Historic Verdict on Bolsonaro Fuels New Tensions in Brazil
marking an end to the military era
HAVANA TIMES – On September 11th, former Brazilian President Jair Bolsonaro, along with three generals, and an admiral were all found guilty of attempting a coup d’état and sentenced to prison terms ranging from 19 – 27 years. The historic verdict brings an end to the military era in Brazilian politics, but not to the tensions reigning within the country, nor to the electoral strength of the far right.
US President Donald Trump posted on X that he was “very unhappy” with the decision and surprised by the conviction of a “good man” who was a “good president of Brazil.” Secretary of State Marco Rubio threatened: “The United States will respond appropriately to this witch hunt.”
“It’s very similar to what they tried to do to me and failed,” Trump acknowledged, in an identification that many point to as the reason for his decision to punish Brazil with super tariffs of 50%, in effect since August 6th. Both Trump and Bolsonaro sought to discredit their electoral loss, boycotted the fight against the COVID-19 pandemic, and encouraged violent invasions – in Washington DC, an attempted takeover of the Capitol building on January 6, 2021; and in Brazil a similar attack on the three seats of government in Brasilia on January 8, 2023.
In Brazil, followers of the 70-year-old Bolsonaro are expected to intensify their calls for amnesty, both in the streets and in the National Congress, where there is sympathy for his views.
The verdict
The First Chamber of the Federal Supreme Court – composed of five of the 11 justices of the country’s highest court – sentenced Bolsonaro to 27 years and three months in prison, and a fine of 322,896 reais ($59,800) by a vote of four to one. The historic trial took place at the Court’s seat in Brasilia, the country’s capital city.
Former Defense Minister and Chief of Staff General Walter Braga Netto received a 26-year sentence and a fine of 130,200 reais ($24,100). He has been in preventive detention since December 14, 2024, accused of attempting to obstruct judicial investigations.
Admiral Almir Garnier, who commanded the Navy until the end of 2022, and two other Army generals who held important positions in the Bolsonaro government, Augusto Heleno Pereira and Paulo Sergio Nogueira, received sentences of 19 to 24 years, in addition to fines equivalent to more than $20,000.
A chain of crimes, going back years
The harsh sentences reflected the convictions on five counts: attempted coup, abolition of the democratic rule of law, criminal organization, damage to public property, and causing deterioration of historical assets. The latter two charges refer to the invasion of Brazil’s three seats of power by a mob of Bolsonaro supporters on January 8, 2023, hoping to provoke a military intervention and stop the transfer of power to current President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva. The melee caused widespread destruction.
This is the first time in Brazil’s history that officials from the highest rank of the armed forces have been tried and sentenced by the civil courts. Since the birth of the Brazilian Republic in 1889 – which also transpired via a military coup – the country’s political history has been rife with coups and military interventions. Bolsonaro himself is a former Army Captain who left the military in 1988 to launch his political career.
The current trial began on March 26, 2025, when the Supreme Court agreed to hear the complaint filed by Brazilian Attorney General Paulo Gonet. Thirty-four people, 24 of them military personnel, were accused of attempting a coup d’état in late 2022 and January 2023 with the goal of preventing Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva, Bolsonaro’s rival in the October 2022 elections, from taking office, or alternatively, of overthrowing him after the January 1, 2023 inauguration.
Defendants considered the “crucial core” of leadership
The prosecution divided the defendants into five groups that performed different functions, such as leadership of the so-called “crucial core;” legal and intelligence support; coordination of disinformation; “tactical actions”—including the proposed assassination of President-elect Lula; and pressuring military personnel opposed to the coup.
The final phase of the trial, which began on September 2nd and concluded on the night of Thursday, September 11th, involved the eight members of the “crucial core,” and resulted in the conviction of former President Bolsonaro, three generals, Admiral Garnier, two federal police officers, and Army Lieutenant Colonel Mauro Cid. Cid, who was Bolsonaro’s aide during his entire presidential term, was offered a plea deal after collaborating with the police investigation and was sentenced only to two years in prison, which he can serve at home.
