Story
September 15, 2026
Dino opens “Dark Horse” case, but investigation has not yet established guilt
Flávio Dino’s decision made the investigation into the financing of “Dark Horse” more transparent, but also intensified the dispute over its political significance. Investigators see a possible interconnected scheme involving public funds, while those under investigation insist that the allegations have not been proven.
Brazilian Supreme Federal Court Justice Flávio Dino lifted secrecy from part of an investigation concerning the possible allocation and diversion of public funds — including parliamentary amendments and funds from São Paulo City Hall — in the financing of Dark Horse, a film about Jair Bolsonaro. At the same time, he ordered the collection of financial records for the companies and the film’s producer, Karina Gama, as well as the transfer to the federal police of materials extracted from seized devices.1
The investigation’s position is based on the theory that several episodes are interconnected. Dino’s ruling states that the review strengthened the hypothesis of an “inseparable intertwining” of facts in an alleged scheme for distributing and concealing public money. The document also mentions possible links to the PCC — but only as an investigative lead, not as a fact established by a court. It also names Congressman Mário Frias as a person who, in the investigation’s “hypothetical” construct, may have been assigned a leadership role.2
Left-wing outlets emphasize the alleged scheme’s scale: police are examining the movement of money among organizations, companies, and individuals linked to the film’s production, and are considering possible signs of a closed financial circuit.3 Right-wing media, by contrast, stress the procedural aspect of the decision: according to lawyers consulted, lifting secrecy expands public oversight and the defense’s ability to review the materials, but does not in itself establish guilt.1
Frias rejected the allegations, calling the operation a “smokescreen,” and said he allocated 2 million reais to a sports project and a digital literacy program for children and teenagers.3 Gama also denies wrongdoing and says she had no contact with the funds from the foundation created for the film.1
Thus, the sides agree only that the release of the materials changes the case’s public context. For investigators, it opens the way to examining financial and digital data; for the defense and some commentators, it underscores that the prosecution’s theories still need to be substantiated by documents and procedure.