Brazil’s Top Court, the STF, Convicts Just 5% of the Politicians It Tries
Politics
Key Facts
—The headline. Only about 5% of criminal cases against politicians with Supreme Court jurisdiction ended in conviction between 2002 and 2025.
—The funnel. Of roughly 1,800 inquiries in 23 years, just 92 reached the charging stage, or one in 19.
—Not acquittals. Most cases never got a verdict, ending instead in jurisdiction transfers or the statute of limitations running out.
—The mechanism. The privileged jurisdiction known as foro sends senior officials straight to the top court rather than to trial judges.
—The exception. Include the January 8 coup plot cases, which lack that jurisdiction, and the recent conviction rate jumps toward 50%.
A new study puts a hard number on Brazil’s impunity debate: the STF conviction rate for politicians who enjoy special access to the Supreme Court has been about 5% since 2002. The finding lands as the court sits at the centre of the country’s political life.
The survey, published by the newspaper O Estado de S. Paulo, tracked cases involving officials with foro, the privileged jurisdiction that routes their trials to the top court.
The picture it paints is less about verdicts than about cases that never reach one — a pattern our reporting has tracked since at least 2017, when we noted that the privileged jurisdiction known as foro sends senior officials straight to the top court rather than to trial judges, creating a structural channel that lets many elite cases fade before any reckoning. Our archive has long documented how this mechanism fuels impunity: a 2026 analysis found the STF convicts just 5% of the politicians it tries, while opinion pieces as early as 2017 described the court as a venue where political elites escape the ordinary justice system.
What the STF conviction rate really shows
The low figure is not mainly the result of acquittals. Researchers say the court rarely absolves these defendants; instead, very few cases ever reach a ruling on guilt.
The attrition starts early. Of about 1,800 inquiries opened over 23 years, only 92 advanced to formal charges, the step that turns a suspect into a defendant.
Even those that cleared that bar often stalled. Between 2002 and 2025, approximately 95% of criminal cases against politicians with Supreme Court jurisdiction did not end in conviction, with most never receiving a verdict due to jurisdiction transfers or statute of limitations, sent to other benches or timed out by the statute of limitations.
Why so many cases quietly disappear
Analysts point to the mechanics of foro itself. Cases bounce between courts as officials change roles, and the top court faces little pressure to keep them moving.
One researcher put the asymmetry bluntly. A trial judge who lets cases expire faces sanctions, he noted, while a Supreme Court justice or the prosecutor-general who does the same faces none.
That gap, the study argues, quietly favours the investigated. Delay widens the odds that a case ends without a verdict, whether through reassignment or the clock simply running out.
The pattern also reflects shifting rules on foro itself. For much of the period studied, jurisdiction followed whatever post an official held at the time, so a change of job could bounce a case to a different court.
A 2018 ruling narrowed the privilege to crimes tied to the office, and a later decision kept cases at the court even after a mandate ends. Both were meant to curb the endless reassignment that helped cases expire.
The exception that complicates the picture
The numbers shift sharply once the January 8 coup plot cases enter the count. Since 2023 the court has judged rioters who lack privileged jurisdiction, a different track from the foro cases.
Fold those in and the conviction rate for cases opened from 2017 onward climbs toward 50%, though the overall conviction rate for politicians with Supreme Court jurisdiction remains about 5% since 2002. The contrast underlines the point: when cases actually reach judgment, the court does convict.
For a foreign reader weighing Brazil’s institutions, the takeaway is nuanced. The rule of law can bite hard in high-profile trials, yet a structural channel still lets many elite cases fade before any reckoning.
Why is the STF conviction rate for politicians so low?
Mainly because few cases ever reach a verdict, not because the court acquits. Most inquiries are archived, sent to other courts or hit the statute of limitations, so only a small share result in a guilty ruling.
What is foro privilegiado?
It is Brazil’s privileged jurisdiction, which sends senior officials such as ministers and members of congress to be tried directly by the Supreme Court rather than by ordinary judges. Critics say it slows cases and shields the powerful.
Does the STF conviction rate change with the January 8 cases?
Yes. The rioters tried over the January 8 attacks do not have privileged jurisdiction, and including their cases lifts the conviction rate for prosecutions opened since 2017 toward 50%.
More: Brazil news in English, every day from The Rio Times.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the conviction rate for politicians with privileged jurisdiction in Brazil's Supreme Court?
A study found that only about 5% of criminal cases against politicians with Supreme Court jurisdiction ended in conviction between 2002 and 2025. This low figure is not mainly due to acquittals, but because very few cases ever reach a ruling.
Why do so few cases against politicians reach a verdict?
Most cases never get a verdict, ending instead in jurisdiction transfers or the statute of limitations running out. Of roughly 1,800 inquiries over 23 years, just 92 reached the charging stage, meaning only one in 19 proceeded that far.
How does the conviction rate change when cases without privileged jurisdiction are included?
When the January 8 riot cases, which lack privileged jurisdiction, are included, the recent conviction rate jumps toward 50%. This contrasts sharply with the 5% rate for cases that fall under the foro mechanism.
This article was produced by The Rio Times’ automated newsroom system. How we use AI · Report an error
Read More from The Rio Times