✓ verbatim from the press ? no verbatim passage
The vice president of the Superior Electoral Court (TSE), Justice André Mendonça, ordered on Friday (19th) the removal of a video posted by federal deputy Sóstenes Cavalcante (PL-RJ), PL leader in the Chamber, which claims there are "major suspicions in the United States" that money from Comando Vermelho (CV) and Primeiro Comando da Capital (PCC) finances PT electoral campaigns. The injunction granted a 24-hour deadline for removal under penalty of daily fines, but as of 7 p.m. Sunday (21st) the video remained published on the deputy's Instagram. ✓
Press quotes (2)
"A liminar determina a remoção das publicações em até 24 horas, sob pena de multa diária"
"No domingo (21), às 19h, o vídeo continuava no Instagram."
The decision granted representation by the Brasil da Esperança Federation — which brings together PT, PV, and PC do B — filed with the TSE under number 0600949-58.2026.6.00.0000. According to the petition cited in the injunction, Sóstenes released a video in which, while commenting on the classification of PCC and CV as terrorist organizations by the United States government, he stated that "there are major suspicions in the United States that this money still finances PT campaigns." The deputy presented no evidence for the allegation. ?
Press quotes (3)
"REPRESENTAÇÃO (11541) Nº 0600949-58.2026.6.00.0000 (PJe) - BRASÍLIA - DISTRITO FEDERAL. RELATOR: MINISTRO ANDRÉ MENDONÇA. REPRESENTANTE: FEDERAÇÃO BRASIL DA ESPERANÇA (FE BRASIL) - NACIONAL. REPRESENTADO: SOSTENES SILVA CAVALCANTE"
"há grandes suspeitas nos Estados Unidos que esse dinheiro ainda financia campanhas do PT"
"Já o deputado federal foi alvo da representação por divulgar um vídeo em que, ao mencionar a classificação do Primeiro Comando da Capital (PCC) e do Comando Vermelho (CV) como organizações terroristas e narcoterroristas pelo governo norte-americano, disse haver "grandes suspeitas"
In his reasoning, Mendonça distinguished legitimate political criticism from unfounded factual imputation. "Saying that a certain party has inadequate public security policies, is lenient with crime, or opposes a certain strategy for confronting organized crime is, in principle, in the field of political opinion and public criticism," wrote the justice. "Asserting, however, that there are 'major suspicions' that money from criminal organizations finances electoral campaigns of a political party attributes to the electoral debate a serious, specific, and verifiable factual premise that, at least in preliminary judgment, has no minimum demonstration of correspondence with reality." ✓
Press quotes (1)
"Dizer que determinado partido possui políticas públicas inadequadas de segurança, que é leniente com a criminalidade ou que se opõe a determinada estratégia de enfrentamento ao crime organizado situa-se, em princípio, no campo da opinião política e da crítica pública. Afirmar, contudo, que há 'grandes suspeitas' de que dinheiro de organizações criminosas financia campanhas eleitorais de partido político atribui ao debate eleitoral uma premissa fática grave, específica e verificável, que, ao menos em juízo preliminar, não possui demonstração mínima de correspondência com a realidade"
The justice also characterized the content as negative early electoral propaganda, since the video presents Senator Flávio Bolsonaro (PL-RJ), a presidential pre-candidate, as a "leadership linked to confronting" the criminal factions, contrasting him with the PT government. The decision also prohibited republication, boosting, or dissemination of identical or equivalent content, and ordered notification of digital platforms to comply with the order. ✓
Press quotes (2)
"O vídeo apresenta o senador Flávio Bolsonaro (PL-RJ), pré-candidato à Presidência da República, como uma "liderança vinculada ao enfrentamento dessas mesmas organizações"
"proíbe a republicação, o impulsionamento ou a divulgação de conteúdo idêntico ou equivalente. O ministro também determinou a notificação das plataformas digitais para cumprimento da ordem judicial"
There is no public record that fines were applied after the deadline expired on Saturday night (20th). The case will be submitted to the TSE plenary for final judgment. Contacted by Folha de S.Paulo, deputy Sóstenes Cavalcante did not respond by the time the report was published on Sunday. ✓
Press quotes (2)
"A liminar determina a remoção das publicações em até 24 horas, sob pena de multa diária"
"Procurado, o deputado Sóstenes Cavalcante não respondeu até a publicação desta reportagem."
Mendonça based the decision on the absence of evidence for the allegation of criminal financing to PT, distinguishing between legitimate political opinion and serious factual imputation without verifiable basis.
The representation was filed by the Brasil da Esperança Federation, which brings together PT, PV, and PC do B.
Covered by only some sources, or where the accounts diverge.
Covered by only some sources (2)
O Globo reported that Mendonça also prohibited, in a separate decision, the PL from using paid resources to boost the video on social media.
Folha contextualized that Lula's campaign has approached TSE more than 60 times, mainly for use of artificial intelligence, and that 18 actions were against Flávio Bolsonaro's campaign.
-
Did the digital platforms remove the video after TSE notification, or only Sóstenes Cavalcante keeps the content published?
Why it's still unknown: The decision ordered notification of platforms for compliance, but there is no public information on whether Instagram, YouTube, or others removed the content independently or await action by the account holder.
-
What is the daily fine amount stipulated by the injunction, and against whom would it be applied — Sóstenes Cavalcante, the platforms, or both?
Why it's still unknown: The decision mentions 'daily fine' but does not specify the amount or the recipients. Complete procedural documents from TSE are not accessible via public portal without PJe credentials.
-
Did Mendonça apply the tripartite proportionality test (suitability, necessity, proportionality in the strict sense) or another formal doctrinal framework for freedom of expression vs. electoral protection in this case?
Why it's still unknown: Press coverage and the official TSE release cite Mendonça's reasoning about 'minimum demonstration of correspondence with reality' and 'serious factual premise,' but do not name the doctrinal test applied or binding precedents invoked. The complete vote was not located on public portals.
-
Are there dissenting votes or concurrent rationales from other TSE justices in this case, or is the decision monocratic awaiting plenary endorsement?
Why it's still unknown: The press reports that 'the case will be submitted to the plenary' but does not clarify whether the injunction is a monocratic decision by Mendonça or whether there was prior manifestation by other Court members. Collegiate documents are not available.