Category World News

Former Brazilian President Jair Bolsonaro has been convicted of attempting a coup in order to cling onto power following his loss in the country’s 2022 elections.

On Thursday, the populist ex-leader was found guilty by four out of five judges examining the case at Brazil’s Supreme Court, on all five counts he faced, making him the first Brazilian leader ever to be found guilty of an attempt to overturn an election. On house arrest in the lead-up to the verdict, he has now been sentenced to more than 27 years in prison.

Bolsonaro, 70, has always denied the charges against him, but experts say a successful appeal is unlikely.

The landmark trial has set Latin America’s biggest economy on edge, with Bolsonaro’s tens of thousands of supporters denouncing the prosecution as a “witch-hunt” and calling for his release. Others, meanwhile, have rallied in support of the prosecution and have demanded Bolsonaro’s formal arrest.

Washington, DC, too, has kept a close eye on the trial, with President Donald Trump, a close ally of Bolsonaro, making it plain that he is deeply opposed to the prosecution. He cited his displeasure when announcing 50 percent trade tariffs for Brazil in July.

On Thursday, following the verdict, Trump told CNN that he had followed the trial and reiterated his support for Bolsonaro, whom he called “a good man”.

Earlier this week, the White House hinted it could use its “economic and military might” if Bolsonaro was handed a guilty verdict.

Here’s what we know about the verdict and what it could mean for United States-Brazil relations:

What was the verdict and sentence?

Bolsonaro was tried on the following charges:

• Attempting a coup to remain in power
• Involvement in an armed criminal organisation
• Attempting to violently abort Brazil’s democratic rule of law
• Committing violent acts against state institutions
• Damaging protected public property when his supporters charged into government buildings in protest on January 8, 2023.

He has now been found guilty of all five counts and sentenced to 27 years and three months in prison.

Four out of the five Supreme Court justices who heard the case supported a guilty verdict. The fifth had argued that the Supreme Court did not have jurisdiction to hear this case.

Hearings began on September 9 and concluded on Thursday this week when two final judges voted to convict Bolsonaro. A sentence was passed afterwards.

Justice Alexandre de Moraes, who led the case, sided with prosecutors’ arguments that Bolsonaro had planned to assassinate President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva, his Vice President Geraldo Alckmin and De Moraes himself, in an operation codenamed Operation Green and Yellow Dagger.

Investigators presented evidence that Bolsonaro had gathered cabinet and military officials to discuss an emergency decree that would have suspended the October 2022 election results and prompted an investigation of unproven electoral fraud claims, ultimately allowing Bolsonaro to stay in power after he had already lost to leftist leader Da Silva.

De Moraes found that those efforts constituted a coup and cast doubt on the country’s electoral system. He also found Bolsonaro had encouraged the violent protests that broke out on January 8, 2023.

Bolsonaro denied all the charges. The embattled politician, who has been under house arrest at his home in the capital, Brasilia, since August, was not in court during the trial.

Seven of Bolsonaro’s allies were also convicted on related charges of a coup attempt. Their sentences have not been announced, but the judges are expected to convene on Friday to clarify that, according to the local news site, UOL.

Is the verdict likely to be challenged?

Bolsonaro’s lawyer, Celso Vilardi, said the defence team would try to lodge appeals of both the conviction and sentence before all the Supreme Court’s 11 justices.

The court’s press office, responding to reporters, confirmed that according to the court’s jurisprudence, the full court can accept an appeal if there are at least two dissenting votes in a ruling, according to reporting by The Associated Press news agency.

However, only one of the five judges, Justice Luiz Fux, disagreed with prosecutors in the trial and called for Bolsonaro’s acquittal. It is not known if the court will accept an appeal yet.

Al Jazeera’s Lucia Newman, reporting from the capital, Brasilia, on Thursday, said Bolsonaro’s supporters in Congress could also move to have the former president pardoned.

