Brazil's political landscape was rocked this week as the country’s Chamber of Deputies stripped two high-profile lawmakers—Eduardo Bolsonaro, son of former president Jair Bolsonaro, and Alexandre Ramagem, ex-head of the intelligence agency—of their parliamentary mandates. The decision, announced on December 18, 2025, marks a significant chapter in Brazil’s ongoing reckoning with the aftermath of the attempted coup that led to Jair Bolsonaro’s imprisonment and has sent shockwaves through the nation’s political establishment.
Eduardo Bolsonaro, who has been living in the United States since February, lost his seat due to excessive absences from legislative sessions. According to the chamber’s official record, Eduardo missed more than 80% of the lower house’s sessions this year, a clear violation of Brazil’s constitutional requirement that lawmakers attend at least two-thirds of annual ordinary sessions. As lower house speaker Hugo Motta explained, “He has not attended our house's sessions and it is impossible to serve one's term as a lawmaker if that person is not in our territory.” (AP)
Alexandre Ramagem’s removal, meanwhile, stemmed from a different set of circumstances. The former intelligence chief fled Brazil in September after being sentenced by the Supreme Federal Court (STF) to 16 years in prison for his role in the coup attempt. Ramagem reportedly crossed the border into Guyana before flying to Miami, without notifying Brazilian authorities—a move that federal police described as an effort to evade justice. He has since sought political asylum in the United States, and Brazil’s Supreme Court has formally requested his extradition.
The Chamber’s decision followed the expiration of deadlines for both lawmakers to submit their defenses. With the memory of a recent controversy involving Representative Carla Zambelli—whose mandate was ultimately preserved by a full-chamber vote despite a court ruling—Chamber President Hugo Motta opted for a more streamlined process. He brought the removals directly to the directing board, sidestepping a potentially divisive plenary vote and, as reported by Agência Câmara, seeking to "avoid the political fallout experienced in the case of Representative Carla Zambelli."
The fallout from the decision was immediate and deeply polarized. Liberal Party leader Sóstenes Cavalcante condemned the move, arguing, “This is not a routine administrative act but a political decision that deprives the plenary of its right to deliberate and transforms the directing board into a tool for automatically validating external pressure.” (Valor Econômico) Cavalcante further criticized what he called "subservience to the Supreme Court" and announced that appeals would be filed.
Flávio Bolsonaro, Eduardo’s older brother and a prominent presidential hopeful, echoed these criticisms. He described the removals as “a mistake,” asserting that Eduardo and Ramagem “are not outside Brazil by choice but because of the bizarre system of persecution in place in the country, which can be called anything but a full democracy.” (Valor Econômico) Flávio went so far as to label the two lawmakers "political prisoners."
On the other side of the aisle, government allies welcomed the decision as a necessary assertion of constitutional order. Workers’ Party leader Lindbergh Farias praised the Chamber for having “eliminated the caucus of fugitives,” declaring, “Taken together, the two cases send an unequivocal institutional message: either a mandate is exercised within the bounds of the Constitution and the law, or it is lost—through a final criminal conviction or through repeated absence and a de facto renunciation of parliamentary duties.” (Valor Econômico) Pedro Campos, leader of the Brazilian Socialist Party (PSB), added, “The House cannot serve as a refuge for those who disrespect the Constitution.”
The consequences for the two ousted lawmakers diverge in meaningful ways. Eduardo Bolsonaro’s removal was administrative, based on absenteeism, and does not entail the loss of his political rights. He remains eligible to run for office in 2026, provided he meets Brazil’s legal requirements for candidacy. In contrast, Alexandre Ramagem’s mandate was revoked as a result of a judicial conviction, which, under the federal constitution, suspends his political rights for a period to be determined by the courts. (Agência Câmara)
Eduardo Bolsonaro’s self-imposed exile in the United States was not merely a personal decision. According to multiple reports, including those from the Associated Press and Valor Econômico, he traveled to the U.S. to lobby members of the Trump administration in hopes of reversing his father’s conviction and applying pressure on current President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva. These lobbying efforts led to unexpected consequences: in July, then-U.S. President Donald Trump ordered a 50% tariff hike on Brazilian imported goods, a move Trump attributed to what he described as a “witch hunt” against Bolsonaro. The tariffs were mostly revoked after Trump and Lula began direct talks, but the episode left a mark on bilateral relations.
Eduardo’s actions abroad also caught the attention of Brazilian federal prosecutors, who deemed them an attempt to interfere with legal proceedings related to the coup plot. As a result, Eduardo faces charges of obstruction of justice and is expected to stand trial in the coming months. If convicted, he could face between one and four years in prison and a fine. His leave of absence, initially granted in February, expired while he remained in the U.S., and his continued absences ultimately cost him his seat. Efforts by Eduardo and his Liberal Party allies to secure a state-level appointment or to change the rules to allow lawmakers to serve remotely were unsuccessful.
Ramagem’s case is equally fraught. After his conviction, he continued to register attendance and vote remotely, despite having left the country. His press office declined to comment on the loss of his mandate, stating only that the decision “is an internal act of the House.” (Valor Econômico) The Supreme Court has already requested his extradition, but as of now, Ramagem remains in Miami, his political future—and personal freedom—uncertain.
The Chamber’s move has prompted broader debates about the balance of power between Brazil’s legislative and judicial branches. Critics warn that the process has eroded parliamentary sovereignty and set a precedent for executive or judicial interference in legislative affairs. Supporters, meanwhile, argue that the removals reinforce the rule of law and send a clear message that no one is above the constitution.
As the dust settles, the seats vacated by Eduardo Bolsonaro and Alexandre Ramagem have already been filled by Doutor Flávio and Missionário José Olimpio. The political drama, however, is far from over. With Eduardo’s trial looming and Ramagem’s extradition request pending, the saga of Bolsonaro’s allies continues to captivate—and polarize—Brazil’s public.
The removal of these two lawmakers underscores the ongoing turbulence in Brazil’s democracy, as the country grapples with the legacy of the Bolsonaro era and the enduring challenge of upholding constitutional norms in the face of political crisis.