The prison terms of those convicted may be delayed for several weeks due to appeals before Court. By law, these appeals can only clarify the sentences but not change them. An appeal for the re-evaluation of the trial by the full Supreme Court would only have been possible if there had been two acquittal votes. However, for six of the eight defendants in the core group, the only dissenting vote was that of Justice Luiz Fux.
The trials of the defendants from the other four groups, expected to take place in the coming months, will likely have limited repercussions, given the conviction of the ringleaders.
The dissenting vote of Justice Fux
Justice Fux spent nearly 12 hours on September 10th, reading his 429-page opinion advocating to absolve Bolsonaro and five other defendants of all the accusations.
Fux did vote to convict former aide Mauro Cid and General Braga, in a decision of little legal consistency according to most of the legal experts who commented on it. He even contradicted his own previous rulings, in which he had handed down harsh sentences to those who invaded the headquarters of the Congress, the Presidency, and the Supreme Court on January 8, 2023.
His opinion displayed other contradictions as well. He proposed convicting Cid, the aide, while acquitting his boss Bolsonaro. He further considered some of the evidence against General Braga to be valid yet invalidated the same evidence in the case of Bolsonaro and other defendants. It’s incomprehensible to convict only two people of attempting to abolish democracy, when such an action necessarily involves a larger conspiracy.
Finally Fux ignored the succession of linked events that served to prove the existence of a criminal organization and the process of constructing a coup d’etat, beginning with 2018 Bolsonaro’s attacks on the electronic voting system, the Supreme Court, and the National Congress, and the massive protests against several democratic institutions.
Instead of considering these, the dissenting justice dealt with each case and each event as an isolated phenomenon, in order to facilitate his sentence of innocence.
Dissenting arguments fuel the extreme right
Justice Fux’ arguments have already begun to fuel accusations against the trial and the Supreme Court itself from the far right and even moderate conservatives, as well as the pro-amnesty movement for Bolsonaro.
A proposal in the Brazilian Congress seeks to free the former president from prison and from being barred from running in the October 2026 elections. Bolsonaro’s supporters do not have a parliamentary majority, but they are frequently able to impose their agenda by attracting conservative lawmakers who covet votes from the far right, which is very popular in the country.
However, the Supreme Court judges have already made it clear that amnesty for those convicted of an attempted coup d’état is unconstitutional. Conflicts between the legislative and judicial branches are expected to worsen, no matter what the final outcome of Bolsonaro’s trial.
Some of the arguments put forward by Fux are not unique to him, but have long divided jurists and politicians. Many believe that coup plotters should be tried first by ordinary judges and courts, rather than by the Supreme Court.
In Brazil, there is a so-called “privileged forum” law, which means that any trial of executive and legislative authorities can only be held at the level of the highest court. Opponents argue that those on trial in this case no longer hold public office, so their cases should be returned to the lower courts. The advantage of this would be that a lower court judgement can be appealed in the higher courts, a right that is denied when they are sentenced by the Supreme Court.
Furthermore, opponents argue, if such a trial is held in the Supreme Court, it should take place before the full body of 11 justices and not just be heard by the five judges of the first chamber. The Supreme Court has been distributing cases among two chambers for almost a century, in order to judge the millions of cases it handles more quickly and avoid backlogs. Nonetheless, critics argue that such an important trial concerning an attempted coup d’état and involving a former president cannot be deprived of the full participation of the 11 judges who make up the Supreme Court.
These are issues that favor the far right’s offensive for Bolsonaro’s amnesty and even fuel the case for retaliation by the United States. The former president’s son, Congressman Eduardo Bolsonaro, has been living in the United States since March, lobbying for sanctions against the country and especially against the Supreme Court judges.
First published in Spanish by IPS and translated and posted in English by Havana Times.