Supreme Court forms majority to convict Bolsonaro of criminal organization in coup plot with vote of Cármen Lúcia

The First Chamber of the Supreme Federal Court formed a majority to convict former president Jair Bolsonaro and seven allies for forming an armed criminal organization in a criminal case investigating the attempted coup after the 2022 elections. The rapporteur, Justice Alexandre de Moraes, started the voting by pointing to Bolsonaro as the central leader of the group, followed by Justice Flávio Dino, who reinforced the existence of coordinated acts to subvert the electoral result. Justice Luiz Fux dissented, advocating acquittal due to lack of concrete evidence, but Justice Cármen Lúcia, in her statement on Thursday, joined the initial votes, consolidating a 3-1 score, with the Chamber’s president, Justice Cristiano Zanin, still pending. The case took place in Brasília during sessions that began in September 2025 and stems from Federal Police investigations that uncovered plans like a draft decree for military intervention and the Green and Yellow Dagger scheme, aimed at eliminating authorities. The main motivation lies in the refusal to accept Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva’s victory, with the group using state structures to spread disinformation and incite invasions, culminating in the January 8, 2023, acts. This preliminary decision could result in cumulative sentences exceeding 40 years in prison for Bolsonaro, including aggravations for leadership, and sets a precedent in defending Brazilian democracy against internal threats.

The trial, spanning consecutive days, reveals details of a network operating since 2021, with a division of tasks among military personnel, former ministers, and close aides. Moraes highlighted in his vote a sequence of actions, such as meetings at the Alvorada Palace and the use of the Brazilian Intelligence Agency (Abin) for illegal monitoring, configuring not just an isolated conspiracy but a lasting structure aimed at perpetuating power.

Several procedural elements were debated, including the validity of the plea bargain of Lieutenant Colonel Mauro Cid, Bolsonaro’s former aide-de-camp, whose statements provided crucial evidence about internal discussions.

• Cid’s plea detailed conversations about the coup decree, confirming Bolsonaro’s knowledge of the document.
• Images and videos of demonstrations on Paulista Avenue were shown, displaying the former president’s speeches attacking the Judiciary.
• Records of internal communications reveal coordination between generals and the political core to discredit electronic voting machines.

These facts, according to the justices favoring conviction, demonstrate intent and planning, ruling out claims of freedom of expression or spontaneous acts.

https://youtu.be/Jj4wqVF_nAM

Initial votes consolidate leadership thesis

Alexandre de Moraes, rapporteur of Criminal Case 2668, dedicated hours to his vote, presenting a timeline linking Bolsonaro directly to the organization. He showed videos of speeches in which the former president questioned the election’s integrity, arguing that such statements fueled the mobilization of radical supporters. Moraes emphasized that the group did not act chaotically but with a clear hierarchy, where Bolsonaro held supreme command, using the presidential office to orchestrate actions against the Superior Electoral Court and the STF.

Flávio Dino, the second to vote, fully followed the rapporteur but introduced nuances regarding sentencing, considering varying degrees of participation. For Dino, the preparatory acts, such as the attempt to issue an unconstitutional state of defense decree, prove the intent to abolish the Democratic Rule of Law. He dismissed defense preliminaries, such as the alleged invalidity of Cid’s plea, stating that the agreement met all legal requirements and produced irrefutable evidence.

Dino’s vote lasted about three hours, referencing technical analyses of seized messages and documents, including notes in aides’ personal notebooks outlining steps for institutional rupture.

Luiz Fux, in turn, presented an extensive dissent, questioning the First Chamber’s jurisdiction to judge former authorities without current privileged status. He argued that the STF should act only in cases connected to common crimes, referring the case to the lower court, and pointed to a lack of direct evidence linking Bolsonaro to specific violent acts.

Rejected preliminaries strengthen continuation

The defendants’ defenses raised several procedural issues before the merits, such as restricted defense due to the volume of evidence—over 100,000 pages—and alleged bias by the rapporteur. Moraes, in rebuttal, highlighted that access was granted and that the preliminaries aimed to delay the trial without solid legal grounds.

Cármen Lúcia, in her vote, aligned with rejecting these objections, stating that the STF has constitutional prerogative to address threats to democracy, regardless of the accused’s status. She described the process as Brazil’s reencounter with its institutions, emphasizing the integrity of the Brazilian electoral system, audited by independent entities and never contested by proven fraud.

