Brazil braces for Bolsonaro's day in court as ex-president testifies over ‘coup plot'
The 70-year-old paratrooper turned populist, who governed from 2019 until 2023, is scheduled to be interrogated by the supreme court as it seeks to untangle what federal police claim was a sprawling three-year plot to vandalize one of the world's largest democracies.
Seven other alleged co-conspirators will also be questioned, including four former Bolsonaro ministers – three of them army generals; the ex-commander of the navy; and the ex-president's former right-hand man, Lt Col Mauro Cid.
Bolsonaro's day in court, which is expected to come on Tuesday, is a milestone moment for a country that escaped from two decades of military dictatorship in 1985 but appears to have come perilously close to a return to authoritarian rule after the veteran leftist Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva beat Bolsonaro in the 2022 presidential election.
Related: Bombshell police report details alleged Bolsonaro plot to stage rightwing coup
'This is the first time in Brazilian history that there is the prospect of the perpetrators of a coup being brought to justice,' said Bernardo Mello Franco, a political writer for the newspaper O Globo.
'Brazilian history is full of military coups and counter-coups … but throughout history the characters [behind them] have always gone unpunished, either because they succeeded in pulling off the coup and seized control of the judiciary, or because they were granted amnesty, which is what happened after the [1964-85] military dictatorship,' Mello Franco added.
Bolsonaro is accused of trying – but ultimately failing – to overturn Lula's victory through a murderous plot, which allegedly involved assassinating or arresting key political rivals including the president-elect; his vice-president-elect, Geraldo Alckmin; and the supreme court justice Alexandre de Moraes. He has repeatedly denied the charges.
The prospect of watching Bolsonaro go on trial has thrilled his many progressive detractors who, in addition to the alleged coup attempt, blame the ex-president for rampant Amazon devastation; historic attacks on the rights of Indigenous peoples, human rights and Brazilian culture; and a calamitous and anti-scientific response to a Covid pandemic that killed hundreds of thousands of people.
There is broad consensus among experts that Bolsonaro will be found guilty and convicted later this year, meaning the former congressman could face political oblivion and a decades-long prison sentence.
'Bolsonaro himself believes he has already been convicted by the supreme court – he's said it on numerous occasions,' Mello Franco said. 'Those who understand the supreme court also believe he'll be found guilty. There's a great deal of evidence against him.'
Last week the former head of the air force, Brig Carlos de Almeida Baptista Júnior, gave damning evidence, telling the supreme court that at one point in 2022 the former head of the army, Gen Marco Antônio Freire Gomes, threatened to arrest Bolsonaro if he sought any kind of 'institutional rupture'.
But major questions remain over whether, if convicted, Bolsonaro will ever actually serve time.
Already one rightwing presidential hopeful in the 2026 election, Romeu Zema, has pledged to pardon Bolsonaro if he wins power. Polls suggest that if Lula seeks re-election he will face a tough battle against whichever rightwing candidate inherits the votes of the still-popular Bolsonaro, who has already been barred from running because of his attacks on Brazil's electronic voting system.
Potential heirs include one of Bolsonaro's politician sons, Eduardo or Flávio Bolsonaro; his wife, Michelle Bolsonaro; or the conservative governors of the states of São Paulo, Minas Gerais and Paraná: Tarcísio de Freitas, Zema and Ratinho Júnior, respectively.
There are also doubts over how Bolsonaro, a notoriously rambunctious Trump-inspired populist with a huge social media following, will behave when his day in court arrives.
On the eve of his appearance, Bolsonaro promised he would not use the hearing to 'lacrar', a Portuguese word which roughly translates as 'take the piss', 'troll' or 'drop the mic'. But the ex-president said his 'inquisition' would be 'worth watching' and urged followers to tune in to see that 'truth' was on his side.
'It will be broadcast live, which is bonkers,' Mello Franco said of the politically charged session, declining to forecast how Bolsonaro might behave in the dock. 'The only predictable thing about Bolsonaro is that he'll be unpredictable.'
