Story
Sep 17, 2026
Lindbergh Seeks Mendonça’s Removal as Impartiality Dispute Reaches PGR
Lindbergh Farias portrays his petition as a safeguard for electoral impartiality, while coverage from the right depicts it as a political attack on André Mendonça. Both accounts agree that the Prosecutor General’s Office must now decide whether the allegations warrant action.
Federal Deputy Lindbergh Farias has asked Brazil’s Prosecutor General’s Office (PGR) to temporarily remove Supreme Court Justice André Mendonça from his duties at the Superior Electoral Court (TSE), where he serves as vice president. The petition also seeks to have Mendonça declared ineligible to hear cases connected to the 2026 elections.
The left-leaning account presents the filing as a legal challenge grounded in Article 20 of the Electoral Code, which allows interested parties to question a TSE member’s impartiality or eligibility on grounds of “partisan partiality.” It says Farias argues that several episodes, considered together, raise questions about Mendonça’s neutrality: a private meeting with Banco Master controller Daniel Vorcaro, handling of secrecy in related inquiries, changes in the Federal Police leadership during investigations, and a video recorded ahead of September 7 events. The report adds that Mendonça did not comment when approached through the courts’ press offices, and that the PGR will determine whether to take any step.1
The right-leaning account frames the initiative more sharply as an attack by Farias on the justice. It highlights the deputy’s accusations that Mendonça sought to protect Senator Flávio Bolsonaro and interfered with the Federal Police while it was examining financing for the Dark Horse film and preparing an operation involving Deputy Cezinha de Madureira. It also reports Farias’s assertion that Mendonça’s participation in political mobilization before September 7 was intended to create political momentum for then-President Jair Bolsonaro.2
The two accounts differ in emphasis rather than in the immediate procedural outcome: neither reports that Mendonça has been removed, and both indicate that the PGR has yet to assess the request. The dispute therefore remains an allegation-driven challenge to the justice’s role in electoral matters, not a ruling on his conduct.