Deadline for Mendonça's Response on Allegations Ends as STF Faces Rising Internal Tensions

The deadline for Minister André Mendonça to respond to allegations regarding irregularities in investigations tied to Banco Master and INSS frauds expired on Monday, marking a critical phase in the Supreme Federal Court (STF) proceedings. This deadline, set by STF President Edson Fachin, concludes the initial phase of evaluation on accusations raised by Alexandre de Moraes. These accusations involve potential administrative improbity, abuse of authority, and political favoritism based on intelligence reports from the Federal Police.

Following Mendonça's response period, the case will return to the STF presidency to determine the next steps. Mendonça has denied any wrongdoing in his actions. However, the proceedings are unfolding amid an intensified internal crisis within the STF, which has complicated the court's handling of the matter. There has been significant debate among justices, including opposition to Gilmar Mendes’ proposal to consolidate investigations involving both Mendonça and Moraes, which could heavily influence the case's future.

Additional tension stems from recent revelations involving MPF's Procurador-Geral Paulo Gonet. A photo surfaced showing Gonet with banker Daniel Vorcaro in an informal setting, stirring unease within the Ministério Público Federal (MPF). Although Gonet defended his brief, non-friendship-related encounter with Vorcaro, and Mendonça stated that the messages mentioning Gonet lacked serious elements, the disclosure has worsened the atmosphere ahead of an MPF council review set for September 25. This could impact perceptions of impartiality related to the Banco Master cases but currently does not indicate a formal disciplinary process against Gonet.

The initial timeline for Mendonça’s case review has already faced uncertainties due to the STF’s internal clash and a pending view request by justice Flávio Dino, leaving the court’s calendar unsettled.

The STF presidency now faces critical decisions on how to proceed with Mendonça’s case, balancing the legal scrutiny with the court’s fragile institutional equilibrium. Observers await further rulings that will shape the course of this politically sensitive and legally complex matter.