Gilmar says there was 'youthful enthusiasm' with code of ethics and sees lack of dialogue with Fachin

The Brazilian Supreme Federal Court (STF) has become the center of intense political and judicial controversy following a heated exchange between two of its most prominent members, Justice André Mendonça and Justice Gilmar Mendes. The dispute emerged during a recent session of the Second Chamber of the STF, where the court upheld the preventive detention of Henrique and Felipe Vorcaro—father and cousin of former banker Daniel Vorcaro, linked to the Bank Master scandal. This decision highlighted deep divisions within the judiciary regarding the balance between investigative rigor and due process.

During the hearing, Justice Mendonça strongly defended the continuation of the investigation into the Bank Master case, emphasizing the gravity of the alleged financial fraud and the need to prevent obstruction of justice. He directly refuted Justice Mendes’s criticisms, which compared the methods used in the current inquiry to those employed during Operation Car Wash, a high-profile anti-corruption campaign that sparked significant public debate. Mendonça argued that the Bank Master case involves unprecedented levels of fraud and criminal activity that must not be ignored or dismissed based on speculative claims without evidence.

Justice Mendes, however, expressed concerns about the potential overreach of the judiciary and raised questions about the legitimacy of the investigative procedures. His stance was seen by some analysts as more aligned with a judicial philosophy that emphasizes restraint and adherence to procedural norms. This divergence in approach has led to speculation about a growing rift within the STF, with some observers suggesting that there are factions among the justices who support either a more activist judicial role or one that prioritizes limits on judicial power.

In addition to the Mendonça-Mendes conflict, another significant legal development occurred when the First Chamber of the STF unanimously convicted former federal deputy Eduardo Bolsonaro (PL-SP) for the crime of coercion in the course of a legal proceeding. Bolsonaro received a four-year prison sentence to be served under semi-open conditions and will also be ineligible for office. The conviction followed allegations that he had publicly encouraged the United States government to impose sanctions against Brazilian officials, including Justice Alexandre de Moraes, during his tenure as a member of Congress.

Legal experts have criticized this ruling, calling it a "legal aberration," arguing that Bolsonaro's actions were part of his legitimate parliamentary duties. Others, however, view the conviction as a necessary step to uphold the integrity of the judicial system and deter similar behavior by politicians who might use their positions to influence ongoing investigations.

The Bank Master case itself has drawn attention not only for its financial implications but also for the alleged involvement of powerful figures within the STF. Investigations revealed that the Vorcaro family allegedly maintained a network known as "A Turma," composed of enforcers and police officers who threatened witnesses and opponents. They also reportedly used hacking techniques to obtain private information from adversaries. Justice Mendonça described these activities as having mafia-like characteristics, involving heavy weaponry and infiltration into police systems to protect the financial interests of the organization.

The decision to maintain the preventive detention of the Vorcaro family members was influenced by fears that their release could jeopardize the collection of evidence. Henrique Vorcaro is suspected of funding a paramilitary group associated with the bank, while Felipe Vorcaro was caught fleeing a police search with electronic devices. Justice Nunes Marques cast the decisive vote in favor of keeping them in custody, citing the lack of secure evidence supporting their release.

Meanwhile, discussions around the implementation of a code of ethics for the STF have intensified amid broader debates about transparency and accountability. President of the STF, Justice Edson Fachin, has expressed his intention to submit the proposed code to the full court once it receives the text prepared by Justice Cármen Lúcia. Fachin emphasized the importance of establishing clear ethical guidelines for the judges, particularly given the recent controversies surrounding the relationships between certain justices and individuals connected to the Bank Master case.

However, Justice Gilmar Mendes has voiced skepticism about the timing and necessity of such a code, criticizing what he perceives as an overly enthusiastic approach by Fachin. Mendes suggested that the proposal should have been introduced under different circumstances, away from the backdrop of accusations against several justices. Despite these reservations, he affirmed his support for measures aimed at increasing transparency within the judiciary, although he remains opposed to any restrictions on the ability of judges to hold shares in companies, provided they do not serve on their boards.

As the STF continues to grapple with internal divisions and external pressures, the outcomes of both the Bank Master investigation and the proposed code of ethics will likely shape the future trajectory of Brazil’s highest court. With tensions rising and differing views on judicial activism versus restraint, the coming months will be crucial in determining how the STF navigates these complex challenges.