Crisis of corruption in Brazil: the STF faces the challenge of effective justice.

The issue of corruption in Brazil has reached unprecedented levels of concern, a problem that Minister Luis Roberto Barroso of the Supreme Federal Court (STF) has highlighted in his recent statements. According to Barroso, corruption has become institutionalized to the point of being a way of doing business, fostered by a "huge pact" of complicity among those involved in illicit acts. "Wherever there is a cent of public money, something is wrong," he stated, conveying a clear message about the seriousness of the situation. However, his speech seems to overlook that this "huge pact" also includes the Judiciary itself, particularly the STF, which has released many convicted of corruption, leaving a lingering sense of impunity. The criticism is well-founded: the minister is aware of the controversy surrounding the release of prominent figures in the political and business spheres, who have benefited from court decisions. For example, former minister and congressman José Dirceu, convicted in the mensalão case, has returned to the political scene with the intention of re-entering the federal Chamber of Deputies. This reappearance not only raises questions about justice but also illustrates a lack of significant consequences for those who have committed corruption offenses. The history of corruption in Brazil is repeating itself, as seen in the case of Valdemar da Costa Neto, president of the Liberal Party (PL), who, despite having been convicted of corruption and money laundering, enjoys considerable influence in the National Congress. The perception that the corrupt can evade punishment is exacerbated by the freedom of former president Lula, who, despite having been sentenced to over 12 years in prison for corruption and money laundering, now appears to be in a position of renewed power. Marcelo Odebrecht, whose name has been at the center of the Lava Jato operation, is also free after having been sentenced to 19 years in prison. The release of such prominent figures has sparked a debate about the effectiveness of the Brazilian judicial system and its ability to tackle large-scale corruption. The feeling that justice is selective—focusing on "common" criminals while allowing the powerful to escape consequences—undermines public trust in institutions. The context is further complicated by the recent pix amendments, a topic that has generated controversy in the legislative arena. Justice Minister Flávio Dino has attempted to modify these amendments but has faced resistance. The decision by the president of the Joint Budget Commission (CMO) to postpone the reading of the preliminary report on the Budgetary Guidelines Law (LDO) highlights the influence these amendments have on the legislative process. Many lawmakers view these amendments as a "conquest," adding another layer of complicity in the fight against corruption. On the other hand, the recent direct action of unconstitutionality presented by the Attorney General of the Republic, Paulo Gonet, is also a reflection of the struggle facing the judicial system. The pix amendments, which allow for the allocation of federal resources through a less controlled process, have raised concerns about transparency and accountability. The expectation is that the STF will take a proactive role in evaluating these amendments, but there are doubts about the Court's impartiality. Most Brazilian citizens wonder if the STF ministers will be willing to act against this "pact" of corruption that has permeated the system. The perception that the powerful are above the law is a sentiment that has grown over time, fueled by the impunity that many of these individuals have experienced. Distrust in the judicial system is exacerbated by the notion that there is a double standard in the application of justice. The current situation poses a dilemma for the STF and its capacity to restore public trust. Barroso, by pointing out the problem of corruption and its complicity, has a unique opportunity to demonstrate that the judicial system can be an ally in the fight against corruption. However, this opportunity comes with a monumental challenge: to break the pattern of impunity and establish a precedent that ensures that everyone, regardless of their status, is held accountable under the law. Meanwhile, the people watch closely, skeptical yet hopeful that this time justice will prevail, and that the fight against corruption will not merely be rhetoric, but a tangible reality that allows for a more transparent and just future for Brazil. In a country where corruption has left an indelible mark on politics and society, the STF's actions in the coming months will be crucial in determining whether this trend can be reversed and trust in institutions restored.