“(They) are already submitting an amnesty law, hopefully to get Bolsonaro off the hook so he won’t have to go to prison at all. Maybe house arrest, maybe no jail time at all. That’s still happening as I speak; it hasn’t (been concluded) yet,” she said.

What happens next, and when could Bolsonaro go to prison?

The court panel now has up to 60 days to formally publish its ruling. After that, Bolsonaro’s lawyers have five days to file motions for clarification, which is a request for clearer language or better explanations of the ruling. That could provide some stalling time for the defence team.

However, once there is a firm sentence, Bolsonaro can go to prison. As ex-president, he will likely be granted special incarceration status and could be detained at the Federal Police’s main building in Brasilia, rather than in a regular prison, according to reporting by AP.

How have people in Brazil reacted?

​​Reactions in Brazil were mixed after the final verdict was reached late in the day on Thursday.

Opponents of the ex-leader and supporters of the ruling Workers Party celebrated across the country. Meanwhile, hundreds of Bolsonaro’s supporters gathered in a vigil near the site of his house arrest to pray for him.

There were earlier fears of violent protests after Bolsonaro’s supporters had rallied in large numbers across the country throughout the week to support the ex-leader. Thousands in support of the trial also held counterprotests.

How has Trump responded?

Trump and Bolsonaro are close allies, and the US president has long expressed his displeasure with the Brazilian government over the trial. He referred to the trial when announcing 50 percent trade tariffs for Brazil.

In July, he also posted on social media that Bolsonaro was “not guilty of anything, except having fought for THE PEOPLE” and told prosecutors to “LEAVE BOLSONARO ALONE!”

He praised Bolsonaro as a “strong leader” who “truly loved his country”.

President Lula fired back, saying “the defence of democracy in Brazil is a matter for Brazilians. We are a sovereign nation. We won’t accept interference or instruction from anyone. We have solid and independent institutions. No one is above the law. Especially those who attack freedom and the rule of law.”

Trump has also compared Bolsonaro’s prosecution to the legal cases he has faced between his own presidencies, including a prosecution for his alleged role in attempting to overturn the results of the 2020 US elections and inciting the riots and invasion of the US Capitol in DC on January 6, 2021 by his supporters.

Following the verdict against Bolsonaro on Thursday, Trump told reporters: “It’s very surprising that that could happen… I can only say this, I knew him as president of Brazil, and he was a good man.”

Could the US take any action?

On Tuesday this week, White House Spokesperson Karoline Leavitt hinted that the US could react economically or even militarily if there was a guilty verdict.

Speaking at an event on Wednesday, Lula again responded. “We are a sovereign country and masters of our own nose. Brazil owes nothing to anyone when it comes to competence, resilience, and capacity,” he said.

In July, the US announced a 50 percent trading tariff for Brazil – even though it has a trading surplus with the Latin American country – citing the charges against Bolsonaro as politically motivated.

The high tariffs were “due in part to Brazil’s insidious attacks on Free Elections, and the fundamental Free Speech Rights of Americans”, Trump had said.

The US State Department also sanctioned Justice de Moraes, who led the Supreme Court panel for Bolsonaro’s trial, in July.

It accused De Moraes of suppressing freedom of expression and politicising prosecutions, including that of Bolsonaro. The judge, alongside his “allies” in the court, is now barred from obtaining a US visa. Any US property De Moraes might own will also be confiscated.

Some experts believe higher tariffs or sanctions, perhaps on government officials, could follow Bolsonaro’s guilty verdict.

What does this mean for Brazil-US relations generally?

Bolsonaro’s trial has soured relations between the leaders of the two countries.

Some Brazilian officials, including Lula, have denounced the US’s interference in the Bolsonaro case, and say the former leader should be tried for attempting to turn the US against his own country.

Lula, meanwhile, initially called for talks between the two nations. However, following the July tariff escalation by the US, the Brazilian president told reporters that there was “no point” in attempting to reason with Trump. The levies, Lula said, were imposed without conversation and done in an “authoritarian” manner.

