Dino Restores Aparecida Posts, Reopening Fight Over Electoral Speech

Dino Restores Aparecida Posts, Reopening Fight Over Electoral Speech
Supreme Federal Court Justice Flávio Dino overturned an electoral-court order that had required comedian Antônio Tabet’s post about Our Lady of Aparecida to be removed and barred similar future publications. The dispute turns on whether the order protected a candidate from a false allegation or improperly restricted debate during an election.

Tabet’s post showed an image of Aparecida and said that “the militia family hates Black women so much that it decided to attack Our Lady of Aparecida.” It did not name Flávio Bolsonaro. Bolsonaro sought its removal, and Justice André Mendonça ordered the post taken down, prohibited substantially similar content and imposed potential penalties. The underlying controversy concerned a 2007 bill by former congressman Victório Galli that sought to change Aparecida’s legal status as Brazil’s patron saint; the bill has been archived since 2008.

Dino held that the restriction went too far. He said treating Tabet’s wording as an electoral offense would require first assuming that “militia family” referred to a particular presidential candidate, then “interdict[ing] the free debate about religious ideas” through an inadequately justified order. He revoked the removal, the ban on similar posts and the fines, and directed platforms to restore material removed on the same basis.

Accounts across the political divide largely emphasize Dino’s shared legal rationale: election-period restraints can cause irreversible harm, and generic orders can push platforms to erase lawful discussion. Dino also argued that people may advocate changing the law on Aparecida’s status, but cannot prevent others from criticizing that position by court order.

The disagreement is sharper over the factual context. Mendonça had characterized claims that Flávio Bolsonaro or his family proposed, organized or supported stripping Aparecida’s title as untrue. Dino did not find enough certainty of illegality for pre-emptive restrictions, leaving any specific abuse to later legal review. Commentator Rodrigo Constantino, meanwhile, accused Dino of spreading and enabling false information, noting that no such bill is currently pending.

https://brazil-test-hub.syndichain.com Brazil News Hub brazil-test-hub brazil-test-hub