A private meeting held at the Supreme Federal Court (STF) on March 12, 2025, significantly widened the existing rifts among its justices. The discussion centered on divergent strategies for navigating the escalating crisis triggered by the ongoing investigations and revelations surrounding the Banco Master case.
The high-level gathering, initially requested by Justice Gilmar Mendes to the court’s president, Justice Edson Fachin, was intended as a one-on-one discussion. However, minutes after it commenced, Justices Alexandre de Moraes, Flávio Dino, and Cristiano Zanin joined the decano and the president, broadening the scope of the debate.
This expanded assembly highlighted a deep-seated tension within the court, particularly regarding the appropriate institutional response to external pressures. The closed-door nature of the meeting underscored the sensitivity and urgency of the internal deliberations.
Internal rifts deepen over crisis management
A significant faction within the court has persistently pressed President Fachin since the previous year to adopt a more assertive posture. This group advocates for a stronger defense of colleagues whose names have appeared in news reports, often linked to alleged connections with former banker Daniel Vorcaro, owner of Banco Master, with Justices Moraes and Dias Toffoli being specifically mentioned.
Despite these internal demands, Fachin has steadfastly maintained his public stance, advocating for judicial self-restraint and deep reflection among the court’s members. This principled position has further exposed the fundamental disagreements on how to effectively steer the institution through the current turbulence.
Calls for collective action clash with self-restraint
Fachin’s public pronouncements, which emphasize the importance of a “healthy distance” for magistrates from involved parties and conflicting interests, are frequently interpreted as veiled criticisms of his colleagues. These statements, asserting that such detachment is vital for upholding social justice, have reportedly caused considerable unease among some justices.
During the March 12 meeting, several justices reiterated a long-standing appeal for Fachin to spearhead a unified response to the crisis on behalf of the entire court. They argued that the president’s role inherently involves coordinating the court’s agenda rather than pursuing individual initiatives, a clear reference to the proposed code of ethics that has been a hallmark of Fachin’s presidency.
Justices Moraes, Gilmar Mendes, and Toffoli have previously expressed their public opposition to the implementation of such a code of ethics for superior court justices, further underscoring the deep divisions regarding institutional conduct and public image. Their resistance highlights a core ideological battle within the highest judicial body.
Judicial actions follow contentious meeting
In the days immediately following the critical internal meeting, several justices who attended made decisions that delivered setbacks to legislators advocating for broader investigations into Banco Master and the alleged ties between its owner, Daniel Vorcaro, and Supreme Court members. These rulings signaled a defensive posture from within the court.
On the very day of the closed-door discussions, Justice Zanin denied a request from Congressman Rodrigo Rollemberg (PSB-DF) to compel the Chamber of Deputies to establish a Parliamentary Commission of Inquiry (CPI) into Banco Master. Zanin concluded that there was insufficient evidence to prove an omission by Congressman Hugo Motta (Republicanos-PB) in addressing the deputies’ original request.
A week later, Justice Gilmar Mendes moved to annul a decision by the Organized Crime CPI. This earlier decision had approved the lifting of fiscal and banking secrecy for the Arleen fund, an entity that had acquired a stake in a resort owned by Justice Dias Toffoli’s family, thus shielding the fund from further scrutiny.
Key decisions impact investigations
On the same day, Justice Flávio Dino issued an order requiring Senator Carlos Viana (Podemos-MG), who presides over the CPMI do INSS—a committee actively pursuing investigations into Banco Master—to provide clarification within five days. The order specifically requested details regarding potential irregularities in the allocation of parliamentary amendments.
The dispatch from Justice Dino cited allegations from two congressmen that Senator Viana had directed R$ 3.6 million to the Fundação Oasis. This entity is described by the parliamentarians as a social arm of the Igreja Batista da Lagoinha, which itself is currently under investigation by the CPMI do INSS. The directive from Dino placed a prominent investigator under scrutiny.
These judicial maneuvers, coming shortly after the internal meeting, collectively acted as barriers to the momentum building in legislative bodies for deeper probes into the financial institution and its connections. They reinforced the perception of an internal desire to protect the institution and its members from expansive external scrutiny.
Fachin’s strategic moves to ease tension
To counteract his perceived isolation in championing an ethics code and to mitigate the significant image damage caused by the Banco Master crisis, President Fachin strategically engaged with other justices. He actively sought to alleviate the growing institutional strain and project a more unified front.
Fachin particularly coordinated with justices of the Second Panel of the STF to accelerate the judgment regarding Daniel Vorcaro’s arrest. This behind-the-scenes effort aimed to bring a swift resolution to a highly sensitive matter, thereby reducing public speculation and the protracted scrutiny surrounding the court’s actions.
High court moves quickly on key arrest
The concerted efforts by the STF president with the panel’s members quickly bore fruit. Despite not being a part of either of the court’s two panels, Fachin personally appealed to justices within the Second Panel, urging them to cast their votes as rapidly as possible on the matter. This rare intervention from the president underscored the urgency he placed on a quick resolution to a thorny issue.
In a remarkably swift session lasting only 47 minutes, the Second Panel achieved a majority vote. This decision formally endorsed Justice Mendonça’s initial ruling and upheld the imprisonment of the banker. This expedited outcome was a direct result of Fachin’s strategic coordination, designed to preempt prolonged debate and further speculation that could have intensified public pressure on the tribunal throughout the week.
Broader context of the Banco Master inquiry
The Banco Master investigation has been a persistent source of controversy, placing the STF at the center of a national debate regarding judicial independence, transparency, and the integrity of public figures. The ongoing revelations and the court’s internal struggles reflect a broader societal demand for accountability.
