Listen to the companion podcast here
Years after a national scandal, Brazil’s battle with corruption remains far from over, with deep-seated challenges in achieving true accountability and transparency.
Petrobras, a state-controlled oil company, was at the center of a scheme involving inflated contracts and kickbacks. Politicians, executives, and construction companies were implicated in the scheme, which funneled billions of dollars into illicit accounts. This siphoning of resources eroded trust in public institutions and had profound economic consequences, inflating costs in key sectors and undermining economic growth.
The investigation began in 2014 when a small-scale money laundering operation was uncovered at a car wash in Brasília, which gave the operation its name – Operation Lava Jato (Operation Car Wash). As investigators delved deeper, they uncovered a vast network of corruption that extended to the highest levels of government and business. The economic repercussions were significant, as public funds that could have been used for essential services like healthcare and education were instead diverted for bribes, lining the pockets of politicians, and maintaining political power.
New legal tools powered the investigation, including plea bargains enabled by the 2013 anti-corruption and criminal organization laws. These measures, along with a Supreme Court decision requiring white-collar criminals to serve jail time post-appeal, provided strong leverage for prosecutors and led to high-profile convictions.
When I spoke with her about the problem of corruption in Brazil, Fernanda Odilla, an academic researcher at the University of Bologna, suggested that the commitment to fighting corruption has weakened significantly since the end of Lava Jato, saying, “The prosecution service is less engaged in investigating corruption broadly, not just the Lava Jato cases.”
The impeachment of President Dilma Rousseff in 2016 and the subsequent rise of conservative factions led to a rollback of anti-corruption measures. Jair Bolsonaro, who campaigned on an anti-corruption platform, failed to deliver on his promises. Instead, his administration saw a weakening of anti-corruption efforts, with Bolsonaro making political compromises that diluted his anti-corruption stance. This included forming alliances with members of the Centrão coalition of centrist and right-wing parties known for their transactional politics and history of corruption scandals.
The situation deteriorated further with the election of President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva in 2022. Although Lula himself is not directly accused of orchestrating new corruption, his administration has faced significant challenges. Lula’s lack of a congressional majority has forced him into coalition politics, where party demands often prioritize political gain over transparency. This means that to pass legislation and maintain stability, Lula must negotiate and make deals with multiple political parties. These parties often push for policies and appointments that benefit their own interests, potentially at the expense of anti-corruption measures.
Under coalition politics, essential reforms to address crucial issues such as poverty, crime rates, and deforestation in Brazil have been sidelined. Political gain has taken priority over genuine reform, delaying or inadequately implementing policies that could alleviate the needs of millions of Brazilians. This focus on political survival has led to delays in implementing effective policies and weakened efforts to tackle poverty, reduce crime, and protect the environment, leaving these vital areas of public concern inadequately addressed.
Recent developments and controversies
Anti-corruption efforts faced a new, pivotal complication in September 2023, when Justice Antonio Toffoli of Brazil’s Supreme Federal Court annulled key evidence from the Lava Jato investigation. Toffoli’s decision involved striking down evidence obtained through illegal means, including intercepted messages between prosecutors and judges. This ruling led to the release of several high-profile individuals previously convicted as part of Lava Jato and has sparked controversy and concern about the integrity of the investigation. Critics argue that this decision undermines the progress made in combating corruption and highlights the ongoing challenges Brazil faces in enforcing accountability.
Additionally, key figures from the task force, such as Judge Sérgio Moro and prosecutor Deltan Dallagnol, have transitioned into political roles. Moro, once a symbol of anti-corruption efforts, now faces the possibility of losing his Senate mandate due to accusations of abuse of power and unethical conduct.
Recent legislation includes laws that aim to curb perceived abuses of power by law enforcement, indicating a trend toward protecting those in positions of authority. This trend is further reflected in political appointments; both Bolsonaro and Lula made politically motivated appointments to key positions, such as the head of the prosecution. Lula’s decision to appoint individuals close to him to the Supreme Court, following Bolsonaro’s similar approach, has raised alarms about the independence of Brazil’s judicial institutions.
These appointments undermine the independence of institutions, prioritizing loyalty over competence, eroding the integrity of the institutions responsible for enforcing accountability, Odilla said. “It’s a clear sign that they want to protect themselves because it’s the Supreme Court that takes action against the president in Brazil. So we see all of the law enforcement main actors under control.”
