OAB raises alarm over prolonged STF fake news inquiry, citing erosion of public trust in 2025

OAB raises alarm over prolonged STF fake news inquiry, citing erosion of public trust in 2025

The Brazilian Bar Association (OAB) has officially expressed profound institutional concern regarding the Supreme Federal Court’s (STF) ongoing fake news inquiry. This investigation, initiated in 2019 to counter an organized campaign targeting the highest court, has now stretched for over six years without a defined conclusion, prompting significant public and legal scrutiny.

The OAB’s statement, delivered recently in 2025, highlights a growing apprehension over the inquiry’s indefinite nature. What began in an “exceptional context” of political confrontation between the executive and judiciary has, in the OAB’s view, evolved into an instrument of exception, progressively undermining social confidence in the STF itself.

This prolonged judicial action, led by Justice Alexandre de Moraes, has become a focal point of debate across various sectors. The association asserts that the investigation’s current trajectory demands an immediate reevaluation, emphasizing the urgent need for its conclusion to restore public faith in the legal process.

Inquiry’s prolonged journey raises critical questions

The fake news inquiry was established in 2019 with the explicit aim of investigating and countering what was perceived as an organized disinformation campaign directed against the Supreme Court. At its inception, the political landscape was marked by intense friction and open confrontation, lending a certain rationale to the court’s robust response.

However, as 2025 progresses, the inquiry has continued unabated, accumulating over six years without a clear end in sight. This extended duration has led to growing unease, transforming what was once seen as a necessary measure into a source of considerable institutional stress and public skepticism.

Shifting perspective on exceptional measures

While the OAB initially acknowledged the extraordinary circumstances that led to the inquiry’s creation, its current position reflects a significant shift. The organization now perceives the investigation as having deviated from its original intent, morphing into a tool that transcends normal legal procedures.

This perceived overreach has, according to the OAB, contributed to a continuous erosion of trust, not only in the specific conduct of the inquiry but also in the broader integrity and impartiality of the Supreme Court. The initial justification for an exceptional response is now overshadowed by concerns about the precedent being set for judicial overreach.

Allegations of abuse of power emerge

A central question now being openly posed is why it has taken the OAB over six years to publicly articulate its concerns regarding potential abuses of power within an indefinite and often secretive inquiry. Critics point to several instances where the inquiry’s operations have appeared to circumvent standard legal safeguards, raising questions about due process and fundamental rights.

The prolonged nature of the investigation, coupled with its lack of transparent milestones or a projected end date, has fueled these concerns. The OAB’s recent statement brings these long-simmering debates to the forefront, demanding a reevaluation of the legal principles at stake.

Internal doubts within the supreme court

Beyond external critiques, there are growing signs of apprehension among the justices of the STF itself. Initially, there was broad support for the inquiry’s firm stance against disinformation campaigns. However, as the investigation, primarily handled by Justice Alexandre de Moraes, has extended without resolution, internal doubts regarding the political wisdom of this protracted approach have begun to surface.

These internal reconsiderations reflect an acknowledgment of the accumulating institutional cost associated with the inquiry’s continuation. The lack of a clear exit strategy and the ongoing public discourse surrounding its methods are reportedly prompting a more cautious assessment among some court members.

The sentiment within parts of the STF appears to be shifting towards prioritizing the restoration of the court’s broader image and public trust. This marks a notable evolution from the initial unified front presented by the justices.

Intersection with broader crises

The ongoing fake news inquiry does not exist in isolation but is increasingly entangled with other institutional challenges facing Brazil’s judiciary in 2025. The confluence of the indefinite investigation with other high-profile issues, such as the Banco Master scandal, has further complicated the STF’s public perception.

The intertwining of these separate but impactful events creates a complex narrative that underscores a period of significant stress for the nation’s highest court. The prolonged inquiry, in particular, contributes to an overall impression of instability and persistent judicial engagement in politically charged matters.

This combination of factors, according to legal observers, risks exacerbating the erosion of confidence in the institution. The OAB’s recent intervention can be seen as a direct response to this multifaceted crisis, urging a return to fundamental legal principles.

The scrutiny surrounding Justice Moraes, who has been at the center of both the fake news inquiry and elements of the Banco Master controversy, further amplifies these concerns. His prominent role in these intertwined issues has placed the STF in a particularly challenging position.

The cumulative effect of these developments is a heightened sense of urgency for the STF to address not only the specific outcomes of the inquiry but also its broader implications for judicial governance and democratic stability.

OAB’s call for fundamental legal principles

The OAB has concisely articulated its core stance: the genuine defense of democracy hinges on unwavering respect for due process, the right to ample defense, the principle of contradictory evidence, and the fundamental freedom of expression. This statement serves as an implicit critique of how the fake news inquiry has been conducted.

The association suggests that these foundational tenets of a democratic legal system have been insufficiently upheld throughout the extended investigation. Their emphasis signals a clear demand for the STF to realign its actions with these essential safeguards.

Uncertain future for the prolonged investigation

With the OAB now formally raising concerns, the future of the fake news inquiry remains highly uncertain. Key questions persist regarding how this seven-year-old investigation, initially born from urgent political necessity, will ultimately conclude. There is no clear precedent or defined roadmap for winding down an inquiry of this nature, especially one that has generated such significant controversy and institutional fatigue.

The options for its resolution could range from its formal closure with specific findings to a gradual archiving of cases, but any path will likely face intense scrutiny and debate. The decision to conclude it, or indeed how to conclude it, will have far-reaching implications for the STF’s authority and its relationship with other branches of government and civil society, as it navigates demands for accountability and the imperative to uphold democratic principles.

STF fake news inquiry, OAB concern, Alexandre de Moraes, judicial oversight, due process Brazil, Supreme Federal Court erosion of trust, Brazilian legal scrutiny, indefinite judicial investigation, democracy and legal process, institutional crisis STF