✓ verbatim from the press
Attorney General Paulo Gonet asked the Supreme Federal Court to reject the criminal review filed by former president Jair Bolsonaro's defense to overturn his 27 years and 3 months prison sentence for attempting a coup d'état in 2022. In the opinion sent to the STF on June 16, 2026, Gonet states that the defense "brought no novelty to legitimize the deconstruction of the definitive jurisdictional pronouncement" and that "the conviction is sound and based on a vigorous body of evidence." ✓
Press quotes (3)
"O procurador-geral da República, Paulo Gonet, enviou nesta terça-feira 16 ao Supremo Tribunal Federal um parecer contra o pedido de revisão criminal do ex-presidente Jair Bolsonaro (PL) para anular a condenação a 27 anos e três meses de prisão no processo da trama golpista."
"As teses suscitadas pelo autor na inicial da presente ação revisional não trouxeram nenhum ineditismo a legitimar a desconstrução do pronunciamento jurisdicional definitivo"
"O título condenatório é hígido e está assentado em vigoroso conjunto probatório"
Bolsonaro's original conviction was handed down by the STF's First Panel in Criminal Action 2668 in 2025, for the crimes of armed criminal organization, violent abolition of the Democratic Rule of Law, coup d'état, qualified damage to public property and deterioration of heritage property. The Criminal Review (RVC) 6021, filed in May 2026, is under the reporting of Justice Kássio Nunes Marques and will be judged by the Court's Second Panel. ✓
Press quotes (3)
"O ex-presidente foi condenado pela Primeira Turma do STF, na Ação Penal [ (AP) 2668](https://portal.stf.jus.br/processos/detalhe.asp?incidente=7223339), a 27 anos e três meses de prisão pela prática dos crimes de organização criminosa armada, abolição violenta do Estado Democrático de Direito, golpe de Estado, dano qualificado ao patrimônio público e deterioração de patrimônio tombado."
"Na Revisão Criminal [ (RVC) 6021](https://portal.stf.jus.br/processos/detalhe.asp?incidente=7587749), os advogados pedem a anulação do processo contra o ex-presidente. ... A RVC 6021 foi distribuída ao ministro Nunes Marques."
"Na Revisão Criminal [ (RVC) 6021](https://portal.stf.jus.br/processos/detalhe.asp?incidente=7587749), os advogados pedem a anulação do processo contra o ex-presidente. ... A RVC 6021 foi distribuída ao ministro Nunes Marques."
Bolsonaro's defense argues in the criminal review that the trial should have taken place in the STF plenary and not in the First Panel, questions the validity of Lieutenant Colonel Mauro Cid's plea bargain agreement, and alleges "late, massive and functionally ineffective" access to evidence, which would have compromised the exercise of adversarial proceedings and full defense. According to Consultor Jurídico, the defense also maintains that acts that would be "mere acts of cogitation and, at most, preparation" were criminalized and that there is "not even evidence" that Bolsonaro was aware of the facts for which he was convicted. ✓
Press quotes (2)
"Os advogados alegam que o julgamento deveria ter ocorrido no plenário da Corte, sustentam que houve cerceamento de defesa, questionam a validade da colaboração premiada do tenente-coronel Mauro Cid e pedem a absolvição do ex-presidente dos crimes relacionados à trama golpista."
"Outro argumento é o de que houve "acesso tardio, massivo e funcionalmente ineficaz" a provas, o que teria comprometido o exercício do contraditório e da ampla defesa. Além disso, argumentam que foram criminalizados atos que seriam "meros atos de cogitação e, quando muito, preparação" e que não há "sequer indícios" de que Bolsonaro tivesse conhecimento de fatos pelos quais foi condenado."
