In any democratic republic, it’s normal for the executive, legislative and judicial branches to clash. That’s a sign of mutual oversight. It’s also normal for politicians to make concessions to their adversaries. That’s a sign of democracy.
But the sequence of recent events in Brazilian politics has turned into a sweeping narrative about what happens when these dynamics of checks and balances slide into sheer revanchism and bargaining over the rule of law.
Conducted under the leadership of House Speaker Hugo Motta and Senate President Davi Alcolumbre, the facts are:
A Supreme Court justice issued an injunction that excessively curtails Congress’s power to impeach justices. The Senate then passed a constitutional amendment on indigenous land rights that ran counter to a previous Supreme Court ruling.
Congress scheduled a vote on stripping the mandate of a fugitive lawmaker. Another vote of the same type was scheduled against a congressman who is a political enemy of powerful figures in the lower house, based on the fact that he reacted to provocations from an activist with pushes and kicks.
A Supreme Court justice pushed forward corruption investigations against dozens of lawmakers. The lower house took steps to sidestep court convictions, preserving the mandate of a criminally convicted lawmaker and approving a bill to reduce statutory sentences. The move was aimed at benefiting former President Jair Bolsonaro and allegedly had the backing of some Supreme Court justices.
In all three cases, the outcomes were surprising: the justice backtracked on his decision regarding impeaching members of the Supreme Court. Another justice overturned the lower house’s decision preserving the seat of fugitive lawmaker Carla Zambelli — and she ended up resigning. And the other congressman, Glauber Braga, was punished with a six-month suspension, rather than being stripped of his seat.
In other words, events slipped beyond House Speaker Motta’s initial calculations. Throughout this process, he once again alienated lawmakers on both the right and the left — as well as public opinion.
He even picked a fight with the press, when journalists were barred from covering a House session and were forcibly removed.
Motta's current bargaining power, both internally and externally, is only not weaker than it is because strong authorities are in short supply. In the executive branch, President Lula still lacks sufficient support in Congress. In the judiciary, reports of justices’ ties to business figures have caused unease.
Still, the left has returned to the streets in protests against Motta, who intends to win nothing less than two elections in 2026: his own, for another term, and his father’s, for a seat in the Senate.
To unpack Motta’s situation and the dynamics among the branches of the Brazilian republic, our guest is Beatriz Rey, a political scientist specializing in Brazil's Congress. She is currently a researcher at the University of Lisbon, author of newsletters on legislative modernization and other political themes, and has been a frequent contributor to The Brazilian Report.
In this conversation, she analyzes:
Structural and personal factors behind Motta’s weakness
The impact of the republic’s president on the strength of Congress
What can reshape Motta's behavior in the 2026 electoral year