• Rejection of the plea’s invalidity due to lack of immediate homologation.
• Denial of the request to transfer to the STF Plenary, maintaining the Chamber’s jurisdiction.
• Dismissal of “document dump” allegations, with adequate deadlines for evidence analysis.

These procedural decisions paved the way for the substantive debate, where Justice Cármen Lúcia saw “conclusive proof” of the implementation of a plan to attack institutions, with a division of roles among the defendants.

General Walter Braga Netto, former Chief of Staff, was identified as an operational arm, responsible for contacts with senior military officials. Admiral Almir Garnier, former Navy commander, allegedly participated in discussions about the Armed Forces’ adherence to the plan.

Structure of the organization revealed in detail

The Attorney General’s Office described the group as a stable entity with thematic cores: disinformation via live broadcasts and social media; parallel intelligence operated by Abin under Alexandre Ramagem; and coercive measures, including the plan to eliminate key figures. Moraes, during an aside in Cármen Lúcia’s vote, displayed January 8 images of protesters wearing shirts with Bolsonaro’s likeness, reinforcing direct incitement.

Lieutenant Colonel Mauro Cid, the whistleblower, provided accounts of meetings at the Planalto Palace where the coup decree was reviewed, with Bolsonaro present and approving changes. His homologated collaboration included audios and messages proving coordination.

Anderson Torres, former Justice Minister, was accused of failing in Brasília’s security, facilitating the invasions. Generals like Augusto Heleno and Paulo Sérgio Nogueira allegedly endorsed the electoral fraud narrative to justify interventions.

Cármen Lúcia, in her vote, highlighted that isolated acts, like individual speeches, gain criminal connotation when viewed together, forming a chain of events culminating in the vandalism of public buildings, with estimated damages of R$ 20 million.

• Dissemination of fake news about voting machines since 2021, with over 50 Bolsonaro live broadcasts.
• Creation of a “parallel Abin” to spy on opponents and electoral judges.
• Planning of the Green and Yellow Dagger, with specific targets like rapporteur Moraes.

These elements, according to the majority votes, meet the requirements of Article 2 of Law 12.850/2013, defining a criminal organization as an association of four or more people, with stability and task division for serious crimes.

Defendants’ roles in the crucial core

The investigated core, called “crucial” by the Federal Police, involved high-ranking figures and civilians close to the former president. Braga Netto allegedly coordinated with military commanders for possible coup adherence, while Heleno managed the Institutional Security Office to monitor institutional reactions.

Ramagem, now a congressman, was linked to producing false reports on electoral vulnerabilities, used to justify judicial challenges. Torres, former Brasília Security Secretary, is accused of complicity with post-election camps that served as bases for January 8 acts.

Paulo Sérgio Nogueira, former Defense Minister, appeared in person at the STF on the first day, denying involvement, but email and meeting minutes evidence contradicts him. Garnier, from the Navy, allegedly refused open adherence but participated in initial discussions.

Moraes, in his vote, classified Bolsonaro as the main “instigator,” showing a man with a watch in a video of the acts, symbolizing remote command. Dino complemented, stating that perpetuation in power justified even armed violence, as in the assassination plan.

Fux, dissenting, argued that political speeches do not equate to crimes and that direct preparatory acts by Bolsonaro are lacking, proposing acquittal to avoid criminalizing opposition.

Debates on preparatory acts and intent

The central discussion revolved around what constitutes a “preparatory act” for coup and abolition of the Democratic Rule of Law crimes. Moraes and Dino argued that the coup decree draft, discussed in November 2022, and instructions not to suppress camps represent the start of execution, even without full consummation.

Cármen Lúcia reinforced this view, citing that the law punishes attempts, and intent is evident in intercepted messages where defendants spoke of “turning the table” if needed. She mentioned the public’s belief in the voting machine as a symbol of sovereignty, systematically attacked by the group.

• December 14, 2022, meeting at Alvorada, with military presence and finalization of the decree.
• Bolsonaro’s instructions for the Armed Forces not to ensure Lula’s inauguration.
• Post-election coordination to maintain street pressure, with camp funding.

These points, validated by the majority, distinguish the case from mere demonstrations, configuring crimes against the constitutional order.

The trial continues with Zanin’s vote, but the majority already formed for criminal organization indicates imminent conviction, with sentencing to be defined subsequently. The final decision, expected for Friday, may include aggravations for leadership, increasing the base penalty.