Gonet rebutted each of these arguments in the opinion. Regarding jurisdiction, he stated that the rule reserving to the plenary the trial of presidents of the Republic applies to the head of the Executive in office, not to former presidents. As for Cid's plea bargain, the Attorney General's Office maintained that the agreement was regularly approved, that the military officer was accompanied by lawyers and that voluntariness was reaffirmed at different times in the process. Regarding the alleged restriction of defense, the Attorney General stated that the lawyers had access to the material and did not demonstrate concrete harm, and that "the volume of documents and media resulted from the complexity of the investigation." ✓
Press quotes (3)
"Para Gonet, a competência do colegiado foi definida com base no Regimento Interno do STF e já havia sido analisada no processo. O parecer sustenta que a regra que reserva ao plenário o julgamento de presidentes da República se aplica ao chefe do Executivo em exercício, e não a ex-presidentes."
"A Procuradoria também defendeu a validade da delação de Cid. O parecer afirma que o acordo de colaboração premiada foi homologado regularmente, que o militar esteve acompanhado por advogados e que a voluntariedade do acordo foi reafirmada em diferentes momentos do processo."
"Sobre a alegação de cerceamento de defesa, a PGR sustenta que os advogados tiveram acesso ao material e não demonstraram prejuízo concreto. Para Gonet, o volume de documentos e mídias decorreu da complexidade da investigação"
The Second Panel's decision on the criminal review may be made in the coming months. The panel is composed of André Mendonça and Nunes Marques — both appointed by Bolsonaro — as well as Gilmar Mendes, Dias Toffoli and Luiz Fux, who voted for the former president's acquittal in the original trial. ✓
Press quotes (1)
"Conforme determina o regimento interno do Supremo, a revisão criminal deverá ser julgada pela Segunda Turma, composta por André Mendonça e Nunes Marques, ambos indicados por Bolsonaro, além de Gilmar Mendes, Dias Toffoli e Luiz Fux. Durante o julgamento de Bolsonaro, Fux mudou para a Segunda Turma após votar pela absolvição do ex-presidente."
Attorney General Paulo Gonet sent an opinion to the STF on June 16, 2026 against Bolsonaro's request for criminal review.
Bolsonaro's conviction was for 27 years and 3 months in prison, handed down by the STF's First Panel in 2025 for the crimes of armed criminal organization, violent abolition of the Democratic Rule of Law, coup d'état, qualified damage to public property and deterioration of heritage property.
The criminal review will be judged by the STF's Second Panel, composed of André Mendonça, Nunes Marques (rapporteur), Gilmar Mendes, Dias Toffoli and Luiz Fux.
Covered by only some sources, or where the accounts diverge.
Covered by only some sources (3)
Luiz Fux voted for Bolsonaro's acquittal in the original trial and moved to the Second Panel after that vote.
Bolsonaro's defense alleges that "mere acts of cogitation and, at most, preparation" were criminalized and that there is "not even evidence" that Bolsonaro was aware of the facts for which he was convicted.
The Attorney General's Office argued that Bolsonaro would not be entitled to infringement appeals because only one justice (Fux) voted for acquittal, and STF jurisprudence requires at least two acquittal votes to admit this type of appeal.
-
What were the specific binding precedents and doctrinal tests (tripartite proportionality, weighing judgment) that the First Panel applied when convicting Bolsonaro in AP 2668?
Why it's still unknown: The Attorney General's opinion does not detail the doctrinal reasoning of the original conviction ruling. Press coverage summarizes the decision without cataloging the precedents cited by the rapporteur. The rapporteur's vote in AP 2668, available on the STF portal, would contain this information, but was not retrieved in this research round.
-
Was there a dissenting vote in Bolsonaro's conviction by the First Panel, besides Luiz Fux's vote for acquittal?
Why it's still unknown: The press confirms that Fux voted for acquittal, but does not specify whether there were other divergent votes or whether the conviction was 3x1 or 4x1. The AP 2668 ruling would have this information, but was not accessed.
-
What is the procedural deadline for the Second Panel to decide on RVC 6021?
Why it's still unknown: None of the outlets consulted mention a legal or internal deadline for the judgment of the criminal review. The STF Internal Regulations may establish a deadline, but the information was not retrieved.