STF to Meet Amid Institutional Crisis Over Moraes and Vorcaro Messages
3 sources · Brazil
Who reported this
- Folha de S.Paulo
- Estadao
- 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 Brazilian Supreme Federal Court (STF) is scheduled to meet on Tuesday, September 15, to address an institutional crisis involving Justice Alexandre de Moraes and messages exchanged with businessman Daniel Vorcaro, the former owner of Banco Master. The session will determine whether to open an investigation into Moraes following a Federal Police report that details communications between the justice and the banker. The crisis has led STF President Edson Fachin to remove Moraes from the relatorship of the Fake News inquiry and to prohibit Justice André Mendonça from advancing investigations that could target other members of the court.
Internal divisions have emerged regarding the conduct of the session. A group of justices aligned with Moraes, including Gilmar Mendes, has sought to postpone the meeting. Justice Mendes formally requested the postponement to allow for a more comprehensive analysis of documents and suggested that the court also judge allegations of abuse of authority against Justice Mendonça. Conversely, Justice Mendonça had previously requested the session to analyze evidence obtained from Vorcaro's phone. The Attorney General, Paulo Gonet, has stated he will attend the session despite President Fachin's preference that he be represented by a deputy, as Federal Police dialogues also mention Gonet.
The court is also deliberating whether the session will be public or held under secrecy. While the Constitution generally mandates public trials, the STF internal regulations allow for closed sessions if the public interest requires it. Some justices expressed concern that a live broadcast could be used as political ammunition for upcoming elections or could devolve into a professional conflict that damages the image of the court.
Center right sources frame the event as a critical test of judicial transparency and a potential political misuse of closed sessions. Center sources focus more on the internal power struggle between the pro Moraes and pro Mendonça wings of the court, describing the potential for institutional carnage.
How each side framed it
- Centre
- Framed the event as an internal power struggle and a tactical battle between factions of the court.
- Centre-right
- Framed the situation as a crisis of transparency and warned against the political use of closed sessions.
Sources
- Centre-right Estadao: Daniel Vorcaro has testimony scheduled for September 15; defense should request postponement
- Centre Folha de S.Paulo: Pro-Moraes wing articulates postponing STF session with pressure to include Mendonça
- Centre Folha de S.Paulo: Gonet says he will be at STF session that will discuss inquiry against Moraes
- Centre Folha de S.Paulo: Gilmar suggests postponing STF session on Moraes and joining case to report targeting Mendonça
- Centre-right Gazeta do Povo: STF decides if session to discuss Moraes case will be closed
93% of the statements in this article were traced back to the source articles listed above.