Bolsonaro did not authorize AI videos, but is not opposed to their use by his children, says defense to Moraes

Jair Bolsonaro’s defense informed Minister Alexandre de Moraes, of the Federal Supreme Court (STF), on July 29, 2026, that the former president did not authorize the creation of a video with artificial intelligence (AI). The content was shown at a PL convention last Saturday, July 25, 2026.

Bolsonaro’s lawyers clarified, through a petition sent to the Supreme Court, that the former president did not authorize the use of his image for the material. The video was played during an event by the Liberal Party (PL) that made Flávio Bolsonaro official as a candidate for President.

Clarifications on AI video at PL convention

The manifestation of Jair Bolsonaro’s defense to the STF responds to a previous request from Minister Alexandre de Moraes. He had asked the former president’s representatives to comment on the video released at the PL meeting.

“Initially, it must be noted that the petitioner did not authorize the use of his image and voice for the production of the video created using artificial intelligence”, stated the defense in the petition.

Restrictions and the former president’s non-opposition

The lawyers justified that Bolsonaro could not formally authorize the video. He finds “his right to visit suspended for a period of thirty days”, and Flávio Bolsonaro, his son, is also prevented from visiting him.

Despite the lack of direct authorization, the defense made it clear that the former president does not oppose the production of content by his family members. This distinction is crucial to Bolsonaro’s position on the use of his image.

History of use of public image and family trust

The petition also mentioned that, before the imposition of precautionary measures, Bolsonaro’s children always used their father’s public image in party political activities. This includes the reproduction of photographs, recordings, statements, speeches and interviews.

The lawyers emphasized that this practice is “notorious, continuous and never the subject of any opposition” on the part of the former president. The defense explained that this circumstance arises from the “natural relationship of trust that exists between father and children and the very public nature of the petitioner’s image.”