Bolsonaro on Trial: A Test Case for Global Democratic Resilience

12 September 2025

The prosecution accused Bolsonaro and seven other individuals – including several former generals and cabinet members – of seeking to violently dismantle Brazil’s democratic rule of law. Alexandre de Moraes, Justice of the Supreme Federal Court, stated that Bolsonaro aimed to establish a “dictatorship” in Brazil. The verdict was announced on 11 September. A majority of 4 judges against 1 voted for conviction.  

Prof. Dr. Mariana Llanos, GIGA expert on democratic institutions and presidential crises, is closely following the proceedings. In this interview, she explains why the trial is so significant and what other democracies can learn from the case. 

Mariana, why is this trial so pivotal for Brazil? 

Mariana Llanos:  

We all remember far-right ex-President Bolsonaro (2019 –2022) for putting Brazilians at risk with policies (or lack thereof) that endangered the Amazon’s biodiversity and denied the threat of the COVID-19 pandemic. That wasn’t all.  

He also became notorious for undermining democratic institutions, casting doubt on Brazil’s reliable electronic voting system, and rejecting the unfavourable results of the 2022 election, in which he sought re-election. We still have in mind those pictures of 8 January 2023, just one week after winning President Lula had taken office, when thousands of Bolsonaro supporters stormed Brazil’s Congress, Supreme Court, and the Government’s Palace in Brasília. They not only destroyed those precious buildings but called for a military coup to oust Lula and reinstate Bolsonaro. A complex plot was revealed following investigations by the police and the public prosecutors, which provided the basis for the trial, in which a 5-justice panel of the 11-member Supreme Federal Tribunal accused Bolsonaro and seven close associates (including high-ranking military officers and collaborators in his government) were charged with grave allegations: those of leading a criminal organization, attempting to violently abolish democratic rule, plotting a coup, causing damage to public property, and conspiring to assassinate key democratic figures, such as President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva and Supreme Court Justice Alexandre de Moraes. 

What happened in 2022 and at the beginning of 2023 was a serious attack on democracy and the constitution! 

Bolsonaro denied all allegations, claiming to be the victim of political persecution. He accused the judiciary of bias and abuse of power. How credible are these accusations? 

Llanos: For Bolsonaro and his supporters, this is a political trial, and they maintain that judges are biased against him. But Bolsonaro’s attacks on the Federal Supreme Tribunal began much earlier, during his government, and took place both informally (such as with rallies against the court) and formally (such as with impeachment requests against some of the judges). Bolsonaristas particularly dislike Justice Alexandre de Moraes, who headed the Superior Electoral Court (TSE) during the 2022 elections and strongly resisted Bolsonaro’s claims of electoral fraud. This judge also had a firm stance after the events on 8 January. In 2024, he even ordered the temporary suspension of the network X’s operations in Brazil in the middle of investigations on far-right disinformation campaigns. 

So, Bolsonaristas do not like the court and openly attack it. Certainly, the firm actions of Justice Moraes are not uncontroversial: some specialists have seen them as an overreach of the judiciary’s power, and even as a provocation inciting further actions by far-right movements. However, Brazil has been known for a long time for its strong judicial and prosecutorial institutions and for the independence of its courts. We cannot talk of political persecution, particularly when the actions against democracy have been so open and overwhelming.

The five-member panel showed a clear majority of 4 votes against 1. The only vote in favour of Bolsonaro came from Justice Fux, who explicitly distanced himself from Justice Moraes and questioned the court’s competence in this case. 

Is there a risk of unrest due to the verdict? 

Llanos: Of course, the right-wing movements won’t stay quiet with the decision. They have formal power in Congress (already signalling that an amnesty law could be a possibility, although this is unlikely in the current context), and they have good control of the streets, as seen last Sunday when rallies took place in the major Brazilian cities to defend Bolsonaro’s innocence.  

Bolsonaro has received support from US President Donald Trump even before the trial began. How and why is Trump backing him? 

Llanos: Loyalties and backing are clear in this case. Donald Trump is an ideological ally of Bolsonaro. He has qualified the trial as a “witch hunt”. The whole country has been facing retaliation from the USA for this trial – a 50 per cent tariff on Brazilian imports. Trump has also attacked and sanctioned Justice de Moraes using the U.S. Magnitsky Act to freeze any U.S.-based assets and block financial dealings. The USA also revoked Moraes’s visa. Eduardo Bolsonaro, one of the ex-president’s sons temporarily relocated to the USA and has actively lobbied for these actions.  

President Lula has recurrently asserted that the judiciary is independent in Brazil, from internal or external actions. Such a stance could be expected from Bolsonaro’s political and ideological opponent. Yet, interestingly, even right-wing politicians – ideologically closer to Bolsonaro – did not question the 2022 electoral results and distanced themselves from the violent events of January 2023.  

In what ways could this trial serve as a model for other democracies to resist democratic erosion? 

Llanos: Take the US case, a similar one with the Capitol attacks of 6 January, one year before those of Bolsonaro. As Bolsonaro, Trump refused to accept his electoral defeat. For these actions, he was accused and impeached by the House of Representatives but was later acquitted in the Senate’s trial. Trump’s Republican Party blocked such accountability actions and even maintained his presidential candidacy in 2024, despite proven undemocratic behaviour. Therefore, Trump could stand for re-election and return to power despite an impeachment attempt, multiple criminal charges, and a felony conviction. 

In contrast, Brazil’s judicial institutions just sent Bolsonaro behind bars, showing that independent courts and political actors’ commitment to democratic values are crucial for democratic resistance. We need firmness when democracy is at risk. Unfortunately, more and more non-democratic actors are reaching power through elections, a troubling hallmark of today’s democratic erosion processes. Not all institutions succeed in withstanding the anti-democratic assaults of these powerful actors. The Brazilian case, however, provides a compelling example that resistance is possible – and illustrates the mechanisms through which it can be achieved.