Apr 11 2025| Nº. 161

Editorial

On Wednesday, April 9, President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva took part in the ninth summit of the Community of Latin American and Caribbean States (CELAC) in Tegucigalpa, Honduras, where leaders from 33 nations gathered to discuss pressing regional issues such as climate change, food security, disaster preparedness, and regional integration. The dire backdrop of the meeting was the global trade war sparked by U.S. President Donald Trump’s tariff policies and his draconian approach to immigration. On his trip, President Lula emphasized the importance of unity among Latin American and Caribbean countries while proposing collaborative actions like a food security plan and a disaster response fund, all while reiterating Brazil’s push for CELAC to support a unified female candidate to succeed António Guterres as UN Secretary-General in 2026. Names mentioned include Michelle Bachelet (Chile), Mia Mottley (Barbados), and Rebeca Grynspan (Costa Rica).

On the sidelines of the summit, Lula also held a bilateral meeting with Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum. The Brazilian president proposed hosting alternating business events in Brazil and Mexico every two years to enhance trade relations and explore commercial opportunities, stressing that stronger economic cooperation between Brazil and Mexico is vital not just for the two nations but for Latin America as a whole. In his remarks to the press, Lula criticized the U.S.'s unilateral protectionist measures, warning against the decline of multilateralism, which he views as essential for global economic stability and respect for national sovereignty. He also reinforced Brazil's diplomatic approach centered on negotiation and dialogue rather than confrontation. Lula expressed optimism about the growing leadership roles of women globally and argued that the 21st century could be the era in which women fully assert their place in international governance, making the CELAC proposal for a female UN Secretary-General not just timely, but a symbolic step toward greater gender equity on the global stage.

Lula also had reason for optimism regarding his own political fortunes this week as new polling indicates his approval rating has notched a small but clear improvement. A new Datafolha poll released late last Friday showed an uptick in the president’s approval from 24% to 29% since February. His disapproval rating, which is near the highest it has ever been for Lula, also fell. Recent efforts to reverse negative perceptions of Lula’s government may be helping stabilize his popularity. If the trend continues, it could provide Lula with important political capital heading into an election year, granting him the ability to avoid lame duck status and continuing to shape Brazil’s domestic and international agenda.

Highlights

• Brazilian candidacy. The Brazilian government has officially supported the candidacy of Fábio de Sá e Silva to serve on the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (IACHR) for the three-year term from 2026 to 2029. President Lula personally endorsed Sá e Silva at the end of March in a move that seeks to strengthen the representation of defenders of democracy and human rights in this body of the Organization of American States (OAS), at a time when the far right is increasing pressure on the international arena. Sá e Silva holds a master's degree in law from the University of Brasília (UnB). He is a professor of Brazilian Studies at the University of Oklahoma and an associate researcher at the WBO.

• Ministerial change. Juscelino Filho, Lula's Minister of Communications, resigned on Tuesday, April 8 in a move that precipitates a broader ministerial reshuffling to accommodate allies and prepare the ground for the 2026 elections. Juscelino is a right-wing politician, linked to União Brasil, who joined the government in a context of accommodating a broad alliance that would support the Lula government, but he was denounced on suspicion of being part of a criminal organization that used a federal state-owned company to divert public funds in projects that benefited his own family. The most likely candidate to replace him is Lucas Fernandes from Juscelino's party.

• Ministerial resignation. Another change that occurred this week was the departure of , Márcia Lima, the Secretary of Affirmative Policies of the Ministry of Racial Equality. She left the ministry complaining that the Lula government does not do enough to promote communication of the actions undertaken by her and Minister Anielle Franco. Márica Lima's statements were reported in the press with a critical tone and as a complaint about the lack of visibility of actions aimed at diversity policies, which should be one of the pillars of the current government.

• Revocation of mandate. On Wednesday, April 9. the Ethics Council of the Chamber of Deputies approved the revocation of the mandate of deputy Glauber Braga of the Socialism and Liberty Party (PSOL) that was founded in 2004 by dissidents who left Lula’s Workers’ Party. The decision was made because Glauber attacked a militant of the right-wing group Free Brazil Movement (MBL) last year. The federal congressman went on hunger strike, and said he will remain in the chamber until the outcome of the case. In order to be effective, the revocation must be approved by the plenary of the lower house. Glauber's defense says it will appeal to the Constitution and Justice Committee (CCJ) of the house. This episode is one of many others in which activists and politicians linked to Bolsonaro and Lula are involved in heated arguments and attacks in front of cellphone cameras, which later feed posts that go viral on social media.