On August 11, Brazil filed a request for dispute mediation to the World Trade Organization, complaining about the high tariffs. Brazil is also considering taking the Trump administration to a US court.

Separately, Lula has criticised US naval forces’ deployment in the Caribbean since August.

The US says its military forces are in the region to counter drug trafficking. However, the deployment comes as US threats against the government of Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro, whom US President Donald Trump’s administration has accused of being closely linked with drug trafficking groups, have ramped up. Some see the military buildup as a pretext to attack Venezuela.

In the hours after conservative activist Charlie Kirk was assassinated, details about his attacker remained elusive, and social media users and live TV commentary filled the void with false information.

As of late afternoon on September 11, the day after the shooting at Utah Valley University, where Kirk had been speaking, authorities did not have the shooter in custody and had not released any suspect’s name.

Federal Bureau of Investigation agents “have been working around the clock in coordination with our law enforcement partners,” FBI special agent Robert Bohls said during a news conference on Thursday. “We are and will continue to work nonstop until we find the person that has committed this heinous crime and find out why they did it.”

Two people were taken into custody on the day of the shooting, but neither was the culprit, and both were released.

The FBI released images on Thursday of a “person of interest” and asked the public for help identifying the attacker.

Here’s a rundown of what didn’t happen, despite claims to the contrary.

No evidence the sniper might have been a Kirk supporter

About an hour after the shooting, before Kirk’s death was announced, political commentator Matthew Dowd suggested during an MSNBC broadcast that the sniper could have been a Kirk supporter.

“We don’t know if this was a supporter shooting their gun off in celebration or – so we have no idea about this,” Dowd said.

While the attacker remains at large, there is no evidence that the person was a Kirk supporter or someone celebrating.

State and federal authorities said a sniper fired a single shot from a high-powered bolt-action rifle that was later recovered in a wooded area outside the university campus. A university spokesperson said law enforcement believes the person fired from the roof of a building some distance from Kirk.

Dowd was fired hours later for his comments, which also included statements about Kirk using “hateful words” that led to “hateful actions”. MSNBC and Dowd both apologised for the rhetoric.

George Zinn was taken into custody, but is not the attacker

Immediately after the shooting, videos of a bald man being dragged away by law enforcement officers circulated widely on X. People sharing the videos said the man’s name was George Zinn.

Zinn was initially taken into custody, authorities said, but he was released and charged with obstruction by police.

The Salt Lake Tribune reported that Zinn disrupted events in the past and has a criminal record dating to the 1980s. Salt Lake County District Attorney Sim Gill told the newspaper that Zinn was often arrested “on suspicion of trespassing” and was “politically conservative, leaning libertarian”.

Michael Mallinson, a 77-year-old Canadian man, was not the shooter

An image of a different bald man also went viral.

An X post with more than 992,000 views said, “The assassination attempt on Charlie Kirk was allegedly carried out by Michael Mallinson, a member of the Utah Democratic Party, Fox News reported”.

That claim was unfounded.

Mallinson said he is a 77-year-old retired banker “who lived and was in Toronto”, The New York Times reported after interviewing him. The rumour may have originated from an X account impersonating a Fox broadcast affiliate, The Times reported.

The fact-checking website, Lead Stories, found that the image was posted in 2020 on X by an account with Mallinson’s name. That account was unavailable on September 11.

A meme has been recycled for almost a decade to push disinformation about the identity of mass shooting suspects in the US and abroad. The meme features a real-life comedian whose name and photos have repeatedly been used by internet hoaxers. Once again, after Kirk’s death, the meme circulated on social media.

“Charlie Kirk shooter and Palestinian sympathizer Sam Hyde identified as shooter,” said a September 10 X post showing an image of a man with a rifle.

Another X post on Wednesday shared a video of the same man with a gun and footage of him shooting outdoors. The caption said: “Video of Charlie Kirk shooter now surfaces after the incident and the shooter is identified as Samuel Hackmann. Watch as he warns about the devastation he will be causing.”

