This week, the Brazilian Association of Jurists for Democracy (ABJD) unveiled a campaign sharply opposing any amnesty for individuals convicted in connection with the pro-coup riots that unfolded on January 8, 2023. The initiative, titled Anistia não, golpistas na prisão! (“No Amnesty, Coup Plotters in Jail!”), is aimed at combating legislative proposals that seek to grant amnesty to those involved in the insurrection, an act that supporters describe as an assault on the nation’s democratic foundation.
Lawyer Tereza Mansi, who serves on the ABJD's national executive board, expressed deep concerns about the implications of such an amnesty. “The idea is to press for no amnesty and for accountability for the people who took part in the attempted coup d’état in our country. This amnesty would represent an endorsement for other coups to take place,” she stated. Mansi further emphasized Brazil’s historical context, noting that the lack of accountability following the 1964 coup facilitated the repeated failures of democratic governance in the country.
The chaotic events of January 8 saw thousands storm the artworks and offices of the Executive, Legislative, and Judicial branches of the Brazilian government, leading to widespread vandalism. The aftermath of these riots has seen a significant number of culprits brought to justice. By December 2024, 370 individuals had faced convictions for various charges associated with the attack, including coup d’état and attempted violent abolition of the democratic rule of law. Furthermore, an additional 63 individuals received sentences of up to 14 years in prison on March 7, 2025.
The Brazilian Federal Police and the Prosecutor-General’s Office expelled any ambiguity from their interpretation of the events, charging former President Jair Bolsonaro and numerous allies for orchestrating the coup attempt. The ongoing court proceedings—culminating in a Supreme Court decision scheduled for March 25—are poised to determine whether these high-profile figures will stand trial for their alleged wrongdoing.
In stark contrast, a faction of society, including Bolsonaro supporters, demonstrated in favor of amnesty for those implicated in the January 8 riots. Demonstrations rallied on March 16, 2025, at Copacabana Beach, illustrating the polarized nature of public opinion surrounding the interplay between law and governance in Brazil.
The narrative surrounding these events is contentious, with contrasting interpretations emerging from various media outlets. For instance, the Oeste magazine vehemently disputes the characterization of the January 8 insurrection as a coup attempt. Citing a myriad of absurd claims, the publication argues that the supposed arsenal featured by the demonstrators included only slingshots and marbles, declaring the entire narrative to be a fabrication concocted by the political establishment and media conglomerates.
This ongoing struggle over interpretation is further complicated by claims regarding the legal repercussions for the alleged coup plotters. The magazine pointedly argues against the ongoing prosecution of Bolsonaro and his supporters, recalling that reported evidence—ranging from dubious witness testimonies to a lack of coherent planning—cast doubt on the integrity of the judicial process.
Oeste noted that the alleged plot against the Lula administration lacked credible resources or support, referring to the idea that the military was opposed to any insurrection. “How can a military coup be perpetrated against the will of the military?” they question, emphasizing the insanity of pursuing charges against those deemed incapable of executing such an elaborate coup.
Moreover, the political fallout from these events has inspired debates concerning individual rights versus perceived threats to democracy, further complicating matters. The STF (Supreme Federal Court) has been accused of bending the rules of justice, scrutinizing mere participation in protests as grounds for prosecution—a move that could establish a dangerous precedent.
In the wake of the January 8 riots, both the left and right are pitching arguments to sway public sentiment about amnesty or its absence. The Lula administration remains implacably opposed to granting any form of amnesty, and advocates in the political realm echo this sentiment. Yet, an ironclad unease looms, as numerous Brazilians feel entangled within a justice system viewed as swift, yet undermining fundamental galactic rights.
The tension surrounding these trials and proposed amnesty showcases the precarious relationship between Brazil’s societal factions, exposing underlying frustrations regarding political representation and the perceived exercise of power by the judicial system.
The upcoming Supreme Court announcement is set to intensify discussions, as proponents of amnesty are prepared to lean into the ongoing unrest among parts of the citizenry, advocating for paths to justice that include vacating penalties landing upon alleged perpetrators.
As events unfold, Brazil stands at a crossroads—between democratic principle, judicial integrity, and social governance—which will dictate the future political landscape of the nation.