• Coup plotters. While former President Jair Bolsonaro leads street demonstrations with the support of governors from all segments of the Brazilian right to demand amnesty, the Brazilian Navy has entered the final stretch of a process that could result in the expulsion of reserve petty officer Marco Antônio Braga Caldas for his involvement in the failed coup of January 8, 2023. If confirmed, this will be the first punishment by a military institution against one of its members for involvement in the coup. The decision is important because it contradicts Bolsonaro's statement that the punishments of those involved would correspond to political persecution directed against him and his supporters by Supreme Court Justice Alexandre de Moraes.

News from ABO and social organizations and movements:

Course. This Friday, the second class of the course on the Inter-American Human Rights System, which is being taught by the WBO and the Behner Stiefel Center for Brazilian Studies at San Diego State University, will take place. The course is given virtually and free of charge once a week, over eight sessions, always on Fridays, except on holidays. The second class, given by the WBO's executive director, Paulo Abrão, will have the theme “Institutions of the Inter-American Human Rights System: The Inter-American Commission on Human Rights”. More information at the link.

UN Rapporteur. This week, Bernard Duhaime, the UN Special Rapporteur on the Promotion of Truth, Justice, Reparations and Guarantees of Non-repetition, released the preliminary observations of his official visit to Brazil, which took place earlier this year. The Brazil Office facilitated contacts and provided the rapporteur with information for the production of the document, which contains important recommendations on transitional justice, accountability for serious human rights violations, and the role of the State in ensuring memory and the non-repetition of these violations.

Transitional justice for indigenous people. The Federal Public Prosecutor's Office filed a request in court for compensation of R$14 million for the Krenak indigenous people for the ethnocide suffered during the military dictatorship (1964-1985). These indigenous people were forcibly displaced from their original territories in the municipality of Resplendor, in Minas Gerais to make way for mineral exploration projects linked to the military. The group was subjected to torture, arbitrary arrests, forced labor, rape, disappearance and exile. It is now up to the Attorney General's Office to present the arguments on behalf of the Brazilian State.

Fishing communities. The Pastoral Council of Fishermen and Fisherwomen (CPP) has released the third edition of the “Report on Socio-Environmental Conflicts and Human Rights Violations in Traditional Fishing Communities in Brazil.” The document brings together data collected between 2022 and 2024 and points to a scenario of worsening threats to peoples throughout the country involved in fishing. Information from around 450 fishing communities in 16 Brazilian states was systematized, revealing that more than 32 thousand families face situations in which their rights are seriously violated. Read the link.

Feature Article

There is Still Time to Judge the Crimes of the Dictatorship

By Eugênia Augusta Gonzaga* and Marlon Alberto Weichert*

The Supreme Federal Court has decided to reconsider the responsibility for the crimes committed by the military dictatorship. This does not seem to be a mere coincidence with the success of the wonderful film Ainda Estou Aqui (I’m Still Here) by Walter Salles Filho. But knowing whether it was the film or another fact is not so important, since what is important is to overcome the constant refusal of the judiciary to deal with the legacy of the authoritarian regime that governed the country from 1964 to 1985.

Since 2008, the Federal Public Ministry (MPF) — based on the initiative of the signatories of this article — has sought to advance the transitional justice process in Brazil. Based on the pillars of promoting justice for serious human rights violations, revealing the truth, making reparations to victims, recovering and disseminating memories, and reforming the agencies and entities that promoted or were complicit in the coup d'état and political repression, transitional justice seeks to help society overcome a legacy of serious human rights violations. The goal is to strengthen the democratic rule of law and ensure that these serious violations do not recur. That year, we began, almost alone, investigations and demands for criminal and civil justice against the perpetrators of serious crimes committed during the military regime, which we consider to be crimes against humanity. It was only in 2010 that the matter was institutionally prioritized by the MPF, when the MPF's Criminal Matters Coordination and Review Chamber, under the management of Raquel Dodge, made holding the main criminals of the dictatorship period accountable as one of its priorities. This decision was the result of Brazil's conviction in the Gomes Lund (Araguaia Guerrilla) case at the Inter-American Court of Human Rights, which declared the 1979 Amnesty Law invalid and the inapplicability of statutes of limitations for crimes that constitute serious violations of human rights.