The video and images show Samuel Hyde, now 40, a comedian. One of the images of Hyde with a rifle is from a 2016 YouTube video that has been removed.

The video in the X post was originally posted on Facebook in 2020 with the caption, “self-defense situation”, and it is not related to the Kirk assassination.

Video of a gunman ‘escaping’ is from July in Nevada

On Thursday, an X user shared a video saying it showed “Charlie Kirk’s real shooter escaping after the shooting”. The post gained 9.5 million views.

But a reverse image search showed the video was taken from a different incident that happened in July, and in another state.

At least 51 people have been killed during violent anticorruption protests in Nepal this week, and thousands of prisoners who escaped during the chaos remain on the run, according to police, as the country’s former Chief Justice Sushila Karki appears set to be appointed interim prime minister.

Police spokesperson Binod Ghimire said on Friday that those killed so far this week included 21 protesters, nine prisoners, three police officers and 18 others, without elaborating. Another 1,300 people were injured as police fought to control crowds.

The announcement comes as political uncertainty engulfs the nation, with Nepal’s President Ramchandra Paudel and army chief Ashok Raj Sigdel preparing to meet later on Friday with Karki and a leading youth activist.

Ghimire added that more than 12,500 prisoners who escaped from multiple jails countrywide remain on the run. “About 13,500 prisoners had escaped – some have been recaptured, 12,533 are still at large.”

The dead included prisoners killed during or after their escape in clashes with Nepalese security forces.

Some of the fugitives have reportedly tried to cross into India, where scores have been apprehended by Indian border forces.

Nepal’s army, which has imposed a curfew, said that it had recovered more than 100 guns looted in the turmoil, with some protesters seen brandishing automatic rifles.

“Sushila Karki will be appointed interim prime minister,” a constitutional expert consulted by Paudel and Sigdel, who spoke on condition of anonymity, told Reuters news agency.

“They [Gen Z] want her. This will happen today,” the source added, referring to the “Gen Z” protesters whose name derives from the age of most participants.

Karki is “seen as an anticorruption voice, so she’s acceptable to a lot of the Gen Z groups that have been firing up this movement, because corruption has been a big issue,” said Al Jazeera’s Rob McBride, reporting from the capital Kathmandu. “But while she’s popular with them, she’s not necessarily popular with other groups … so she’s seen as a consensus candidate.”

Karki’s appointment is likely to be formally made after a meeting at Paudel’s residence, rescheduled to Friday afternoon from an initial time in the morning, according to a Gen Z source involved in the talks.

McBride, however, said that uncertainty remains over whether Karki can serve as an interim prime minister if she’s not a member of parliament, adding that this raises the prospect of Nepal dissolving its parliament or even overturning its constitution.

“But what is for sure is that Nepal is in for a long period of political uncertainty,” McBride said.

The president’s office and the army spokesperson did not respond to a request from Reuters for comment.

On Monday, the 21 protesters were killed in a police crackdown on demonstrations against a government ban on social media, corruption and poor governance.

On Tuesday, protesters set the parliament ablaze, KP Sharma Oli resigned as prime minister, and the army then took charge of the streets.

Wedged between India and China, Nepal has grappled with political and economic instability since the abolition of its monarchy in 2008, while a lack of jobs drives millions to seek work in other countries and send money home.

Shops began reopening on Friday, among signs that normalcy was returning in Kathmandu, with cars in the streets and police personnel taking up batons instead of the guns they carried earlier in the week.

Some roads stayed blocked, though streets were patrolled by fewer soldiers than before.

Authorities began handing the bodies of loved ones killed in the protests to mourning families.

“While his friends backed off (from the protests), he decided to go ahead,” Karuna Budhathoki said of her 23-year-old nephew, as she waited to collect his body at Kathmandu’s Teaching Hospital.