Inquiry into fake news at the STF: five years of controversy and political polarization.

The opening of the inquiry into fake news at the Federal Supreme Court (STF) has been a topic of controversy since its announcement in March 2019. With nearly five and a half years in process, this case has been marked by opacity and political polarization, attracting the attention of business leaders, politicians, and social media users. The appointment of Minister Alexandre de Moraes as the case's rapporteur has added more tension to an already charged atmosphere, making him a target of criticism from the far-right while gaining support from leftist sectors that value his defense of institutions and democracy. The official purpose of the inquiry is to investigate the dissemination of fraudulent news and threats against the Court and its members. However, the context that led to its opening was a notable increase in attacks directed at the STF. These attacks included everything from death threats to calls for the Court's closure, creating a climate of uncertainty regarding the protection of judicial independence and the rule of law in Brazil. The "elastic" interpretation of the STF's internal regulations used to justify the opening of the inquiry has been one of the most recurrent points of criticism. One of the most discussed aspects has been the manner in which the rapporteur of the inquiry was appointed. Although the regulation allows for this appointment, it has raised doubts about the impartiality of the process. Critics of the inquiry have dubbed it the "inquiry of the end of the world," reflecting a perception that its scope is disproportionate and, in some cases, abusive. Criticism has focused on the breadth of the investigation, which extends not only to fake news but also to the investigation of financing schemes and mass dissemination that threaten the independence of the Judiciary. Among the most controversial decisions is the censorship imposed on the media outlets O Antagonista and Crusoé in April 2019, which sparked intense debate about press freedom and the STF's capacity to regulate information. The case originated from a report linking a member of the Court to the Odebrecht scandal, leading to an order for the content to be removed from platforms. This measure was ultimately revoked, but it marked the beginning of a debate over the balance between protecting judges' reputations and freedom of expression. The arrest of Deputy Daniel Silveira in 2021, following the release of a video in which he insulted STF ministers and praised acts of the military dictatorship, highlighted the tension between political discourse and judicial action. This case, like others related to disinformation, has underscored the delicate balance that must be maintained between freedom of expression and the protection of democratic institutions. Throughout this process, the figure of former President Jair Bolsonaro has repeatedly emerged, as his statements have been the subject of investigation in the context of the inquiry. The secret nature of the investigations has been another point of discussion, as it has limited public knowledge about who has been the subject of inquiries. Many of the congress members being investigated belong to Bolsonaro's inner circle, raising suspicions about the politicization of the inquiry. The evidentiary connection between fake news and other investigations, such as digital militias, has further complicated the landscape, suggesting a broader network of disinformation that threatens Brazilian institutional integrity. As the inquiry has progressed, voices within the STF have emerged questioning its duration. With a processing time extending beyond five years, many legal experts believe that the process should reach a conclusion. However, the president of the STF, Minister Luís Roberto Barroso, has argued that the length of the inquiry is not a problem in itself but reflects the complexity of the facts being investigated. Barroso has pointed out that the focus of the inquiry has been essential to countering a far-right movement that threatens democracy in Brazil. Expectations regarding the conclusion of the inquiry have increased, especially after the events of January 8, when the Three Powers were attacked. Barroso has mentioned that the Attorney General of the Republic is already receiving materials related to the case and that decisions on its possible closure or the formulation of charges are expected to be made in the near future. This development could mark a new chapter in the fight against disinformation and the defense of judicial independence in Brazil. As Brazilian society continues to debate the legitimacy and effectiveness of the fake news inquiry, political polarization remains at the center of the discussion. The current situation reflects not only an internal problem within the judicial system but also a broader challenge for democracy in Brazil, where information and disinformation play a crucial role. The conclusion of this inquiry will not only have legal repercussions but will also define the course of democratic health and trust in institutions in the country.