The minister of the (Supreme Federal Court), appointed by the former president in 2020, gave votes that diverged from the majority of the court in emblematic cases, such as the ineligibility of the former president and the investigations into the January camps.
The one from the (Superior Electoral Court) in rotation of seniority, with André Mendonça as vice. His administration will be responsible for conducting the 2026 general elections.
As head of the TSE, his declared goal is to defend the credibility of electronic voting machines and seek management with less judicialization and a focus on combating disinformation.
See how the minister voted in cases of court repercussion:
Jair Bolsonaro’s ineligibility
Kassio voted against making Jair Bolsonaro ineligible for eight years at trial in 2023.
At the time, the TSE (Superior Electoral Court) judged possible abuse of political power and misuse of the media by the then president, after Bolsonaro made unfounded attacks on the Brazilian electoral system in a meeting with ambassadors in July 2022.
The minister argued that the meeting was not aimed at electoral advantage or discrediting the results of the polls, but was defeated by 5 votes to 2 due to the conviction and consequent ineligibility of Bolsonaro. Only minister Raul Araújo voted in the same direction as Kassio.
Ministers Benedito Gonçalves (rapporteur), Floriano de Azevedo Marques, André Ramos Tavares, Cármen Lúcia and Alexandre de Moraes voted for ineligibility.
8/1 Camps
Kassio against 50 people detained in front of the Army HQ after the attacks on January 8, 2023. He highlighted that there were no elements of criminal incitement in all cases and that the PGR (Attorney General’s Office) had not individualized the conduct. He also questioned the STF’s conduct in judging those who do not have a special jurisdiction.
The complaint, however, was accepted, and the majority of ministers voted to convict those involved, with sentences ranging from 12 to 17 years for the most serious crimes, such as coup d’état and violent abolition of the democratic rule of law.
Claudio Castro
This year, the minister voted to acquit the former governor of Rio de Janeiro (), in an investigation that investigated the use of Uerj (University of the State of Rio de Janeiro) and the Ceperj Foundation to pay social project employees in cash and without disclosing their names.
For Kassio, there was not sufficient evidence that popular sovereignty or voter choice had been affected by the actions investigated in a way that justified the loss of office or ineligibility.
The final score of the trial at the TSE, in March, was 5 votes to 2 for conviction, making the former governor ineligible until 2030. Castro resigned from his position on the eve of the trial, in an attempt to avoid impeachment, but the decision of ineligibility was maintained.
Amendments
Kassio differed from the majority in the STF by voting against , a mechanism that allowed the general rapporteur of the Annual Budget Law project to distribute billion-dollar funds from the federal Budget.
He defended Congress’s autonomy to manage its resources, stating that Judiciary intervention should be minimal, focused on transparency and not on the extinction of the mechanism.
The STF declared the mechanism unconstitutional by 6 votes to 5 in December 2022.
Racism and racial slur
Kassio voted against equating racial insults with the crime of . In his understanding, the insult would be prescriptible (there is a deadline for punishment) and is not equivalent to racism. Furthermore, racial insult (offense to honor) protects individual dignity, while racism attacks collective human dignity.
He was defeated once again. In 2021, racial insult is a form of the crime of racism and, therefore, is imprescriptible (there is no deadline for punishment).
When the STF decided, in 2020, that the Covid-19 vaccine can be mandatory as long as there is a law to that effect, Kassio was once again the only one to vote against it. At the time, the court made it clear that forced immunization is prohibited, but freed federal entities to pass laws that would restrict the rights of people who did not want to be vaccinated.
At the trial, Kassio stated that mandatory vaccination is constitutional, but that it depends on “prior hearing” from the Ministry of Health and that it can only be used as a “last measure”.
The minister could only be established by the Union. All other members of the court, however, granted autonomy to governors and mayors to impose the obligation and maintained the line adopted by the Supreme Court
