Brazil's Supreme Court Makes PL Deputy a Defendant Over Insults Toward President Lula
2 sources · Brazil
Who reported this
- Folha de S.Paulo
- Gazeta do Povo
What the colours mean
- Left
- Centre-left
- Centre
- Centre-right
- Right
- A hatched block means the outlet is affiliated with, or controlled by, a state.
Political lean describes where an outlet sits within the politics of its own country. It is never a position on a single global scale.
Political lean is comparable inside one country and not across them, which is why the bar groups by country first. Publicly funded broadcasters are not marked as state-linked.
The owner of each outlet is listed as a matter of record, not as a judgement about the outlet.
Every source for this story reports from Brazil.
The First Panel of the Supreme Federal Court (STF) unanimously decided to make Federal Deputy Gilvan da Federal (PL-ES) a defendant in a criminal action for insulting President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva. The decision follows a complaint by the Prosecutor General's Office regarding a speech the deputy delivered on April 8, 2025, during a session of the Chamber of Deputies' Commission on Public Security and Combatting Organized Crime. During the session, Gilvan referred to the president as an ex-convict and a partner in crime, stating that he wanted the president to die and go to hell, specifically mentioning a hope that he would suffer a heart attack.
Justice Cármen Lúcia, the rapporteur, rejected the deputy's defense that his words were protected by parliamentary immunity. She argued that the speech was a void manifestation dissociated from the legislative debate and intended exclusively to offend the president. Justice Alexandre de Moraes added that the comments exceeded the legitimate exercise of parliamentary functions and constituted a level of offensiveness not covered by immunity. Justice Flávio Dino also voted in favor of the decision, noting that the sharing of such insults on social media creates a market for bizarreness. Justice Cristiano Zanin recused himself from the judgment because he previously served as Lula's lawyer.
Gilvan da Federal defended his actions by stating that the debate was heated and that he had been provoked by a government ally. He also noted that the Chamber's Ethics Council had previously archived a representation against him for the same facts. However, Justice Moraes clarified that the Ethics Council's decision does not affect the criminal instance. In a subsequent plenary session, the deputy apologized for his words, stating that as a Christian he should not wish death upon anyone, though he maintained that the president should pay for his crimes.
How each side framed it
- Centre
- The center-leaning report focuses on the legal reasoning of the justices and the specific quotes used to justify the removal of parliamentary immunity.
- Centre-right
- The center-right leaning report provides more context regarding the specific bill being discussed and includes the deputy's subsequent apology and justification.
Sources
100% of the statements in this article were traced back to the source articles listed above.