application 3,651 of 2025.
In other words: the parties of the parliamentarians who voted in favor of Alessandro Vieira’s report are much more involved with the Master than the parties of the parliamentarians who voted against it.
It is no coincidence: by placing all the blame on the STF, the CPI report takes the focus away from politicians and opens up a space for Bolsonarist criticism of the STF to appear legitimate. It creates a natural alliance between a multitude of “moderate” right-wing politicians involved with the Master and anti-STF Bolsonarists who, incidentally, are also involved with the Master.
If he had told the whole story, the CPI report would have been rejected 10 to 0, not 6 to 4. But it would not help the right to win the Presidency as a reward for breaking a bank.
LINK PRESENT: Did you like this text? Subscribers can access seven free accesses from any link per day. Just click the blue F below.
