By Camilo Diniz
Gilmar Mendes, a justice of Brazil's Supreme Federal Court (STF), the country's highest court, has reignited the debate over the annulment of President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva's conviction in the Guarujá triplex case. In a post on X, he answered former judge Sergio Moro and said the decision rested on "formal" and "political" reasons. Coming from a member of the court that decided the case, the wording did not go unnoticed.
What Gilmar Mendes wrote about Moro and Dallagnol
According to the justice, Moro and then-prosecutor Deltan Dallagnol acted in collusion to manipulate the justice system. In his version, the goal was to prevent Lula from running in the 2018 presidential election. Mendes called the episode "procedural theater with political-electoral purposes" ("teatro processual com finalidades político-eleitorais").
The reply was aimed at arguments Moro had published on social media about the annulment of the sentence. It is worth stressing that this is an accusation made by Gilmar Mendes on his own account. The material available does not include a ruling that proves it, nor a detailed reaction from Moro or Dallagnol.
A turnaround on Lava Jato
The harsh tone contrasts with the justice's past. Mendes was once an open supporter of Operation Car Wash (Lava Jato), the sweeping anti-corruption investigation, and even praised how it was conducted. Over time he became a fierce critic of the practices used in the case involving Lula.
That shift is what gives the episode its political weight. The same justice who applauded the operation now describes it as staged. Those who follow the Supreme Court closely know that changes of position like this feed distrust among part of the electorate about the court's consistency.
Why it matters
Lava Jato was the investigation that led to Lula's conviction in the triplex case, which was later annulled. The statement comes at a moment of intense debate over the validity of the proceedings that led to the president's conviction. The issue remains at the center of institutional discussions and, by all appearances, is far from settled.
What to watch next: whether Moro and Dallagnol respond publicly to the accusations, and whether the matter gains new chapters in the Supreme Court or in Congress.
VDD Analysis
When a Supreme Court justice acknowledges that an annulment had "political" motives, citizens have the right to ask where the law ends and convenience begins. Cases must be judged under clear rules, and Gilmar Mendes's switch from Lava Jato enthusiast to its harshest critic reinforces the feeling that rigor varies with the moment. Defending due process applies to everyone, including those who investigate, and that demands consistency and transparency from the court.
