Story
Nov 12, 2026
Triplex auction ruling revives clash over Lula’s Lava Jato case
The return of the Guarujá triplex auction proceeds has prompted sharply different readings: the PT portrays it as further evidence that the case against Lula was unjust, while the court’s rationale is narrower, centering on the closure of the criminal proceedings and OAS’s registered ownership.
The Federal Court in Brasília ordered the release of about R$2.42 million in proceeds from the auction of the Guarujá triplex to construction group OAS. The money had been held in a Caixa Econômica Federal judicial account since 2018, when the apartment was sold at auction; monetary adjustment later raised the balance from R$2.2 million.1
For the PT, the ruling carries significance beyond the destination of the funds. The party said it again exposes the “Lava Jato farce,” arguing that the decision reinforces what Lula had always maintained: “the property never belonged to him or his family.”2 The party linked the outcome to the Supreme Federal Court’s annulment of Lula’s convictions and its finding that former judge Sérgio Moro was biased, describing the prosecution as political-electoral persecution.
The court decision, however, did not reassess Lula’s criminal liability or determine ownership in the broader political dispute surrounding the case. Judge Marcelo Gentil Monteiro concluded that OAS remains listed as the property’s owner in official records and that no active criminal proceeding justifies retaining the auction money. The Federal Public Prosecutor’s Office also supported returning the funds.1
The triplex was central to a Lava Jato accusation that it had been offered to Lula as an improper benefit by OAS. That case led to his conviction and imprisonment, but the Supreme Court annulled the convictions in 2021 after finding the Curitiba federal court lacked jurisdiction; the criminal action was later closed after prosecutors sought dismissal on statute-of-limitations grounds.1
Both accounts acknowledge that the underlying case has ended. Their divide is over what that ending means: the PT sees vindication for Lula, while the ruling itself treats the matter as a legal question of whether the state can continue to hold assets once the proceedings that supported their seizure no longer exist.