In the same year, weeks before the Inter-American Court's decision, the Supreme Court plenary had ruled on the Claim of Non-Compliance with a Fundamental Precept (ADFP) No. 153, proposed by the Federal Council of the Brazilian Bar Association (OAB) following the repercussions of the investigations we had been conducting since 2008. The Supreme Court, in a chapter that differed from its fine history of defending fundamental rights after the 1988 Constitution, decided by majority vote that the 1979 Amnesty Law was valid and, therefore, that the punishment of agents of repression could not be demanded. However, there was no final judgement on ADPF No. 153, as the OAB filed an appeal, which has not yet been considered.

In 2011, the Socialism and Liberty Party (PSOL) filed a new ADPF (No. 320), asking the Supreme Court to review its understanding to adapt it to the ruling of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights. ADPF 320 received a substantial opinion from the then Attorney General of the Republic Rodrigo Janot, which reaffirmed what we have been arguing since 2008. First, the dictatorship has committed crimes against humanity in Brazil and these crimes have no statute of limitations and are not subject to the amnesty law. Second, cases of forced disappearances – crimes that involve kidnapping victims, torturing them, killing them, hiding their body, denying their whereabouts, and falsifying documents to support this denial, as occurred with Rubens Paiva and at least 200 other people – are ongoing crimes, that is, until the victims' remains are found or their whereabouts are definitively confirmed, they are ongoing.

Thus, ongoing crimes were not covered by the Amnesty Law (if we admit, for the sake of mere mental exercise, that it was valid), since the law explicitly defined that it benefited crimes committed up to August 15, 1979. Likewise, they are not statute-barred, since it is not even possible to state when the murder or the end of the kidnapping occurred. ADPF 320 has not yet been judged by the Supreme Court. It is being processed together with the appeal of ADPF 153 by Justice Dias Toffoli.

In 2018, the Inter-American Court ruled on another case involving the Brazilian dictatorship. It involved the failure to promote justice for the torture and murder of Vladimir Herzog. The international court reaffirmed its 2010 decision that the amnesty law and statute of limitations were invalid, and recognized that the Brazilian dictatorship committed crimes against humanity, one of the four international crimes recognized by the International Criminal Court. These crimes, even when committed, do not admit impunity, due to their intrinsic gravity. They must be investigated, prosecuted, judged, and punished without being subject to amnesty or statute of limitations rules.

Brazil, under the terms of the 1988 Constitution and the American Convention on Human Rights, recognized the jurisdiction of the Inter-American Court in 1998. Based on this recognition, all Brazilian state bodies – including the Judiciary and the Public Prosecutor's Office – are obliged to respect and apply the decisions of the Inter-American Court. The Federal Public Prosecutor's Office understood that it was its obligation to comply with the Inter-American Court's rulings in the Gomes Lund and Herzog cases. Despite the STF's decision in ADPF 153, it continued to investigate and prosecute the crimes of the dictatorship. Thus, to date, it has initiated 56 criminal proceedings against 79 agents of repression. The vast majority of cases were not accepted by the judges, due to the Supreme Court's decision in ADPF 153. However, some judges and courts understood the Federal Public Prosecutor's Office and, adopting the force of the Inter-American Court's decisions, accepted the cases. These, after all, also ended up being closed by the Supreme Court or the Superior Court of Justice, always under the pretext of ADPF 153, the amnesty law, and the statute of limitations.

It is in this context that the Supreme Court, on the initiative of Justices Flávio Dino and Alexandre de Moraes, announced the decision to judge four of the appeals that were pending in criminal actions initiated by the Federal Public Prosecutor's Office in Pará, São Paulo and Rio de Janeiro. The appeals will be assessed under the general repercussion rule, which has binding force for other similar cases. Justice Edson Fachin recently decided to schedule two other cases for judgment. He will probably submit them to the same general repercussion procedure.

Read the full content

*Eugênia Augusta Gonzaga is a regional attorney for the Brazilian federal government. She holds a master's degree in Constitutional Law from PUC-SP, is a pioneer in legal actions to hold agents of the dictatorship accountable, and is the president of the Special Commission on Political Deaths and Disappearances.

**Marlon Alberto Weichert is a regional attorney for the Brazilian federal government. He holds a master's degree in Constitutional Law from PUC-SP, is a pioneer in legal actions to hold agents of the dictatorship accountable, and is the coordinator of the Working Group on Memory, Truth, and Defense of Democracy of the Federal Attorney's Office for Citizens' Rights.

This article was originally published in the Conjur website on March 11, 2025, and was kindly provided by the authors for reproduction in the WBO (Washington Brazil Office).

Feature articles express the opinions of the author and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of the editors or WBO.