The week of December 25 used to be a “dead” week in journalism. The journalist on duty saw these days as a double burden: a deprivation of time with his family, but also a kind of professional sacrifice, because generally nothing significant was happening. The rule does not apply to 2025: dismissal of Ramagem and Eduardo Bolsonaro, action by the PF against INSS fraud, postponement of the signing of the EU-Mercosur agreement, all this a week or less before Christmas.
But the most serious problem in recent days is the crisis in the Supreme Court. The STF has been involved in successive scandals, at a time when it is going through an acute crisis of confidence. The conduct of investigations and the trial of “anti-democratic mobilizations” placed the Court at the center of the Brazilian political conflict. The dynamic of polarization has earned it the support and trust of some citizens and, at the same time, the rejection and distrust of the other party.
- Malu Gaspar: Alexandre de Moraes contacted Galípolo to request the Master’s degree at the Central Bank
We cannot accept that the Supreme Court benefits from the dynamic of trust of political bodies. A democracy requires that justice, by its very nature, enjoy broad confidence, without variation between ideological groups. With the imminent conclusion of the trials, the ideal would be for this imbalance to evolve towards normality. But what we are seeing could be the start of a worrying direction: the Court, instead of regaining the trust of the half that had distanced itself from it, ends up losing the support of the other half.
The current crisis involves three ministers: Alexandre de Moraes, Dias Toffoli and Gilmar Mendes. According to a series of reports from Malu Gaspar, here at GLOBO, the office of Alexandre de Moraes’ wife signed a contract significantly above market values to defend Banco Master. The high values raised suspicions that the bank had purchased not only the legal services of Viviane Barci de Moraes, but also her influence over the minister. Revelations from at least six sources, suggesting that Moraes may have interceded with the president of the Central Bank in favor of Master, reinforce suspicions. The minister’s explanations seemed to confuse the conversations reported in the report with other public and known conversations on the application of the Magnitsky Act and were not convincing.Lauro
- Laura Jardim: Toffoli flew to Lima by private jet with a lawyer from the Master case to see Palmeiras lose
As if that were not enough, there are also suspicions of favoritism towards the Master on the part of Minister Dias Toffoli. Toffoli agreed to board a plane with a bank executive’s lawyer to attend the Libertadores final in Lima. He then centralized the investigations into the Master at the Supreme Court and determined that new measures had previously been submitted to the Court, under the argument of the possible involvement of an authority endowed with the prerogative of the forum. He also decreed high secrecy on the process, an excessive level of opacity and contrary to the principle according to which publicity is the rule and secrecy the exception.
All this is happening at a time when Gilmar Mendes, in a move interpreted by many jurists as a hermeneutic distortion, has created new obstacles to the dismissal of ministers of the Court. The same college showed strong resistance to Minister Edson Fachin’s proposal to establish a code of conduct for the Supreme Court.
The STF seems to be counting on the gratitude it believes it deserves for having judged the January 8 putschists with determination. But that doesn’t guarantee you immunity from mistakes. If ministers are not accountable to society, if they do not work to clarify legitimate doubts and do not begin a phase of self-revision and restraint, the next attempt to dismiss a minister may not only have the support of the Bolsonaristas.
About The Author
