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 riot 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.

One-stop reference

Company Intelligence

Every listed company in Latin America — financials, ownership and structure for 1,450+ companies across 26 exchanges, in one place.

Browse the directory →

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 2016, more than 70% of prosecutions left the court without a decision, 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 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%. 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%.