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Bloomberg
an hour ago
- Bloomberg
Top Copper Nation Chile Sweats on Details of Trump's 50% Tariff
By and Valentina Fuentes Updated on Save Chile, by far the biggest shipper of copper into the US, is waiting for details to emerge following President's Donald Trump's bombshell comments on tariffs. Trump sent shock-waves through the global copper industry on Tuesday by telling reporters that he would be slapping a 50% levy on copper imports — much higher than previously thought.
Los Angeles Times
an hour ago
- Los Angeles Times
Supreme Court OKs Trump's mass layoffs of federal employees across more than a dozen agencies
WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court cleared the way Tuesday for the Trump administration to lay off tens of thousands of federal employees and downsize their agencies without seeking the approval of Congress. By an 8-1 vote, the justices lifted an order from a federal judge in San Francisco who blocked mass layoffs at more than 20 departments and agencies. The court has sided regularly with President Trump and his broad view of executive power on matters involving federal agencies. In a brief order, the court said 'the Government is likely to succeed on its argument that the Executive Order and Memorandum are lawful,' referring to the plans to reduce staffing. But it said it was not ruling on specific layoffs. Justice Sonia Sotomayor concurred with the decision on the grounds that it was narrow and temporary. Dissenting alone, Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson said the court should not have intervened. 'Under our Constitution, Congress has the power to establish administrative agencies and detail their functions,' she wrote. Since mid-April, the court has handed down a series of temporary orders that cleared the way for Trump's planned cutbacks in funding and staffing at federal agencies. Litigation will continue in the lower courts, but the justices are not likely to reverse course and rule next year that they made a mistake in allowing the staffing cutbacks to proceed. The layoff case posed the question of whether Congress or the president had the authority to downsize agencies. U.S. District Judge Susan Illston in San Francisco said Congress, not the president, creates federal agencies and decides on their size and their duties. 'Agencies may not conduct large-scale reorganizations and reductions in force in blatant disregard of Congress's mandates, and a president may not initiate large-scale executive branch reorganization without partnering with Congress,' she said on May 22. Her order barred more than 20 departments and agencies from carrying out mass layoffs in response to an executive order from Trump. They included the departments of Commerce, Energy, Health and Human Services, Housing and Urban Development, Interior, Labor, State, Treasury, Transportation and Veterans Affairs as well as the Environmental Protection Agency, the General Services Administration and the National Science Foundation. She said the planned layoffs are large. The Health and Human Services department plans to cut 8,000 to 10,000 employees and the Energy Department 8,500. The Veterans Administration had planned to lay-off 83,000 employees but said recently it will reduce that number to about 30,000. Labor unions had sued to stop the layoffs as illegal. Illson agreed that the agencies were not acting on their own to trim their staffs. Rather, Trump's Office of Management and Budget under Russ Vought was leading the reorganization and restructuring of dozen of agencies. She said only Congress can reorganize agencies. The U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, by a 2-1 vote, turned down the administration's appeal of the judge's order. Appealing to the Supreme Court, Trump's lawyers insisted the president had the full authority to fire tens of thousands of employees. 'The Constitution does not erect a presumption against presidential control of agency staffing,' Solicitor Gen. D. John Sauer said in his appeal, 'and the President does not need special permission from Congress.' He said federal law allows agencies to reduce their staffs. 'Neither Congress nor the Executive Branch has ever intended to make federal bureaucrats a class with lifetime employment, whether there was work for them to do or not,' Sauer wrote.
Washington Post
an hour ago
- Washington Post
Defendants released in Massachusetts as pay dispute with public defenders remains unresolved
BOSTON — Defendants are being released in Massachusetts in the wake of a prolonged dispute over pay for the state's public defenders, and one of those set free was charged with a serious crime. The first four defendants without legal representation were freed Monday by a Boston judge following a ruling last week by the state's highest court to implement a process that requires releasing defendants without attorneys after a week. Among them was a man accused of strangling his pregnant girlfriend.
