Judiciary must act without submission to other powers, says Brazil's STF chief

Edson Fachin, president of Brazil's Supreme Federal Court (STF), asserted that the judiciary's role is not to substitute for politics, but it must operate without undue submission to the executive and legislative branches. Speaking in Luanda, Angola, Fachin stressed that the judiciary should also resist undue influence from economic interests, media campaigns, and popular or internal pressures.

"A judicially strong institution, but with judges vulnerable to pressure, is not truly independent," Fachin stated during a lecture at the Palace of Justice. He added, "Likewise, upright magistrates within fragile institutions will hardly be able to maintain their independence in the long run." Fachin highlighted that judicial legitimacy stems not from elections, and cautioned against judicializing every political matter, advocating for judicial self-restraint when the legislature possesses greater institutional or technical capacity.

However, Fachin firmly defended the judiciary's role in safeguarding democracy by setting limits when the exercise of power exceeds constitutional boundaries. He described judicial independence as a less visible but fundamental pillar supporting the democratic edifice, becoming critically apparent during crises. This perspective has been increasingly adopted by STF ministers in recent years, notably in justifying decisions concerning the investigation into alleged coup plots during former President Jair Bolsonaro's administration and the fake news inquiry.

The STF's expanding role has drawn criticism, with opponents alleging abuse of authority. In recent years, the court has been increasingly called upon by the executive to arbitrate conflicts with the legislature and decide on significant issues like the Marco Civil da Internet and drug possession for personal use. These interventions have sometimes displeased congressional leaders who believe such matters fall within their purview. In 2025, Senate President Davi Alcolumbre even proposed revisiting the list of entities authorized to challenge laws passed by Congress before the STF, reflecting ongoing tensions between the branches of government.

“

A Judiciário institucionalmente forte, mas composto por juízes vulneráveis à pressão, não é verdadeiramente independente. Da mesma forma, magistrados íntegros inseridos em instituições frágeis dificilmente conseguirão sustentar sua independência no longo prazo.