Public perception of corruption in Brazil is split. While petty corruption, such as bribes for licenses or permits, has reportedly decreased, grand corruption remains pervasive. This is often reflected in the popular Brazilian expression “ele rouba, mas faz” (“he steals, but he gets things done”), which explains a resigned acceptance of corruption among the political elite as long as they deliver some public benefits.
“Ordinary people don’t report experience with corruption as much as they perceive top-level corruption as a main widespread issue in Brazil,” Odilla said.
Trust in government and federal institutions has had a concerning decline, with consistently low confidence from the public. According to the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, only 25.9% of Brazilian respondents reported high or moderately high trust in the federal government, with even lower levels of trust in civil service (23.6%) or local government (19.6%).
I also spoke with Gregory Michener, an expert on transparency and anti-corruption policies. A professor at the Brazilian School of Public and Business Administration in Rio de Janeiro, he leads its Public Transparency Program and the Transparency Evaluation Network. He describes the current situation as “retrograde,” with progress undone by recent political and judicial developments.
Michener criticizes the Supreme Court’s handling of corruption cases, arguing that its dual role as a constitutional and criminal court is flawed. He suggests separating these functions and creating specialized courts to enhance efficiency and fairness.
He described this phenomenon using the “broken window effect” analogy, saying that just as visible signs of neglect can encourage further vandalism, the pervasive corruption among elites in Brazil may encourage broader societal corruption. “If your elite are creating and providing the example of crime, you’re going to have more crime, which is exactly what’s happened in Brazil.”
This persistent issue not only erodes public trust but also poses a significant threat to the stability of democratic systems. Michener stressed the need for substantial reforms in the judicial and political systems, emphasizing transparency and accountability to rebuild public trust and combat corruption effectively.
Transparency and civil society
Efforts to mitigate corruption, such as limiting corporate campaign donations and introducing public funding, have had mixed results. Despite the progress, off-the-record contributions and other circumventing practices persist. Michener points out that Brazil’s lack of transparency in corruption prosecutions is a major issue. Compared to the U.S., where public records and official documentation provide a clear picture of corruption cases, Brazil’s public records are inadequate. Improved transparency, including detailed public accounting of corruption cases, is necessary to prevent future setbacks and ensure accountability.
The role of civil society in monitoring and promoting transparency has seen both innovation and stagnation. Initiatives like Operaçao Política Supervisionada and Transparência Brasil continue to make strides in monitoring legislative activities and promoting transparency.
I spoke with Juliana Sakai, the executive director of Transparency Brazil, where she oversees efforts to enhance transparency and combat corruption. The organization works on monitoring legislative activities, advocating for public awareness, conducting research on anti-corruption strategies, and collaborating with both national and international partners. Sakai highlights the ongoing challenge of weak controls on party finances and the frequent weakening of accountability systems by major parties like the Partido Liberal, a far-right political party and the centre/left Partido dos Trabalhadores (Workers’ Party). Despite these obstacles, Sakai and her team have engaged in discussions with a few political parties to improve their practices, though progress has been limited.
“The structures to fight against corruption were dismantled, and no one is really interested in strengthening them right now,” Sakai said. To her, corruption became a less prominent concern post-Lava Jato, with weakened control systems and diminishing public and political will to address corruption.
“There is a perception that the fight against corruption has contributed to political extremes, and right now, it’s not a priority for many parties.” She notices a lack of commitment from key political players, particularly major parties, which undermines the effectiveness of these initiatives and exacerbates public distrust in the political system.
Adding to the concern, Fernanda Odilla argues that we should emphasize social accountability over transparency.
“Civil society is not as strong as we would like it to be,” she said. “I’m convinced that politicians in Brazil, they are reactive; under pressure, they take certain actions. So we need more social oversight.” She believes that current systems are vulnerable to political manipulation and lack the necessary rigidity to prevent a backlash.
Looking forward, she expressed concern about the future of anti-corruption efforts in Brazil. She fears that weakened institutions and political maneuvering could hinder the discovery and prosecution of new scandals. Additionally, the polarized political climate complicates efforts, with political actors like Bolsonaro using anti-corruption platforms to advance their agendas while often failing to change policy or infrastructure that allows corruption to persist. The setbacks experienced in recent years highlight the need for substantial reforms in the judicial and political systems in order to restore public trust in its institutions.
“In the end, we need to vote for better politicians,” Odilla said. “If you wait for them to do the work, they aren’t doing it and it’s clear that we cannot expect much from them. This is a shame, but this is the reality.”
Feature photo: Brazilian banknotes by Ivo Brasil combined with hand photo by Thiago Matos. CC BY-NC-SA
